Skip to main content

Full text of "The expositor's Greek Testament;"

See other formats


^ 5SV Of pw/v^ 

^ SEP 12 I960 _, 


V. 5 
c o p/X 















J. H. A HART, MA. 





















In the case of this document a question preliminary to the ordinary 
heads of Introduction arises; the question of the Unity of the 
Epistle. For it contains two formal and solemn conclusions. 
The first ^ is " That in all things God may he glorified through ^esus 
Christ to Whom belongs the glory and the victory to the ages of the 
ages. Amen ; " and the second,- " Now the God of all grace, he who 
called you to his eternal glory in Christ, himself shall refit you after 
brief suffering, shall confirm you, shall strengthen you, shall establish 
you. His is the victory to the ages of the ages. Amen." The latter 
conclusion is followed by a postscript which ends with yet another 
formula of conclusion ^ "Peace to you all who are in Christ ". 

The address'^ at the head of the document stamps it as a circular 
letter or an encyclical epistle. The three conclusions divide it into 
three parts. Of these the last and shortest part may fairly be taken 
as a true postscript. The writer (we may suppose) takes the pen 
from the secretary, to whom he has been dictating, and appends a 
greeting in his own handwriting. St. Paul did the same thing in 
the Epistle to the Galatians.^ In such a case the value of the post- 
script would be greater than in the case of a circular letter addressed 
to widely separated churches in different provinces or countries. 
The Galatian letter would naturally be preserved in the chest of the 
chief church of the province ; and St. Paul's autograph would be 
prized as proof of the authenticity of the exemplar, copies of which 
were doubtless made and supplied as need and demand arose. But 
in this case also the autograph has a value of its own, inasmuch as 
it gives the credentials of the bearer, who presumably went from 
place to place and read it out to the assembled Christians, letting 
them see the postscript before he travelled on. So the third part of 
the letter may well be an integral portion of this encyclical. 

But this postscript is preceded not by one conclusion but by two ; 
and in this the document bears witness against its own unity. And 

^iv. II. *v, lof. 'v. 14. •*!, I. 'Gal. vi. 1 1- 1 7. 


further it is to be noted that the first conclusion is followed by a 
general form of address — " Beloved " — which has occurred at an 
earlier point.^ In fact, apart from the formal superscription — X to 
Y greeting — the second part'-^ of the Epistle is a complete epistle in 
itself. And it is natural enough that a circular letter, addressed to 
different communities, should contain alternative or additional letters, 
if the writer was aware that the conditions or circumstances were 
not identical in every case. The formal severance of the second 
part may, therefore, be taken as indicating that all the communities 
addressed were not necessarily in the condition, which that part 

1. The Recipients. -^E.useh'ms of Caesarea, whose Ecclesiastical 
History belongs to the beginning of the fourth century, is the earliest 
(extant) writer, who inquired systematically into the origins of the 
Christian literature. For him there is no question about the nation- 
ality of the first recipients of this document : they are Hebrews or 
Jewish Christians. He insists that the compact made between St. 
Peter and St. Paul at Jerusalem ^ was faithfully observed, as their 
respective writings and the evidence of St. Luke agree to testify : 
"That Paul, on the one hand, preached to those of Gentile origin and 
so laid the foundations of the churches from Jerusalem and round 
about as far as Illyricum is plain from his own statements and from 
the narratives, which Luke gives in the Acts. And, on the other hand, 
from the phrases of Peter it is clear in what provinces he for his part 
preached the Gospel of Christ to those of the Circumcision and 
delivered to them the message of the New Covenant — I mean, from 
his acknowledged epistle in which he writes to those of Hebrew origin 
in the dispersion of Pontus and Galatia, Cappadocia and Asil and 

Just before this^ plain statement Eusebius quotes verbally from 
Origen's exegetical commentary upon Genesis : " Peter seems to have 
preached in Pontus and Galatia and Bithynia, in Cappadocia and 
Asia to the ^ews in dispersion ". Origen's assertion rests presumably 
on the authority of the address of our document, although the order 
of the provinces differs in respect of Bithynia from the generally 
accepted text. When Eusebius speaks for himself he restores the 
conventional order of the provinces and explicitly quotes the authority 
of "the acknowledged Epistle". It does not seem at all probable 
that either Eusebius or Origen had any other evidence for their belief 
than such as is preserved for modern investigation. Both knew of 

^ii. II. *iv. I2-V. II. ^Ga.\.\\.j-g. 

* Eus. H. E. iii. 4. 5 Eus. H. E. Hi. i. 


the compact, in virtue of which Peter was to continue his work among 
the Jews: both construed the direction of the Epistle as proof that 
the writer had preached the Gospel to his readers : therefore in 
virtue of the compact his readers were Jews — Jews of the Dispersion, 
but still Jews. 

The evidence upon which both Eusebius and Origen seem to rely 
is extant ; the deduction drawn — characteristic as it is of patristic 
exegesis — is not necessarily valid, and it is not supported by any 
pretence of independent tradition. 

The compact to which James and Cephas and John, on the one 
side, and Paul and Barnabas, on the other, were consenting parties, 
cannot be held to prove these Christians to be Jewish Christians — 
even if it could be made out that St, Peter " the Apostle of the Cir 
cumcision," who writes to them, converted them to Christianity. 

The appellation of the Dispersion is on the face of it a weightier 
argument, because Dispersion is a technical term and comprises in 
itself all the Jews who lived outside Palestine. Whatever its pro- 
venance, the term is Jewish through and through, for it insists upon 
the First Cause of all such scattering and upon the central shrine 
from which the exiles are removed. The mere Greek spoke and 
thought of exiles as fugitives and had a collective term (fivyrj to cor- 
respond with the Jewish Stao-Tro/aa, But the Jewish word recognises 
that those dispersed are placed here and there — as exiles, traders 
and what not ? — by God. Jewish as it is, this appellation is capable 
of extension to the new Israel and does not necessarily imply that 
the persons addressed were born Jews. Ultimately and fundamentally 
it does not denote privilege like the term Israel but rather penalty — 
removal from the place which was traditionally associated with the 
visible presence of Jehovah. The writer may, perhaps, be taken to 
use it without a precise definition of a centre corresponding to the Holy 
Land of the Jew ; but there is no valid ground for doubting that he 
could apply it to Gentiles, who were in the world and not of it by 
virtue of their faith in Christ. Situated as they were among un- 
friendly friends these Gentile churches are collectively the new Dis- 

These Gentile Churches — for there is more than one passage in 
our document which seems to settle the point, apart from general 
probabilities to be derived from the traditions of St. Paul's missionary 
activity. In the first place, St. Peter ^ applies to his readers the words 
of Hosea^; ye who were once no People but now are God's People, 
who were not in a state of experiencing His mercy, but now have 

' ii. 10. * See Hosea ii. 23. 

VOL. V. I 


come under its influence." At a definite time God had shown mercy 
to these Christians, who before — according to the strict Jewish point 
of view — had been outside the pale of His mercy. And, if we may 
argue from silence as from the tenses employed, they were formerly 
not a people at all, to say nothing of their being no people of God. In 
fact they were just tribes and Gentiles — not a Xao's but just lOvrj. It 
is true that Hosea was speaking of the children of Israel, who had 
apostatized, and of the final restoration, when all the dispersed should 
be gathered together. It is true, again, that St. Paul ^ uses the pro- 
phecy conformably with the apparent intention of the prophet ; but 
he cites it more fully than St. Peter in connexion with the calling of 
the Gentiles." The Christian Church is God's, Israel the heir of His 
promises ; and — who knows ? — the writer may have added the title 
of the Dispersion partly because it is written in the book of Hosea,^ 
"and I will sow her unto myself upon the earth, and I will love her 
who was not beloved, and I will say to Not-my-people, Thou art my 
people and he shall say, Thou art the Lord my God ". It is a great 
prophecy and a Jewish Christian would be slow to forget its first 
intention. No line of argument can exclude the possibility that some 
of the Christians, to whom his letter is addressed, were born Jews. 
And if he thought less of thera and most of the aliens, who, perhaps, 
outnumbered them, at anyrate his own mind was Jewish and he 
spoke to his Jewish self, before he wrote or dictated his letter. It 
must have been a strange experience for a Jew to preach a Messiah, 
whom his Nation had rejected, to a motley collection of Gentile be- 
lievers and to use such prophecies as this. 

But whatever emotions the words stirred up within his heart 
they remained there. The thought of his countrymen does not 
shake him visibly as it shook St. Paul ; * and from this self- repression 
one might conclude that the Jewish element in these churches was 
insignificant, or that the decree which severed him and them from 
the unbelieving Jews was already made absolute. 

The probable significance of this use of Hosea's phrase is sup- 
ported by the words, " For ye were once wanderers like sheep but now 
ye have returned to the shepherd and overseer of your souls ".^ It is, 
of course, possible to exaggerate the force of iTre(rTpd(f)r)T€, ye have 
returned, as if it implied a previous association with God . But the 
word means no more than obedience to the invitation Repent, 
which Christian missionaries addressed to all the world ; in the 
Septuagint it is used of Jewish apostasy without implying previous 

1 Rom. xi. 28-32 "Rom. ix. 24-26. ^ Hosea ii. 23 (LXX). 

♦Rom. ix. I ff. 'ii. 25. 


apostasy, and here it is fitly applied to the adherence of Gentiles, 
who previously had no faith in God. In fact its proper force is 
represented by turn rather than return. 

Another capital passage would seem to be sufficient in itself to 
show that the writer regarded the churches to whom he speaks, as 
composed of Gentile Christians : " Sufficient is the time that is past 
for the accomplishment of the ideal of the Gentiles, when you walked 
in . . . unlawful idolatry ".^ If they were Jews by birth, who are so 
reproached for their pre-Christian life, it is clear that they must have 
been renegades, who had forfeited their title to be reckoned as Jews. 
For so great an apostasy there is no evidence whatever. That in- 
dividuals in the Dispersion did succumb to the attractions of the life 
outside the ghetto is probable enough. Philo, for example, warns 
his fellow countrymen against the seductions of pagan mysteries ; 
and his own nephew gave up his faith in order to become a soldier 
of fortune. But the interpretation, which makes Jews of the 
readers, involves an impossible assumption of wholesale perversion. 
The persons in question are, surely. Gentiles ; before their conver- 
sion they lived as their neighbours lived, and, after their conversion, 
they excited the surprise of their neighbours by their change of life.^ 

The internal evidence of the Epistle is borne out by what is 
known of the evangelisation of the provinces named. With the ex- 
ception of Cilicia all Asia Minor is included and Asia Minor was the 
great field of the labours of St. Paul and his companions. There is 
nothing to suggest that St. Peter was addressing converts of his own 
as Origen and Eusebius^ seem to assume. 

The Author. — The beginning and the final conclusion of this 
document certify it to be the letter or epistle of Peter the Apostle of 
Jesus Christ, who speaks of Silvanus and Mark as his companions 
and writes from " Babylon". The certificate was accepted and re- 
mained unquestioned until quite modern times. Irenaeus, whose 
connexion with Polycarp is certain, quotes the document as 
written by the Peter of the Church — Simon, son of John, to whom 
Jesus gave the name of Cephas or (in Greek) Peter. When F. C. 
Baur (for example) speaks of the " alleged apostolic authorship of 
writings which bear the marks of pseudonymity so plainly on their 
face," * he illustrates the reaction which ran riot, when once the 
doctrine of the inspiration and authority of canonical books was 
called in question. The authorship of this document does not 

1 iv. 3. 2 iv. 4. * See above page 4. 

* Church History (English translation : London, 1878), p. 131 (note) in refer- 
ence to the Epistle of James and the First Epistle of Peter. 


necessarily decide the question of its authority — all or none — as it 
did in the time of uncritical devotion to the letter of Scripture. But 
Baur's brave words do no more to solve the problem than the stolid 
reiteration of traditional dogmas. And it is to be remembered that 
Catholic traditions have often been rehabilitated by critical researches. 

To the question, *' Do you at this time of day venture to attribute 
this document to Simon Peter ? " the answer is, " Why not ? " 

Such a conservative attitude excites the pity — if not the contempt 
— of the " advanced " critics. They find no difficulty in treating the 
Canonical Epistles as most men have treated the Epistles of Phalaris 
— ever since Bentley wrote his dissertation. Bentley said ^ out of 
Galen, " That in the age of the Ptolemies the trade of coining false 
Authors was in greatest Practice and Perfection. . . . When the 
Attali and the Ptolemies were in Emulation about their Libraries, 
the knavery of forging Books and Titles began. For there were 
those that to enhance the price of their Books put the Names of great 
Authors before them, and so sold them to those Princes." But Bentley 
proceeded to demonstrate that the Epistles of Phalaris contained 
blunders incompatible with their authenticity ; and — for all their 
exquisite reasons — the critics, who treat the First Epistle of Peter 
as falsely so-called, have not yet found their Bentley. Indeed, their 
reasons are chiefly interesting as symptoms of presuppositions in- 
herited from past controversies. They reveal (for example) a ten- 
dency to resent the attribution of divine authority to the Apostles, 
and a tendency — which others share — to ignore the relatively mature 
theology to which, as a matter of fact, the first Christian mission- 
aries were bred, before ever they became missionaries or Christians 
at all. For those who believe that the Church has been directed by 
the Holy Spirit it is not easy to suppose that others than James and 
Peter, Jude and>John were as destitute as they were full of divine 
inspiration. And it is not difficult to acquiesce in the excommunica- 
tion of Marcion and all others who regard Christianity as a new 
thing descended from heaven with no affinity to any earthly ante- 

In a natural and simple phrase this document professes to be 
written by Peter. But Harnack^ has put forward the hypothesis 
that the opening and closing sentences ^ are an interpolation by an- 
other hand and argues against the assumption that the whole is a 
forgery. " If," he says, " the hypothesis here brought forward should 
prove erroneous, I should more readily prevail upon myself to regard 
the improbable as possible and to claim the Epistle for Peter him- 

^ Wagner's edition (London, 1883), pp. 80, 81. 
^Chronologic, p. 457 ff. 'i. i, 2 and v. 12-14. 


self than to suppose that a Pseudo-Petrus wrote our fragment as it 
now stands from the first verse to the last, soon after a.d. 90, or 
even from ten to thirty years earlier. Such an assumption is, in my 
opinion, weighed down by insuperable difficulties.^ 

So far as extant evidence goes Harnack's hypothesis of interpola- 
tion has nothing on which to rest. It remains to consider the chief 
objections which have been urged to prove that the traditional view 
is improbable. Peter cannot have written the Epistle (it is said) 
because (1) it is clearly indebted to Paulinism, (2) it contains no 
vivid reminiscences of the life and doctrine of Jesus, (3) it is written 
in better Greek than a Galilean peasant could compass, and (4) it 
reflects conditions which Peter did not live to see. 

The first reason is regarded as decisive by Harnack:^ "Were it 
not for the dependence [of 1 Peter] on the Pauline Epistles, I might 
perhaps allow myself to maintain its genuineness : that dependence 
however, is not accidental, but is of the essence of the Epistle". Dr. 
Chase has examined the affinities between 1 Peter and the Epistles 
of the N.T., and it is sufficient to state the results at which he arrives. 
" The coincidences with St. James can hardly be accounted for on the 
ground of personal intercourse between the two writers. . . . The 
coincidences with the Pauline Epistles other than Romans and 
Ephesians are not very close and are to be accounted for as the out- 
come of a common evolution of Christian phrases and conceptions 
rather than as instances of direct borrowing. . . . There is no doubt 
that the author of 1 Peter was acquainted with the Epistle to the 
Romans. Nor is this surprising if the writer is St. Peter. . . . The 
connexion of Ephesians with 1 Peter (here he adopts the words of 
Hort) is shown more by the identities of thought and similarity in 
the structure of the two Epistles as wholes than by identities of 
phrase. . . ." In his summing-up he says: " All that we learn of St. 
Peter from the New Testament gives us the picture of a man prompt 
and enthusiastic in action rather than fertile in ideas. His borrow- 
ing from St. James' Epistle shows that his mind was receptive and 
retentive of the thoughts of others. The Epistle undoubtedly owes 
much to St. Paul. But it is only when the Pauline element is isolated 
and exaggerated that it becomes a serious argument against the 
Petrine authorship of the Epistle." ^ ' 

It is to be remembered, also, that St. Paul did not invent Paul- 
inism and that St. Peter manifests (according to the narrative of 

1 Die Chronologie, 464 f. (quoted by Chase, Hastings' Dictionary of the Bible, 
vol. iii. p. 786 b). 

' Chron. p. 364 (quoted by Chase). 

' Hastings' Dictionary of the Bible, vol. iii. pp. 788 f. 


Acts) a disinclination to associate with the Gentile which suggests 
that he also was a strict Pharisee. There can be no doubt that of 
the Apostles of Christianity, who are known to us, St. Paul's was the 
master-mind. And there can be no doubt that St. Paul brought to 
the service of the Church a body of doctrine which he had inherited 
from Gamaliel and the masters of •Gamaliel. The common notion 
that Christianity was something absolutely new planted by St. 
Paul and watered — watered down — by St. Peter and finally by St. 
John is inconsistent with known facts and with general probability. 
It is, indeed, the vicious product of the artificial isolation of the New 
Testament literature from the literature and the life of Judaism. 

Others than St. Paul modified their inherited theology in the 
light of their belief, that Jesus, having been raised from the dead, 
was the promised and anointed deliverer — the Messiah, who by 
revealing God's will more fully than the prophets or the scribes, but 
not independently of either, introduced to men more fully the Sove- 
reignty of Heaven, under whose yoke he lived and died. Inevitably 
and insensibly the first Christian teachers learned from each other 
and profited by their own and each other's experience. But they all 
inherited and already possessed the presuppositions and categories of 
the Scribes, whose teaching their Master had endorsed and extended. 
Into this body of theology they fitted the new fact of a crucified Mes- 
siah — into the framework of Pharisaism — as Pharisees fitted all new 
facts which threw fresh light upon the will of God. If St. Paul was the 
first (as our fragmentary evidence suggests) to find a deep significance 
in it, it is not derogatory to St. Peter to suggest that he may have 
been indebted to St. Paul both here and elsewhere, and such in- 
debtedness is not necessarily an argument against the authenticity 
of this Epistle of Peter. 

The second objection is that our document contains no vivid re- 
miniscences of the life and doctrine of Jesus such as we should 
expect from a personal disciple. 

The alleged expectation is not altogether a reasonable one. If 
the document is, as an unbroken chain of tradition affirms, a pastoral 
letter addressed to Christian Churches already in being, there is no 
reason to expect reminiscences of the life and teaching of Jesus. The 
Church was built upon the belief that Jesus was raised from the dead 
and so declared to be the promised deliverer. His submission to 
death — and the death of the cross — was the crown and the summary 
of His life as it was the fulfilment of His teaching. So far as other 
facts and traditions were relatively necessary to the faith of the 
converts they were naturally communicated — formally or informally — 
by those who founded or confirmed the Churches. But in an epistle 


like this they would have been irrelevant and inconclusive. The oc- 
casion called for the emphatic isolation of the glorious resurrection, 
which followed the culmination of the sufferings of Jesus and in which 
His past miracles were swallowed up like stars in the sunshine. As 
for the teaching of Jesus our records are plainly incomplete, and, 
whether the Fourth Gospel be permitted to give evidence or not 
it is quite clear that the arguments used by Jesus and the topics He 
treated were determined for Him by the character of those to whom 
He addressed Himself. When the Christian missionaries addressed 
themselves to men of different nationalities, they could not presume 
in them knowledge of Jewish presuppositions and therefore, quite apart 
from its relative insignificance they postponed indefinitely much of 
the teaching of Jesus. For in any case this teaching was relatively 
insignificant in their view ; the essence of their message was Jesus 
and the Resurrection. Particular incidents and particular sayings 
may have their value as links in the chain of proof that — witness here 
and witness there — Jesus was He of whom Moses and the Prophets 
had spoken. But such proof belongs properly to the controversy 
with the Jews and, in many cases, not to the original phase of it. 
Historical or biographical sermons upon which the Gospel according 
to St. Mark is by tradition asserted to be based, were a sequel to the 
summons, " Repent and believe ". It may well be that St. Peter 
did so preach, and that he dwelt rather upon the record of Jesus' life 
in Galilee of the Gentiles, because his own audience had little in 
common with the Jews of Jerusalem ; but his reminiscences of the 
ministry prior to the Passion were not, as has been said,i " the best, the 
most inspiring message that he could deliver at such a critical time ". 
He himself had seen and heard these things ; yet, when the crisis 
came, he himself denied and repudiated Jesus. The impressiveness 
of these things, which failed to convince an eye-witness, was not likely 
to be heightened, when he repeated them to strangers. And there 
can be little doubt that, if he had inserted a reference to the Trans- 
figuration (for example), it would be said nowadays that this was the 
mark of a sedulous forger, anxious to keep up the part he was playing. 
In his intercourse with Jesus St. Peter had learned and unlearned 
here a little and there a little. But at the last his faith was not 

^Von Soden, Early Christian Literature (English Translation), London, 190^, 
pp. 278 f. : " It is evident that St. Peter cannot have written this epistle. The oldest 
personal disciple of our Lord would never have omitted the slightest reference to that 
which must above all things have distinguished him in the eyes of his readers. And 
how, especially at such a critical time, could he have refrained from speaking of 
reminiscences which formed the best, the most inspiring, message that he could 
deliver ? " 


proof against the appearance of failure. When, therefore, he con- 
verted and began to establish his brethren, he imparted to them the 
convictions he had acquired, and did not parade the diverse and 
devious steps by which he had painfully reached that height. 

A third objection is that the Greek of this Epistle is better than 
a Galilean peasant could compass and that a Palestinian Jew would 
not possess such a familiar knowledge of the Old Testament in 

Such an objection seems to take no account at all of certain 
known facts and of general probability. Even a Galilean peasant, 
who stayed in his native place, needed and presumably acquired 
some knowledge of the Greek language in his intercourse with the 
non-Jewish inhabitants of\he land, whom Josephus calls indifferently 
Greeks and Syrians. If he went up to Jerusalem for the feasts 
he there came into contact with Jews of the Dispersion, most of 
whom lived in the Greek-speaking world. The part played by these 
assemblies in cementing the solidarity of the whole nation is 
commonly overlooked ; and therefore it is worth while to quote 
Philo's explicit statement on the subject.^ " The Temple made with 
hands," he says, " is necessary for men in general. They must have 
a place where they can give thanks for benefits and pray for pardon 
when they sin. So there is the temple at Jerusalem and no other. 
They must rise up from the ends of the earth and resort thither, if 
they would offer sacrifice. They must leave their fatherland, their 
friends and their kinsfolk, and so prove the sincerity of their religion. 
And this they do. At every feast myriads from East and West, 
from North and South repair to the Temple to be free for a little 
space from the business and the confusion of their lives. They 
draw breath for a little while, as they have leisure for holiness and 
the honouring of God. And so they make friends with strangers 
hitherto unknown to them ; and over sacrifices and libations they form 
a community of interests which is the surest pledge of unanimity.'" 
In the face of this, it seems impossible to accept the modern dis- 
tinction between Alexandrian and Palestinian Judaism as corre- 
sponding to an absolute severance in life, language and religion in 
the first century of the present era. Apart from this normal inter- 
course of all classes of religiously minded Jews, those who aspired 
to direct their fellows as Sages or Scribes seem to have travelled in 
foreign countries as a part of their training. And further, it is 
known that the delivery of the Temple dues at Jerusalem was 
regarded as a pious duty which the foremost members of each 

^De specialibus legibus, i. {de templo), §§67-70 {Cohn and Wendland, vol. v. pp, 
17 f. ; ii. p. 223, Mangey). 


community were selected to perform. In these and other ways the 
Jews of Palestine became acquainted with the Greek language and, 
so far as they engaged in religious discussion with their visitors or 
hosts of the Dispersion, with the Old Testament in Greek also. 
The translation known as the Septuaj^int was still a triumphant 
achievement, through which the Jews of the Greek world were 
retained within the fold of Judaism and the Greeks outside were 
•offered knowledge of the Law. And even when the Christian 
missionaries began to utilise in the interests of their own creed the 
laxities of the Septuagint, the non-Christian Jews produced the 
Greek versions of Aquila Symmachus and Theodotion. In fact, so 
far as and as long as any sect of Judaism engaged in missionary 
enterprise knowledge of the Greek language and the Greek Bible 
was indispensable to its agents. 

It is therefore entirely in keeping with the tradition that this 
document is the Epistle General of St. Peter, the Apostle of the 
Circumcision, that it should be written in passable Greek and bear 
evident traces of familiarity with the Septuagint. In order to prove 
that Jesus was the deliverer for whom the prophets had looked, he 
was bound to appeal to the Scriptures, and to the Scriptures in that 
version which was established as the Bible of the Greek Dispersion. 

If in spite of these and other considerations it is felt that the 
general style of the Epistle is too literary for one who had lived the 
life and done the work of St. Peter, there is still another line of 
defence for the traditional view. In other words, it is still possible 
to believe that the document as it stands gives a just and true 
account of its own origin. In the postscript ^ the author says, " / 
write (or / have written) to you, briefly by means of Silvanus the 
faithful brother, as I reckon him ". 

If the phrase / write by means of Silvanus may be taken to imply 
that Silvanus was not only the bearer of the Epistle but also the 
trusted secretary who wrote out in his own way St. Peter's message, 
then all the difficulties derived from the style of the document and 
its use of Pauline ideas vanish at once. And in any case this mention 
of Silvanus proves that St. Peter was closely associated with the 
sometime colleague of St. Paul, who had actually helped to preach 
the Gospel in Syria, Cilicia and Galatia.^ For there seems to be no 
reason for questioning the identification of the Silas of the Acts with 
the Silvanus of the Pauline Epistles and this Epistle. 

The interpretation of the phrase 8ia CiXouai'ou is still in dispute. 
Professor Zahn ^ maintains the view that "Silvanus' part in the 

^ V. 12. *See Acts xv. 23, 40 f. ; xvi. 1-8. 

'Introduction to the New Testament (English Translation, igog), vol. ii. p. 150. 


composition was so important and so large that its performance 
required a considerable degree of trustworthiness. ... It purports 
to be a letter of Peter's ; and such it is, except that Peter left its 
composition to Silvanus because he regarded him as better fitted 
than himself ... to express in an intelligible and effective manner 
the thoughts and feelings which Peter entertained toward the Gentile 
Christians of Asia Minor". 

Dr. Chase ^ quotes Professor Zahn as arguing that Silvanus 
•' must have been either a messenger who conveyed the letter or a 
friend who put St. Peter's thoughts into the form of a letter". 
Against this interpretation, he says, four " considerations seem 
together decisive " ; and he concludes that Silvanus carried the 
Epistle and did not write it. It is of course possible that the phrase 
may bear this meaning, but the other is not to be excluded. The 
parallels quoted are, with two exceptions, ambiguous, and of the 
exceptions each supports one of the rival views. In Acts xv. 22, 
for example, it is said that the Apostles chose Judas and Silas and 
wrote by their hand? Clearly they were the bearers of the letter, 
as it is said that they delivered it at Antioch ; ^ and " being prophets 
they exhorted and confirmed the brethren".* But it is certainly 
possible if not definitely probable that they actually wrote each a 
copy of the letter for himself at the dictation of St. James. The 
case on which Dr. Chase chiefly relies is the postscript of Ignatius' 
letter to the Romans : " 1 write these things to you by the worthy 
Ephesians : Crocus whom I love is by my side with many others ".^ 
But even here the other interpretation is not impossible. They 
certainly were the bearers, but for safety's sake each may have written 
his own copy of the letter. The journey from Smyrna to Rome was 
long and dangerous, and apart from considerations of safe delivery 
each of them may well have desired to have his own copy. And there 
is one clear case in which this ambiguity disappears: Dionysius, 
Bishop of Corinth, writes to Soter, Bishop of Rome, in acknowledg- 
ment of a letter received from the Roman Church, which (he says) 
" we shall always have to read for our admonition like the former 

1 Hastings' Dictionary of the Bible (igoo), vol. iii. p. 790. 

- Ypd\|/avT€s Sia x^i-P^^ avTuv. 

^ Acts XV. 30, 01 pi€V ovv airoXv6€VT€s KaTf)\9ov els 'AvTiox«iav Kai trvv- 
a^Ya-yovTCS to irXTJOos iTreSuKav tt)v eirio-ToXiiv. 

■^ Acts XV. 32. 

^ Ad Romanes, xiv. i, ypa^xi) Se -uiilv ravra atrit CjxvpvTjs 81' 'Gi^ea-iiav twv 
dlio^aKapifTTuv. etrriv Se xal a.^l.a Jpiol oriiv aXXoi; ttoXXois Kai KpoKo; to •rroBi]T6y 
|xoi ovofxa. 


Epistle written to us through Clement ".^ Here the preposition 
clearly denotes the interpreter who writes in the name of the Church 
and cannot cover the messenger also, because the bearers of the 
Epistle — Claudius Ephebus, Valerius Bito, and Fortunatus— are 
named at the end.^ 

Since, therefore, 8ia can in such contexts designate the writer as 
well as the hearer of an Epistle, it is hardly safe to say that Silvanus 
cannot have been both in this case. If St. Peter had not so far 
profited by his general experience and in particular by his association 
with Silvanus and other missionaries as to write moderately good 
Greek and to employ " Pauline " ideas, then we may suppose that 
he permitted Silvanus to write the Epistle for him. He was none 
the less the real author if he employed a letter-writer whose position 
and experience enabled him to supplement the author's alleged 
deficiencies in respect of the language and modes of thought familiar 
to the persons addressed. The postscript indicates St. Peter's 
approval of the draft thus made and submitted to him. The tone 
of authority which is used in the addresses to separate classes is 
naturally reproduced by the secretary from his recollection of what 
St. Peter had said. The secretary's intervention affects only the 
manner of the Epistle at most. If Silvanus had really contributed 
to the matter he would have been joined with St. Peter in the 
salutation. On the other hand, there is every reason to suppose 
that Silvanus was also St. Peter's messenger plenipotentiary and 
would, as when he was sent by the Apostles of Jerusalem, " proclaim 
the same things by word of mouth ".^ 

The fourth objection to the traditional view is that the Epistle 
reflects conditions which were definitely later than the date of St. 
Peter's death. No other book of the New Testament offers any 
plain information about St. Peter at any time after the hypocrisy he 
practised at Antioch.* But Christian tradition connects him not 
only with Antioch ^ and Asia Minor ^ — statements which are probably 
simple inferences from the statements of St. Paul's Epistle to the 

^ Tt|v aT](xepov ovv icvptaKT)v ayiav :qp,epav 8iT]Yd'Y0(icv Iv ^ aviyvta^iv vfjiwv tt v 
liri(rToXT]v • Tjv €|ofj,€v o€i iroTt dvaYivcScKOVTcs voviOcreicrOai i)% Kat ttjv irporepov 
■^fieiv 8id KXii(i€VTos 7pa<{)€i<rov (Eusebius, Historiae Ecclesiae, iv. 23. 8). 

2 Clement, ad Corinthios, Ixv. ^Acts xv. 27. *Gal. ii. 

''So Origen (in Lucatn Homilia, vi.) : " Eleganterin cuiusdam martyris epistola 
scriptum repperi, Ignatium dico, episcoptim Antiochiae post Petrum secundum, qui in 
persecutione Romae pugnavit ad bestias, ' principem saeculi huius latuit virginitas 

* So Origen (fragment in Eusebius, Historiae Ecclesiae, iii. i) : Fl^rpos Se iv 
n<5vTci> Kal PaXaTitj, koX Bi9vv{(ji Ka7rira8oKi(^ t€ <aX 'Airiqi KeiCT)pvx^vai tois ^k 
SiacTTropas 'lovSaiois coikcv. 


Galatians and the First Epistle of St. Peter respectively— but also 
with Rome. For this part of the tradition there is no obvious hint 
in the New Testament which can be used to explain away its origin, 
unless it be supposed that the bare mention of Babylon in the First 
Epistle of St. Peter is sufficient of itself to have given birth to so 
complete a legend. It is not surprising that Babylon should have 
been interpreted as meaning Rome from the first ; but the tradition, 
that St. Peter died at Rome under Nero, has nothing on which to 
rest in the Epistles or elsewhere. 

Tertullian is the first to state this tradition explicitly. We read, 
in the Lives of the Ccesar's, "Nero first laid bloody hands upon the 
rising faith at Rome. Then was Peter girded by another when he 
was bound to the cross." ^ But apart from the definite date, the 
tradition is as old as Clement of Rome, who cites St. Peter and St. 
Paul as " noble examples of our own generation " in his Epistle to 
the Corinthians : " By reason of envy and jealousy the great and 
righteous Pillars were persecuted and struggled on till they died. 
Let us put before our eyes the good Apostles — ^Peter, who by reason 
of unrighteous envy endured not one or two but many labours and 
so became a martyr and departed to the place of glory which was 
his due ".^ A brief account of St. Paul's sufferings, based largely 
on New Testament evidence, follows ; and the conclusion that St. 
Peter suffered before St. Paul and both at Rome is commonly drawn. 
After this Clement goes on to say : "To these men of holy life was 
gathered a great multitude of elect persons who by reason of envy 
suffered many outrages and torments and so became a noble example 
among us ".^ This further illustration of the terrible effects of envy 
and jealousy — the theme to which all these references are incidental 
— is most naturally interpreted as describing the victims of the 
Neronian persecution of a.d. 64, of whom Tacitus* speaks as "a 
huge multitude ". If, then, Clement has put his illustrations in 

1 Vitas Caesartim leginius : Orientem fidem Rotnae primus Nero cruentavit. 
Nunc Petrus ab altera cingitur, cum cruci adstringitur (Scorpiace, 15). The fact 
is so stated as to indicate the fulfilment of the word of Jesus reported in John xxi. 

- Sia tfjXov Kai <|>0ovov ol (xe'-yicrTou Kai SiKaioTaTOi o-TvXoi (cf. Gal. ii. 9) 
€8iwx6'n<»'av Ktti ?o)S Bavarov r\6\y]<rav. \a^Q)\ irpo 6<|>6aX|ioJv rifiaiv tovs aYaOo-ii; 
diroo-ToXoDS risTpov §s 8ia £tjXov aSiKOV ovix «va oihk 8vo dXXa irXeiovas viriiveyKev 
irovoTJS Kol ovTci) p.apTupii<ras liropevOr) els Tbv d4>€iX<5|ji€vov rdirov Ttjs 8o|t]s 
(I dementis ad Corinthios, v. 2-4). 

^ toiJtois Tots avSpdo'iv 6(riii)% xoXiT€\icrafi,€Vois (rvvr]9pol<T6y\ iroXw itXtjOos 
IkXcktuv oiTivts ToXXas alxtas Kai Pacrdvovs 8id t'H^os iraOdvTes v'n'686iY|jia 
KoLXXio-TOv iyivovTo ev t||jiiv (i dementis ad Corinthios, vi. i). 

* Annals, xv. 44. 


chronological order, he agrees with Tertullian in asserting that St. 
Peter died as a martyr under Nero and, being a conspicuous pillar 
of the Church, before the mass of the Christians. To this assertion 
Origen, quoted by Eusebius,^ adds the statement that " at the end 
Peter being at Rome was crucified head-downwards having himself 
requested that he might so suffer ". 

Eusebius in his account of the Neronian persecution endorses 
this tradition of St. Peter's martyrdom and cites evidence to prove 
its truth : " So then at this time this man who was proclaimed one 
of the foremost fighters against God was led on to slaughter the 
Apostles. It is related that Paul was beheaded in Rome itself and 
that Peter was likewise crucified in his reign. And the history is 
confirmed by the inscription upon the tombs there which is still in 
existence. It is also confirmed by an ecclesiastic named Gaius, 
who lived at the time when Zephyrinus was Bishop of Rome, who 
writing to Proclus, the leader of the Phrygian heresy, says these very 
words about the places where the sacred tabernacles of the aforesaid 
Apostles are deposited, ' But I can shew the trophies of the Apostles. 
For if you will go to the Vatican or to the Ostian Way you will find 
the trophies of those who founded this Church. And that they both 
became martyrs at the same time Dionysius, Bishop of Corinth, 
writing to the Romans proves in this way. You also by such 
admonition have compounded the plant of Romans and Corinthians 
which came from Peter and Paul. For they both of them came 
to our Corinth and planted us, teaching like doctrine, and in like 
manner they taught together in Italy and became martyrs at the 
same time."'^ 

All the other extant evidence ^ agrees with this, and we may 
fairly conclude that from the end of the first century it has been the 
unchallenged belief of the Christian Church that St. Peter was put 
to death at Rome in a.d. 64. The question therefore arises. Is this 
tradition compatible with the traditional ascription of this document 
to St. Peter ? 

Date, Circumstances, and Purpose. 

If St. Peter was the author of this document and if St. Peter 
perished in the persecution under Nero, it follows that the document 

1 Historiae EccUsiasticae, iii. i : 8s kqi Jirl riXn ev Pwffn yevo^itvos aveo-KoXo- 
iritrOi] Kara KC(|>aXr)s ovtws avrbs a|i(o(ras iraOtiv. 

- Historiae EccUsiasticae, ii. 25. 

' See Dr. Chase's article on Peter (Simon) in Hastings' Dictionary of the Bible 
vol. iii. 


must have been written before a.d. 64, The conclusion is challenged 
on the ground of the circumstances implied by the document and 
consequently one or other of the premises is invalidated. The cir- 
cumstances implied and indicated are suppposed to belong to a date 
definitely later than the time of Nero ; and from this supposition it 
follows either that St. Peter did not write the Epistle or that he 
did not perish under Nero. In either case the Epistle is now com- 
monly assigned to the reign either of Domitian (a.d. 81-96) or of 
Trajan (a.d. 98-117). Professor Gunkel (for example) in a popular 
commentary recently published ^ ends his introduction with the 
words : " The more precise dating of the Epistle must be determined 
in accordance with the persecutions above mentioned, with which, it 
must be confessed, we are not perfectly acquainted. Now the 
Neronian persecution affected only Rome and not the provinces. 
On the other hand more general persecutions seem to have taken 
place under Domitian. The time of Trajan, under whom a persecu- 
tion (a.d. 112) to which the letters of Pliny to the emperor testify, 
certainly took place in Asia Minor, is open to the objection that 
then the Christians were compelled to offer sacrifice — to which the 
Epistle has no reference. Our Epistle is therefore best assigned to 
the early period of Domitian's reign. A still later dating {sc. than 
the reign of Trajan ?) is excluded by the lack of references to Gnosis 
and the Episcopate." 

Professor Ramsay similarly suggests, on the basis of the contents of 
the Epistle : " ThevFirst Epistle of Peter then must have been written 
soon after Vespasian's resumption of the Neronian policy in a more 
precise and definite form. It implies relations between Church and 
State which are later than the Neronian period, but which have only 
just begun." 2 

Professor Cone ^ urges that the conditions implied by the Epistle 
fit the time of Trajan, and argues, as against Professor Ramsay, that 
" since they also fit the later date, they furnish no ground for exclud- 
ing it in favour of the earlier". His conclusion is: "The data 
supplied in the Epistle and in known and precisely determinable his- 
torical circumstances do not warrant us in placing its composition 
more definitely than in the last quarter of the first, or the first 
quarter of the second, century ". For this he relies partly on Pro- 
fessor Ramsay's opinion that "the history of the spread of Chris- 

^Die Schriften des Neuen Testaments neu iibersetzt und fur die Gegenwart 
erkldrt . . . Gottingen, 1908. 

- The Church in the Roman Empire (sixth edition : London, 1893), p. 282. He 
assigns it, therefore, to c. a.d. 80 at the end of Vespasian's reign. 
'^Encyclopedia Biblica III., " Peter, the Epistles of". 


tianity imperatively demands for 1 Peter a later date than a.d. 64 " ; 
and from it he deduces the corollary : " The later date renders it 
very probable that Babylon is employed figuratively for Rome, ac- 
cording to Rev. xiv. 8, xvi. 19, xvii. 5, xviii. 2, 10, 21 ". 

Professor Cone's corollary deserves attention. He seems to 
assume that the Christians started afresh — de novo or ex nihilo — to 
evolve modes and idioms of thought for themselves. Such an as- 
sumption is demonstrably untenable. In the particular case of such 
cipher-language as this, it is certain that the Christians appropriated 
the inventions of the Jews, who in their own oppressions and their 
own persecutions had learned to veil their hopes from all but the 
initiated. Babylon was the great and typical oppressor, and her 
successors in the part naturally received her proper name. Rome 
was not the declared and inflexible enemy of the Jewish nation as a 
whole before the time of Caligula ; but Rome stood behind Herod 
the Great, and Pompey had desecrated the Temple at Jerusalem. 
Philo might forgive and forget the outrages which Pompey and 
Herod had perpetrated in order to heighten the enormity of Caligula's 
offences, but the Psalms of Solomon and the evidence of Josephus 
suffice to prove that for some Rome was already the enemy in the 
last century B.C. Formal proof that the Jews actually spoke of 
Rome by the name of Babylon before the destruction of Jerusalem 
in A.D. 70 is, indeed, wanting. But the identification of Rome with 
Babylon and the consequent transference of the paraphernalia of 
Babylon to Rome is part and parcel of the apocalyptic vocabulary 
and passed over into the language of the Rabbis. The author of the 
Epistle had no more need to explain his use of Babylon than had the 
Jewish poet who wrote in the name of the Sibyl and said in reference 
to Nero : — 

" Poets shall mourn for thee, thrice-hapless Greece, 
What time the mighty king of mighty Rome, 
Coming from Italy, shall pierce thine Isthmus — 
A God-like mortal, born (they say) of Zeus 
By lady Hera, who with dulcet songs 
Shall slay his hapless mother and many more. 
A shameless prince and terrible ! He shall fly , 

From Babylon . . . "^ 

And again he prophesied that after a time and times and half a 
•time 2 

' Oracula, Sibyllina, v. 137-143 (Geffcken: Leipzig, 1902). 
^ Ibid, 154: "Ik T€TpaTov treos " ; compare Daniel vii. 25. 


" From heav'n into the sea a star shall fall 
That shall consume with Are the ocean wide, 
And Babylon herself, and Italy . . . " ^ 

Nero's achievements added matricide to the specification of Anti- 
christ ; but the book of Daniel and other apocalypses, which were 
directly or indirectly inspired by the experience of the Jews under 
Antiochus Epiphanes, had long ago established the code of language 
by which each particular persecutor was identified with the vanished 
type. In the time of Antiochus such disguise was a necessary pre- 
caution ; and it was so again in the time of Nero or Vespasian, of 
Domitian or Trajan. In fact, Professor Cone's corollary has nothing 
to do with his conclusion. Whenever any Christian community be- 
came exposed for whatever reason to attack by any representative of 
the State, the State became for them the enemy, and therefore 

For Trajan's attitude towards the Christians of Bithynia we have 
ample testimony — thanks to the lack of independence displayed by 
his legate, the younger Pliny. In a.d. 112 Bithynia was in a bad 
state. There were many abuses which called for remedies, and the 
province was distracted by factions.^ The law which forbade the 
formation of clubs or associations for different purposes had fallen 
into abeyance, and Pliny began by re-enacting it in accordance with 
Trajan's mandate.^ On this policy Trajan insisted so strongly that 
he refused to authorise a fire brigade in Nicomedia, in spite of Pliny's 
protestations that only 150 men would be enrolled, only carpenters, 
and for the sole purpose of dealing with such a conflagration as had 
recently devastated the city.* From experience he held that all 
corporations, whatever name they bore, quickly became political 
associations.^ This rigid interpretation of the law made the ordi- 
nary meetings of the Christians at once illegal ; and there were so 
many Christians in Bithynia that the temples were almost deserted 
and the customary sacrifices were omitted. When the edict was 

1 Or. Sib. V. 158-160. 

^Trajan to Pliny, xxxii. (xli.) : " Meminerimus idcirco te in istam provinciam 
missum, quoniam multa in ea eraendanda apparuerint; xxxiv. (xliii.) meminerimus 
provinciam istam . . . factionibus esse vexatam ". 

3 Pliny to Trajan, xcvi. (xcvii.) : " Edictum meum quo secundum mandata tua 
hetaerias esse vetueram ". 

* Pliny to Trajan, xxxiii. (xlii.) : " Tu, domine, dispice an instituendum putes 
Collegium fabrorum dumtaxat hominum CI. Ego attendam ne quis nisi faber reci- 
piatur neve iure concesso in aliud utatur ; necerit difficile custodire tarn paucos ". 

*Trajan to Pliny, xxxiv. (xliii.): "Quodcumque nomen ex quacumque causa- 
dederimus eis qui in idem contracti fuerit. . . . hetaeriae que brevi fient ". 


published, some Christians — apparently renegades, who abjured 
Christianity when challenged by Pliny — asserted that either they or 
the Christians generally gave up either the practice of meeting for a 
common meal or their religious meetings also. It is improbable that 
those who persisted in their wicked and immoderate superstition 
should have abandoned their weekly assemblies at which they recited 
a hymn to Christ as God, but it is unnatural to distinguish between 
these assemblies and the subsequent meetings for the common meal, 
and the statement of the renegades may reasonably be confined to 
their own obedience to the edict. \ 

Professor Ramsay, however, infers from Pliny's language that 
the statement refers to the Christians as a whole: "They had, 
indeed, been in the habit of holding social meetings, and feasting in 
common; but this illegal practice they had abandoned as soon as the 
governor had issued an edict in accordance with the Emperor's in- 
structions, forbidding the formation or existence of sodalitates ".^ 
And he asserts that Pliny's language implies a distinction between 
the illegal meetings of the evening and the legal meetings of the 
morning : " The regular morning meetings which Pliny speaks about 
and which, as we know, must have been weekly meetings, were not 
abandoned, and Pliny obviously accepts them as strictly legal. Amid 
the strict regulations about societies the Roman government ex- 
pressly allowed to all people the right of meeting for purely religious 
purposes. The morning meeting of the Christians was religious ; 
but the evening meeting was social, including a common meal, and 
therefore constituted the Christian community a sodalitas. The 
Christians abandoned the illegal meeting, but continued the legal 
one. This fact is one of the utmost consequence. It shows that 
the Christian communities were quite alive to the necessity of acting 
according to the law, and of using the forms of the law to screen 
themselves as far as was consistent with their principles," ^ 

Against this view it must be urged, in the first place, that the 
common meal of the Christian community had a definitely religious 
character and could not be abandoned without a breach of their 
principles; and, in the second place, that Pliny's language is by no 
means so explicit and clear as is suggested. The authors of the 
statement are a large number of persons accused of Christianity, 
either by an anonymous letter or by an informer : all of them 
convinced Pliny that they had never been Christians, or had 
ceased to be Christians, by offering sacrifice to idols and blas- 

* The Church in the Roman Empire, p. 206. 
'Ibid. pp. 219 f. 
VOL. V. 2 


pheming Christ.' As regards their past Christianity — if ever they 
had practised Christianity — they affirmed that this was the sum 
and substance of their crime, that they had been accustomed to 
assemble on a fixed day before sunrise and to repeat alternately 
a hymn to Christ as God, and to bind themselves by an oath — not 
to commit any crime, but — to abstain from theft, brigandage, adul- 
tery, breach of faith, and refusal of any deposit ; which done they 
usually departed and assembled again to take food, which food was 
taken by all together, and involved no crime. And even this, they 
said, they had ceased to do after the edict.- 

Here, surely, Pliny is concerned only with renegades who proved 
to him that the Christian faith which they had abandoned had led 
them into no crimes of which he must take cognisance. Their oath 
was not proof of conspiracy and their meal was not a cannibal feast. 
To satisfy himself that their denial of the charges brought against 
them was well founded, Pliny examined two slaves, who were called 
deaconesses, under torture. Finding nothing in them but a foul im- 
moderate superstition, he submitted the case to the Emperor.^ 

The fact is that the large number of persons involved and the 
doubt whether those who had repented of their Christianity had 
thereby deserved free pardon, gave Pliny food for reflexion. Christi- 
anity had been rampant in his province, but his experience of these 
apostates gave him good hope that it might be checked. Apostates 
would naturally be more zealous heathens, and therefore good 

1 Pliny to Trajan, xcvi. (xcvii.) : " Propositus est libellus sine auctore multorum 
nomina continens. Qui negabant esse se Christianos aut fuisse cum praeeunte me 
deos appellarent et imagini tuae, quam propter hoc iusseram cum simulacris nomi- 
num adferri, ture ac vino supplicarent, praeterea male dicerent Christo, quorum nihil 
posse cogi dicuntur qui sunt se vera Christian!, dimittendos esse putavi. Alii ab 
indice nominati esse se Christianos dixerunt et mox negaverunt ; fuisse quidem, sed 
desisse, quidam ante plures annos non nemo etiam ante viginti quoque. Omnes et 
imaginem tuam deorumque simulacra venerati sunt et Christo maledixerunt." 

2 Pliny to Trajan, xcvi. (xcvii.) : " Adfirmabant autem banc fuisse summam vel 
culpae suae vel erroris quod essent soliti stato die ante lucem convenire carmenque 
Christo quasi deo dicere secum invicem, seque sacramento non in scelus aliquod 
obstringere, sed ne furta, ne latrocinia ne adulteria committerent, ne fidem fallerent, 
ne depositum appellati abnegarent; quibus peractis morem sibi discedendi fuisse, 
rursusque ad capiendum cibum, promiscuum tamen et innoxium ; quod ipsum 
facere desisse post edictum meum, quo secundum mandata tua hetaerias esse 
vetueram ". 

' Pliny, ibid. : " Quo magis necessarium credidi ex duabus ancillis quae minis- 
trae dicebantur, quid esset veri et per tormenta quaerere. Nihil aliud inveni quam 
superstitionem pravam immodicam. Ideo dilata cognitione ad consulendum te 
decucurri ". 


citizens, in future. To execute them all would have been to diminish 
seriously the population of his province.^ As a conscientious gover- 
nor, he was anxious to bring this section of his subjects to their 
senses, and he believed that the extension of clemency to those who 
repented of their Christianity would be tbe means most likely to 
secure that end.^ If room for repentance was given, all the 
Christians might be induced to recant. He does not contemplate 
2L policy of religious toleration at all. Though there might be no 
crimes inherent in the profession of Christianity, Christians were 
still guilty of sacrilegium when they refused to worship the gods of 
the Empire, even if they satisfied Pliny that their meetings were 
purely religious in character and, therefore, did not constitute them 
a sodalitas within the meaning of the law. Obstinate Christians 
had three opportunities of recantation : if they did not take ad- 
vantage of their opportunities, they were executed summarily — or, if 
they were Roman citizens, they were transported to Rome. It was 
an accepted and a familiar fact that a Christian was, as such, a 
criminal ^ — so familiar, indeed, that Pliny leaves their crime of sac- 
rilege to be inferred from the sacrifice required of those who would 
prove their apostasy. He confesses that he never occupied such an 
official position as to be called on to decide or advise in the case of 
Christians, and was therefore ignorant of the precise nature of the 
proceedings.'* But he did not hesitate to condemn the obdurate,^ 
although he might doubt whether the name itself, if it involved no 
crime, or the crimes attaching to the name were thereby punished.^ 

^Ibid.: "Visa est enim mihi res digna consultatione maxime propter pericli- 
tantium munerum. Multi enim omnis aetatis, omnis ordinis utriusque sexus etiam, 
vocantur in periculum et vocabuntur. Neque civitates tantum sed vicos etiam atque 
agros superstitionis istius contagio pervagata est ; quae videtur sisti et corrigi posse. 
Certe satis constat prope iam desolata templa coepisse celebrari et sacra sollemnia 
diuintermissa repeti pastumque venire victinarum cuius adhuc rarissimus emptor." 

^ Ibid. : " Ex quo facile est opinari quae turba hominum emendari possit si sit 
paenitentiae locus". 

'^Ibid. : •' Interrogari ipsos an essent Christiani. Confitentes iterum ac 
tertio interrogari, supplicium miratus: perseverantes duci iussi. Neque enim dubi- 
tatum, qualecumque esset quod faterentur, pertinaciam certe et inflexibilem obstina- 
tionem debere puniri. Fuerunt alii similis amentiae quos, quia cives Romani erant, 
adnotari in urbem remittendos." 

* Professor Ramsay's paraphrase of Pliny's words (ibid.) : " Cognitionibus de 
Christianis interfui numquam ; ideo nescio quid et quatenus aut puniri soleat aut 
quaeri ". "> See note (i) supra. 

^Ibid. : " Nee mediocriter haesitavi sitne aliquod discrimen aetatum an quam- 
libet teneri nihil a robustioribus difTerant, detur paenitentiae venia an ei qui omnino 
Christianus fuit desisse non prosit, nomen ipsum, si flagitiis careat, an flagitia 
'Cohaerentia nomini puniantur ". 


Such doubts as this arose from his examination of the renegades 
and the slaves who were called deaconesses, in which he learned 
that there were no crimes other than sacrilegium involved in the 
name, and, therefore, was emboldened to suggest that renegades 
should be pardoned. 

Trajan's answer authorises the policy suggested : " Any one 
who denies that he is a Christian and gives plain proof of his 
truthfulness, that is, by worshipping our gods, though his past may 
not be above suspicion, shall obtain pardon by his repentance ".^ No 
anonymous accusations are to be entertained,^ and Christians are 
not to be sought out. If they are brought before the governor and 
convicted of being Christians they must, of course, be punished. 
Pliny did well to investigate the cases of the so-called Christians, 
who had been brought before him.^ No general policy can be 
laid down. Trajan is content to endorse the existing practice of 
punishing obdurate Christians as Christians, and to sanction the 
pardon of such Christians as were prepared to renounce their 
Christianity and to ratify their renunciation by performance of 
heathen rites. 

Trajan's endorsement of the action which Pliny took without 
hesitation against the Christians as such, proves that "persecution 
for the name " was already an established and familiar part of 
Roman policy. If Pliny had been present at trials of Christians 
before becoming governor of Bithynia, he might have learned that 
the vulgar were wrong in ascribing foul crimes to the Christians, as 
such. But there is no question that Christians, as such, were liable 
to capital punishment. In the first instance, when he had only to 
do with those Christians who refused to apostatize, Pliny con- 
demned them to death almost instinctively as a matter of routine 
and immemorial tradition. 

Under Domitian (according to Dio Cassius) Flavius Clemens 
was put to death on the charge of atheism, and many others who 
embraced the customs of the Jews were condemned to death or 

1 Trajan to Pliny, xcvii. (xcviii.). . . . puniendi sunt ita tamen ut qui negaverit 
se Christianum esse idque re ipsa manifestum fecerit, id est supplicando dis nostris, 
quamvis suspectus in praeteritum, veniam ex paenitentia impetret". 

^Ibid.: "Sine auctore vero propositi libelli in nuUo crimine locum habere 
debent. Nam et pessimi exempli nee nostri saeculi est," 

3 Ibid. : " Actum quem debuisti, mi Secunde, in excutiendls causis eorum qui 
Christian! ad te delati fuerunt secutus es. Neque enim in universum aliquid quod 
quasi certam forman habeat constitui potest. Conquirendi non sunt : si deferantur 
et arguantur, puniendi sunt ". . , . 


deprived of their goods. His wife Domitilla, a relative of the Emperor, 
was merely banished to Pandateria.^ 

Suetonius 2 describes Flavius Clemens as a man of contemptible 
inactivity — a conventional description of Christians ^ — and says that 
he was put to death on the barest suspicion. Eusebius * asserts 
explicitly that Domitilla was banished with many others, because she 
bore witness to Christ. Probably the Christians were regarded as 
a Jewish sect who could not claim the privileges of Jews proper. 
Evidently the sect was proscribed. A Christian as such was liable 
to death, banishment, or confiscation of his goods. Domitian (as 
Eusebius^ says) was the second persecutor of the Christian Church 
and made himself the heir of Nero's battle with God. But according 
to Hegesippus,'' as reported by Eusebius,''' Domitian stopped the 
persecution after examining the grandsons of Judas, the brother of 

^Ixvii. 14 (epitome of Xiphilinus) : Kav tw ovtu) erei (a.d. 95) aWov; reiroXXovis 
Kai Tov <^\dpi.ov KXii(A£VTa vTraTevovTa, Kaiirep dvEtj/iov ovra, Kai yvvaiKa Kal avTTjv 
a-vyyevi] eavTov <l>Xaoviav AojxiTiXXav exovra, KaT£cr<j>a|ev 6 Aoficnavos* lirTjvexOT) 
Se d|ji4>oIv CY'^^'HF'''^ aOedTt^Tos, ii^' tJs Kal dXXoi els TdTuvMovSatuvcdt) c|okeXXovtc; 
ToXXoi KareSiKacrOTrjcrav, Kal ol (xev dircOavov, ol 8e t«v 70OV oifriCtv e<rTepi79T)o-av r\ 
Se AojxiTiXXa -uTTEpoipia-Ot] fidvov els navSarepiav. 

- Domitian xv. Denique Elavium Clementem patruelura suum contemptissimae 
inertiae . . . repente ex tenuissima suspicione tantum non ipso eius consulatu 
interemit : quo maxime facto maturavit sibi exilium. 

^ Compare Tertullian's Apology, xlii. : " Sed alio quoque iniuriarum titulo 
postularaur et infructuosi in negotiis diciraur. . . . Quomodo infructuosi videmur 
negotiis vestris, cum quibus et de quibus vivimus, non scio. Sed si carimonias tuas 
non frequento, attamen et ilia die homo sum." 

* Historiae ecclesiasticae, iii. 18: '"els too-ovtov Zl apa . . . ■f\ Tt)s i^jxcTcpag 
iricTTeus 8iEXa}xir€ SiSao-KaXia, is Kal tovs diroOev tov Ka9* "^jxas Xdyov o-UYYP°''^*tS 
piT) aTTOKVTio'ai rats avTwv Morropiais tov t€ Siwyh^ov Kal tol €V avTO) (xapTvpia Trapa- 
SoiJvai. oiYC Kal tov Katpov lir* aKpi^fS e'Te(rt]f4T]vavTO, Iv tTct irevTCKaiSEKaTOJ 
Ao|xeTiavov (ieto, ttXeio-tuv cTEptov Kal <^Xaviav AojiETiXXav i<rTopi]o'avTes, e| d8£X<j)Tis 
Yeyovviav ♦Xaviov KX^jfiEVTOS, evos tuv T-qviKaSE «irl Puintjs -inrdToiv, ttjs «is 
XpioTT^v p,apTvpias EVEKEV, eIs vqcrov riovT^av Kara Tifiupiav 8E8do-0ai." 

^Historiae ecclesiasticae, iii. 17: 'Tfjs Ne'puvos OeoEx^p^as te Kal OfOfiaxias 
8id8oxov EawTov KaTEaTT^craTO. SfiVTEpOS SfJTa TOVKaO' T|^uvdvEKlvEi SiuyP'OV, KoiiTEp 
TOV TraTpos avTOv OvEtriraaiavov |xt]8ev Ka9' y]\i.C>v aro-irov £irivoi]o-avTOs." 

Hegesippus was an Eastern — probably a native of Palestine. He visited Rome 
in the episcopate of Anicetus (? a.d. 155-156) and published his five books of 
Memoranda or Memoirs (virojAVT^noTa) in a.d. i8o. See Bardenhewer, Geschichte 
der altkircklichen Literatur, i. pp. 483-490. 

Historiae ecclesiasticae, iii. 20 : *' l^' ols ftT)8Jv ovtwv koteyvukoto t^v 
Ao|XETi(Xvov, aXXd i^al us evteXuv KaTa(j>povi^o-avTa, ^XEvOspovs pi^v avTOvs dvEivai, 
KaTairavo'ai Si 8id irpocmxYIJ-aTOS tov Kara ttjs EKKXT](7ias SiuyH'^*' 


Eusebius ^ quotes Tertullian ^ to the same general effect : 
" Domitian, a semi-Nero in cruelty, attempted to condemn the 
Christians ; but, being also a man, he readily stopped the course of 
action he had begun, and even recalled those whom he had 
banished ". 

But Nero was the first to persecute the Christians ^ and something 
is known of his procedure from Tacitus,* who represents his per- 
secution as a final effort to divert from himself the suspicion of 
having given orders for the fire of Rome. Human assistance, public 
largesses, services of expiation, all failed to banish the calumny. So 
to put an end to the rumour, Nero made the Christians, as they were 
commonly called by the vulgar who hated them for their crimes, 
scape-goats in his place and visited them with the most elaborate 
penalties. Christ from whom their name was derived was executed 
by the procurator Pontius Pilate in the reign of Tiberiu.s. For a 
time this fatal superstition was suppressed, but it broke out after- 
wards not only in Judaea, the birthplace of the mischief, but also in 
Rome . . . Accordingly, in the first instance those who confessed 
were arrested ; and afterwards on their information a huge multitude 
were sent to join them not so much on the charge of arson as on that 
of hatred of the human race. 

Tacitus emphasises the fact that the Christians were guilty and 
deserved to suffer the last penalty of the law.^ Public feeling con- 
demned them as enemies of civilised society ; but the outrageous 
mockery with which Nero had them executed, and the common sus- 
picion that the alleged arson was a mere pretence produced a revul- 

^ Historiae ecclesiasticae, lii. 20. 

"^ Apology V. : " Temptaverat et Domitianus, portio Neronis de crudelitate ; sed qua 
et homo (dXX' oX^ai are exwv tu «njv€or«ws, Eusebius) facile coeptum repressit, restitutis 
etiam quos relegaverat. 

2 Tertullian, Apology, v.: " Consulite commentarios vestros; illic reperietis 
primum Neronem in banc sectam cum maxime Romae orientem Caesariano gladio 
ferocisse. Sed tali dedicatore damnationis nostrae etiam gloriamur. Qui enim scit 
ilium, intelligere potest non nisi grande aliquod bonum a Nerone damnatum." 

'^Annals, xv. 44: " Sed non ope humana, non largitionibus principis aut deum 
placamentis decedebat infamia, quin iussum incendium crederetur. Ergo abolendo 
rumori Nero subdidit reos, et quaesitissimis poenis affecit, quos per flagitia invisos vul- 
gus Chrestianos (sic) appellabat. Auctor nominis eius Christus, Tiberio imperitante, 
per procuratorem Pentium Pilatum supplicio affectus erat. Repressaque in praesens 
exitiabilis superstitio rursus erumpebat, non modo per Judaeam originem eius mali 
sed per urbem etiam. . . . Igitur primo correpti qui fatebantur, deinde indicio eorum 
multitudo ingens, baud perinde in crimine incendii quam odio humani generis 
coniuncti sunt." 

^ Ibid. ; " sontes et novissima exempla meritos ". 


sion in their favour.^ The bare punishments — crucifixion, burning 
at the stake, and death by wild beasts — were right and proper. But 
the people to whom Nero threw open his gardens, in order that they 
might witness such sights, found Nero himself among them dressed 
in the garb of a charioteer 2 — the ancient equivalent of a jockey. If 
the Christians were really magicians, as their punishments implied,^ 
and their stories of healings may have suggested, the situation was 
too serious for such buffoonery. Nero's conduct was enough to dis- 
credit his plea of reasons of state. 

It is clear, then, that Christians, who confessed their Christianity 
or were denounced as Christians by such confessors, were put to 
death by Nero after the great fire of Rome in a.d. 64. It was alleged 
that they were incendiaries or magicians, but these allegations were 
not proven. The reference to the execution of the founder of the 
sect suggests that they were, in accordance with that precedent, liable 
to capital punishment in Rome or in the provinces, 

Suetonius records that under Nero many practices were severely 
punished and prohibited and many others set up. No food was 
henceforth to be sold in the cook shops (for example) except vege- 
tables ; and punishments were inflicted upon the Christians — a kind 
of men who embraced a new and maleficent superstition.^ 

The natural inference that Nero's action in the matter of the 
Christians formed a precedent which was followed generally and m 
the provinces unless further regulations were introduced by himself or 
his successors, is probable in the nature of the case, and it is expressly 
asserted by Sulpicius Severus, who follows Tacitus, and may have 
known parts of his Annals which are no longer extant. This, he 
says, was the beginning of the savage treatment of the Christians. 

' Annals : " pereuntibus addita ludibria, ut ferarum tergis contecti, laniatu canum 
interirent, aut crucibus affixi, aut flammandi, atque ubi defecisset dies in usum 
nocturni luminis urerentur . . . Unde . . . miseratio oriebatur, tamquara non utili- 
tate publica sed in saevitiam unius absumerentur," 

2 Ibid. : " Hortos suos ei spectaculo Nero obtulerat et Circense ludicrum edebat, 
habitu aurigae permixtus plebi vel circulo insistens ". 

"•So Ramsay, Church in the Roman Empire, p. 236: " Odium hitmani generis 
was, as Arnold aptly points out, the crime of poisoners and magicians. . . . The 
punishments inflicted on the Christians under Nero are those ordered for magician^, 
Paulls, Sentent. v, 23 M, : " Magicae artis conscios summo supplicio afflici placuit, 
id est, bestiis obici aut cruci suffigi, Ipsi autem magi vivi exuruntur," 

■* Vita Neronis, xvi. : " Multa sub eo et animadversa severe etcoercita nee minus 
instituta , . . interdictum, ne quid in popinis cocti praeter legumina aut holera 
veniret cum antea nullum non obsonii genus proponeretur ; adflicti suppliciis 
Christian!, genus hominum superstition's novae ac maleficae." 


Afterwards also laws were laid down by which the religion was pro- 
scribed and edicts were issued by which it was publicly declared 
illegal to be a Christian. Then Paul and Peter were condemned to 
death. 1 

To the three first persecutors of the Church — Nero, Domitian, 
and Trajan — Sulpicius Severus suggests that Titus should be added. 
If he is following good authority — say, Tacitus, here as elsewhere — 
Titus held a council to decide the fate of the Temple, when Jerusalem 
was taken in a.d. 70. Of his councillors some urged that a con- 
secrated house famous beyond all mortal things ought not to be 
destroyed. Its preservation would bear witness to Roman modera- 
tion ; its ruin would be an eternal mark of their cruelty. Others, 
and among them Titus himself, held the Temple should be destroyed 
at once, in order that the religion of the Jews and Christians might 
be more completely undone ; inasmuch as these religions, though 
opposed to one another, nevertheless came from the same parent 
stock. The Christians sprang from the Jews. If the root were 
taken away the branch would naturally perish. ^ 

Prom this survey of the evidence it appears that the non-Christian 
authorities bear out the assertion of Tertullian that from the year 64 
A.D. Christianity was distinguished from Judaism and, therefore, pro- 
scribed. It had lost the protection of the ancient and famous lawful 
religion, which sheltered it at the first. ^ Nero set the law in motion 
against it for his own purposes and attempted to justify his action 
to the people. But such action once taken, persecution of the 
Church was part of the law of the Empire, as Suetonius, Sulpicius 
Severus, and Tertullian aver.* There is nothing in the evidence to 

^ Chronicon, ii. 29 : " Hoc initio in Christianos saeviri coeptum. Post etiam 
datis legibus religio vetebatur, palamque edictis propositis Christianum esse non 
licebat. Turn Paulus et Petrus capitis damnati." 

^Chronicorum, ii. 30 : " Fertur Titus adhibito consilio prius deliberasse an templum 
tanti operis everteret. Etenim nonnuUis videbatur aedem sacratam ultra omnia 
mortalia illustrem non oportere deleri, quae servata modestiae Romanae testimonium, 
diruta perennera crudelitatis notam praeberet. At contra alii et Titus ipse evertendum 
imprimis templum censebant, quo plenius Judaeorum et Christianorum religio 
tolleretur : quippe has religiones, licet contrarias sibi, isdem tamen ab auctoribus 
profectas : Christianos ex Judaeis extitisse : radice sublata stirpem facile perituram." 

2 Tertullian, Apology, xxi. : " Antiquissimis Judaecorum instrumentis sectam . . . 
sufFultam . . . sub umbraculo insignissimae religionis carte licitae ". 

^ In addition to passages quoted above, see Tertullian, ad Nationes, i. 7 : " Prin- 
cipe Augusto nomen hoc ortum est : Tiberio disciplina eius inluxit : sub Nerone 
damnatio invaluit ut iam hinc de persona persecutoris ponderetis, si plus ille princeps, 
impii Christiani ... si non hostis publicus, nos publici hostes : quales simus dam- 
nator ipse demonstravit, utique aemula sibi puniens ; et tamen permansit erasis 


SLii^gest that the Neronian persecution slackened, because the citizens 
of Rome saw through the pretexts of arson and witchcraft. On the 
contrary the evidence suggests that the name was condemned by 

It was still possible for Titus and for Dio Cassius to recall the 
fact that Christianity was a sect — a schismatic sect of Judaism. 
Perhaps the condemnation of the sect carried with it a partial pro- 
scription and prohibition of its name. But there is no trace of any 
real change of attitude between the policy, on which Nero embarked 
in sudden desperation, and the action taken by Pliny, when he began 
to put the affairs of Bithynia in order. Pliny assumed that the name 
of Christian was proof of guilt and only inquired why, when he found 
himself dealing with special and extenuating circumstances. Nero 
in special circumstances had sought to save himself from popular 
suspicion by making the name of Christian proof, first of special and 
then of general guilt. 

It remains to examine the relations of the Christ'an Church and 
the Roman State, as they are reflected in the First Epistle of St. 
Peter, and to inquire which of the first three persecutions known to 
us they best fit. 

In the first part of the Epistle, which ends at iv. 11, the writer 
speaks generally of manifold temptations.^ " He exhorteth them — 
to quote the summary of the revisers of 1611 — from the breach of 
charity ... he beseecheth them also to abstain from fleshly lusts, 
to be obedient to magistrates, and teacheth servants how to obey 
their masters, patiently suffering for well-doing after the example of 
Christ. He teacheth the duty of wives and husbands to each other, 
exhorting all men to unity and love, and to sufi'er persecution. . . . 
He exhorteth them to cease from sin by the example of Christ, and 
the consideration of the general end that now approacheth. . . . 

In the second part of the Epistle the writer " comforteth them 
against persecution. He exhorteth the elders to feed their flocks, 
the younger to obey, and all to be sober, watchful, and constant in 
the faith : to resist the cruel adversary the devil." Here only it is sug- 
gested that Christians may be put to death for the Name. For certain 
churches, to whom the bearer would read this part of the letter and 
whose special circumstances the writer had in mind, a trial "^ was im- 
minent : their adversary the devil was walking about, as a roaring lion, 

omnibus hoc solum institutum Neronianum : iustum denique, ut dissimlle sui 

1 i. 6. * iv. 12. 


seeking whom he might devour.^ In the earlier and general part the- 
references to persecution and persecutors are vaguer, and stress is 
laid upon the railing or reviling ^ to which the Christians are exposed, 
but must not retaliate in kind. In both parts the example of Christ 
is put before them as their model — He suffered and they must suffer 
as He suffered — but only in the second part is it added that they 
must commit the keeping of their souls to God, as He did.^ The 
first part, in fact, does not seem to contemplate state- persecution so 
much as the discredit and discomfort inevitably incurred by those 
who dissent from an established religion. 

But such a distinction between the two parts of the Epistle, even 
if it be accepted as valid, does not relegate the second part to a later 
period. In some of the Churches of Asia Minor, at any rate — and 
there is no evidence to show which — the conditions described in the 
second part existed already. And so the evidence of the Epistle as 
a whole must be taken. 

The faith of the Christians addressed is undergoing a trial : for a 
season (if need be) they are in heaviness through manifold tempta- 
tions.* In different ways their faith is being tested. The tests — 
whatever they are — cause a temporary grief in the midst of their 
permanent joy, but will only refine their faith and purge it of dross. 
Half-hearted Christians will fall away. They have already purified, 
their souls by obedience to the truth revealed to them,^ and must 
lay aside all malice and all guile and hypocrisies and envies and all 
evil speakings.^ They must abstain from fleshly lusts which war 
against the soul, and, by their good conduct, refute the common 
rumour which speaks of them as evildoers." Pending the visitation 
of God, they are exhorted to be obedient to the Emperor and his 
officers, and as loyal citizens stop the mouths of ignorant fools. ^ 
There is no room, here, for the later test of their loyalty : the writer 
could not exhort them to offer sacrifice to Caesar. No one can really 
harm them, if they obey these commands ; but they may have to 
suffer for righteousness' sake.^ They must not be afraid. They 
must be ready to defend themselves and to reply to every one who 
inquires about their hope. Good behaviour and gentle answers may 
put their calumniators to shame ; in any case it is essential.^" 

In certain places Christians are already sharing in the sufferings 
of Christ, and therefore must rejoice therein. Their suffering may 
be misrepresented as the just punishment of murderers, thieves,, 

1 V. 8. ^ iii. 9 with ii. 21-23. ' iv. 19 with ii. 23. ^ i. 5 f. 

"1.22. •* ii. I. ^ ii. II f.. ^ ii. 13. ^ jij, j^ f. i",,;. i^f. 


criminals or busybodies : they must correct by word or deed all such 
misrepresentations and make it clear that they are reproached — or 
what not ? — simply because they are Christians.^ Their adversary 
the devil — in the persons of all his agents — goes about seeking whose 
faith he may destroy ; they must resist him and survive the ordeal. 2 
Throughout the world the Christian brotherhood is exposed to the 
same temptations and varied persecutions. 

From this evidence Professor Ramsay ^ concludes that the Epistle 
belongs to the time when Vespasian revived the policy of Nero. 
" The Christian communities of Asia JMinor north of the Taurus are 
regarded as exposed to persecution (i. 6), not merely in the form of 
dislike and malevolence on the part of neighbours, . , . but persecu- 
tion to the death (iv. 15, 16), after trial and question (iii. 15). The 
persecution is general, and extends over the whole Church (v. 9). 
The Christians are not merely tried when a private accuser comes 
forward against them, but are sought out for trial by the Roman 
officials (v. 8, iii. 15). They suffer for the Name (iv. 14-16) pure 
and simple ; the trial takes the form of inquiry into their religion, 
giving them the opportunity of ' glorifying God in this name '." 

Of this persecution by Vespasian there is no evidence except an 
inference from the statement of Sulpicius Severus, that Titus his 
son and successor wished to exterminate both Judaism and Christi- 
anity, and the general deduction from the letter of Pliny, that 
persecution for the Name was an established practice. Apart from 
this objection, it may fairly he said that even the rigorous interpre- 
tation which Professor Ramsay puts upon different passages is not 
necessarily inconsistent with the conditions of the reign of Nero 
when persecution of the Church did, as a fact, begin. If the vague 
terms, in which the various sufferings of Christians are described, are 
to be pressed and limited to mean State persecution and persecu- 
tion to the death, there still remain indubitable references to un- 
official persecution which did not go to such lengths. The author, 
as Professor Ramsay himself says, looks forward to a period of 
persecution as the condition in which Christians have to live. 
Further he exhorts Christians to be loyal subjects and therein 
proves that the obvious test of loyalty had not yet been applied to^ 
them. And he definitely excludes the narrow interpretation of the 
roaring lion, when he urges the Christians to resist it. 

For these and other reasons, Professor Ramsay's theory is re- 

Mv 13-16. ''v. 8 f. : 

• The Church in the Roman Empire, pp. 279 ff. 


jected by Dr. Chase on the one hand and Professor Schmiedel ^ on 
the other. But many of his arguments hold good against the date 
under Trajan, to which Professor Schmiedel adheres. Pliny's cor- 
respondence with Trajan, however, is not easily made to fit the state 
of things reflected in the First Epistle of St. Peter. For one thing, 
in Pliny's time Bithynia was so far infected by real or nominal 
Christianity that the temples were deserted. The unlawful super- 
stition was so far predominant that many of its adherents conformed 
without any conviction. Pliny's anticipation that clemency shown 
to such penitents would result in the annihilation of Christianity 
suggests an altogether different state of things. 

On the whole — whether St. Peter perished under Nero or, as 
Professor Ramsay urges, at a later date — the Epistle may not un- 
reasonably be referred to the time when Nero inaugurated the 
attack upon the provincial Roman Christians and gave the cue to all 
provincial governors who wished to earn his favour by endorsing the 
rightfulness of his action under whatever pretext. Already they were 
distinguished from the Jews, and, therefore, stood under the ban of 
the law as an unlicensed corporation. They were magicians who 
prophesied the destruction of the world, and the fire of Rome was 
proof of their power. They might plead innocence of crimes associ- 
ated with the name by vulgar suspicion ; but even when they cleared 
their name it was in itself sufficient to condemn them. That is the 
pagan view. The Christian view is that Christ suffered and they 
must follow in His steps. No colour must be given to the misrepre- 
sentations of their enemies. They must take every opportunity of 
removing them. This done, though death be their penalty, they 
will die to the glory of God, resisting the slanderer and remaining 
firm in their faith. 


There are two different ways of treating the fact that any given 
book of the New Testament Canon is first quoted as authoritative 
Scripture and as the work of its commonly reputed author by a later 
writer of known date and recognised authority. You may say that 
the said book is thereby recognised as canonical and as authentic 
either not before or as early as such and such a date. In the former 
case the endorsement of tradition is regarded as an innovation, in 
the latter as an explicit regularisation of previous, but inarticulate, 

^ Encyclopadia Biblica, vol. i. : " Christian, name of". 


The former interpretation of such facts has the advantage of 
appearing to appeal to what is apparent and to nothing else. But it 
involves axioms which require to be proved. We must suppose that 
the Canon was definitely fixed by authority and was not a thing of 
gradual grovirth. And, if we are to argue from the silence of ec- 
clesiastical writers, we must ignore the fact that many of them are 
no longer extant and postulate for them an interest in such matters 
as canonicity equal to our own. In fact it seems more reasonable to 
allow ourselves the exercise of a sober imagination in dealing with the 
evidence. In the case of 1 Peter at all events there is no sign of any 
attempt to force a new forgery upon the acceptance of the Church. 
It contains no innovation of doctrine such as might need the support 
of Apostolic authority. 

The Epistle, then (we may say), is used by Irenaeus as early as 
the third quarter of the second century. Behind Irenaeus in all 
probability there lies a period, in which the idea of the New Testa- 
ment Canon grew up and in which its contents were gradually reduced 
for reasons which appeared to those in authority to be adequate. Of 
that period we certainly do not know everything. All the Gnostics 
whom Irenaeus has pilloried are represented only by fragments and 
summaries of their doctrines contemptuously preserved by their 
opponents at a later time. But, even so, it appears that the Gnostics 
in their efforts to elucidate the philosophy of the Christian rc^ligion 
and to advance to something higher than the somewhat pedestrian 
and commonplace theology of the ordinary ecclesiastic laid stress 
upon Scripture. And in so far as they tended to relegate the Old 
Testament to a definitely inferior place in the development of true 
religion they necessarily devoted themselves to the writings of the 
Apostles — the Scriptures of the New Testament. Inevitably the 
Gospels, which contained the sayings of Jesus, and the works of St. 
Paul occupied the first place in their estimation. The Lord and the 
Apostle exercised an authority to which the Church must bow. So 
the Gnostics applied themselves to New Testament exegesis — not 
always for the purposes of theological controversy. The controversies, 
which ensued upon the deductions they drew from such exegesis, led 
to the delimitation of the Canon and there is a strong presumption 
in favour of the traditional view of the books which survived the' 
ordeal. 1 Peter is not a book which was likely to be much to the 
mind of daring thinkers who could discriminate between the different 
degrees of inspiration latent in different sayings of the Lord and who 
were determined to be done with Judaism. The Gnostics professed 
to be wiser than the Apostles — Irenjeus their posthumous conqueror 


asserts. 1 Peter is a book more congenial to such a man as Polycarp, 
who was more fitted to be a simple recipient of the general tradition. 
And it is to be remembered that Polycarp takes us back to a time 
when the idea of a Canon of New Testament Scripture was in its 

Our document is first quoted with the- formula Peter or Peter in 
his Epistle says in the latter part of the second century. 

Irenaeus, the disciple of Polycarp, whose book Against Heresies 
was written while Eleutherus was Bishop of Rome (a.d. 175-189),^ 
is the earliest witness to its reception as such. He appealed to it 
(for example) along with Paul and Isaiah : " et Petrus ait in epistula : ^ 
Quern non videntes diligitis, inquit, in quern nunc non videntes credi- 
distis, gaudehitis gaudio inenarrabili ".^ In another place it is quoted 
after Moses and the Lord : " et propter hoc Petrus, ait, non vela- 
inentum malitiae habere nos libertatem * sed ad probationem et 
manifestationem fidei ". 

Tertullian, a little later, puts Peter on a level with Paul in respect 
of his inspiration, and explains their agreement as due to the fact 
that they were inspired by the same spirit : " de modestia quidem 
cultus et ornatus aperba praescriptio est etiam Petri cohibentis eodem 
ore quia eodem et spiritu quo Paulus, et vestium gloriam et auri 
superbiam et crinium lenoniam operositatem ".^ In his Antidote to 
the poison of the Gnostics, which may perhaps be dated a.d. 213, 
he cites 1 Peter as addressed to the natives of Pontus : " Petrus 
quidem ad Ponticos, Quanta enini, inquit, gloria si non ut delin- 
quentes puniamini, sustinetis. Haec enim gratia est, in hoc et vocati 
^stis, qtw7iiam et Christies passus est pro nobis, relinquens vobis 
exemplum semetipsuni, uti adsequamini vestigia ipsius. Et rursus 
Dilecti ne expavescatis ultiotiem quae agitur in vobis in temptationem, 
quasi novum accidat vobis : etenim secundum quod comniunicatis 
passionibus Christi, gaudete, uti et in revelatione gloriae eius gau- 
deatis exultantes : si dedecoramini nomine Christi, beati estis, quo- 
niam gloria et dei spiritus requiescat in vobis, dum ne quis vestrum 
patiatur, ut homicida aut fur aut maleficus aut alieni speculator. 
Si autem ut Christianus, ne erubescat, glorificet autem dominum in 
nomine isto.^ 

1" vvv SwScKciTu T(5'jrci> Tov TTJs eirnrKOirrjs airo to"v 'AiroorrdXwv kutcxci icXTjpor 
^EX€v0epos." Irenasus, Adv. Haer., iii. 3. 3 (Harvey's edition). 

-Adv. Haer. iv. 19, 2 = i Peter i. 8. ^ Adv. Haer. iv. 28. * i Peter ii. 16. 

^ De Oratione, xv. referring to i Peter iii. 3 and Tim. ii. 9; compare Clement of 
Alexandria, Paedagogus, III., xi. 66, quoted above. 

'Scorpiacexii. = i Peter ii. 20, 21 and iv. 12-15. 


Clement of Alexandria (a.d. 150-(?) 210) commented on 1 Peter 
•in his Hypotyposes, but the commentary is only preserved in a 
Latin abridgment.^ In his extant works he quotes freely from the 
Epistle and uses it as if it were familiar to his readers. In the 
Paedagogiis ^ (for example), which is addressed to catechumens, he 
says : iyvwKores ouv to cKciaToo epYOk, iv ^ 6 ^ (a to*' Tr\<i 
iTapoiKias ufiu}v \p6vov di'ao'Tp<i<|>r]TE, eiSoTes otiou 
<j>0apTois, dpyupiu ^ ^^^putribi, eXuTpcSOrjixcf ck ttjs |j,a- 
Tttias "fniiov d fa arp o <|> TJ s tt a Tp i ir a p a S 6 to u, dWd t i p, i w 
aifxan a>s djxfou dp.up,ou Kai daTTiXou Xpiarou. dpKC- 
Tos ouv 6 TrapeXTjXuOus XP°''°5 — o R^Tpos <|>r]0'i — to P o u X tj fx a 
TWf id vdv KaTeipYacdah TTCTropcup.e't'Ous ei* daeXyeiais, 
€iridup,iais> oico<})XuYiaiSj KwfAOiSj ttotois. Kal dGep-iTois 
tiSwXoXaTpeiais-^ And in the Stromateis,^ which were intended 
for more advanced Christians, he has, after quotations from the 
Second Epistle to the Corinthians : 810 Kal 6 Oaujidcrios HeTpos <j>tictii' • 
ayaiTr]Toi, irapaKaXw (is irapoiKous Kai TTapeTri8rip,ous 
direxcfSai Toil' (t a.p KiKSiv eir i 6 u |x i u c, aiTii'es (TTpaTeuoi'- 
Tai KaTa ttjs ^I'ux^?* ttji' d i' a o-Tp o 4>t) c u p, cj c k a X t) i' 
ey^o V r €.<i Iv Tois <IQ v i v. oti outojs eaTi to 0eXT]p,a toO 
0eou, dyafloTTOiout'Tas ^ip-ovv Tr[V r iav ck^p6vi3iv&.vQpuiTTu>v 
i py aa Lay, ws eXeuOepoi Kal p,T| ci»s €7riKdXup,p,a IxorTcs 
TT^s KaKias TTjc iXeuOepiav, dXX' (is 800X01 Oeou. On 
one occasion ^ he fuses together the sumptuary laws for women 
laid down by St. Paul and St. Peter : -n-poo-ieVai 8e auTds 6 iraiSdywyos 
KcXeuci ei' KaTacTToXif] Kocrp-ita, p,eTd al8ous Kal ar(«)<})pocru>'T|s Koap.eli' 
eauTois,'' UTTOTaaCTop.ei'as tois t8iots avhpd<Tiv, (£»s Kai 
£1 Tii/es direiOoIci' tw X()y(o, 8i.d tt^s tS>v y u v a ikC)v av- 
a,aT p o^ r\^ aveu \6you KcpStjOi^croKTai, eiToirTeuaai'T€s> 
4>T]ai, TT)C € y X6y(o dyi'Tji' d»'a(rTpo<j>ri»' u p. Stv • Stv e ar ot 
ov\ 6 l^oiOei' €p.irXoKT^s Kal TrepiOeaeojs XP"*''^''*' ^ ^^'- 
8(jae(>iS ip.aTicji' K(>ap.oS) dXX' 6 KpuiTTos ttJs KapSias 

dfOpdiTTOS i V TW d<|>6dpT(0 TOU TTpacos Kal T^O^UX^OO TTl'eU- 

fiaTos, o kvTiv ivuiTTiov TOU 0eoG iroXuTeXc's.^ This fusion 
is characteristic : both St. Paul and St. Peter wrote Scripture, and 
Clement follows popular usage, which never has insisted upon a nice 
discrimination between the authors of " texts ". Indeed in another ' 
,place s he refers part of the first Epistle to Timothy ^ to St. Peter : 

^ Potter's edition, pp. 1006 f. " III., xii. 85. « i Peter i. 17-19, iv. 3. 

*III., xi. 75. ^ Paedagogus, III., xi. 66. ^i Tim. ii. 9. 

" I Peter iii. 1-4. ^ Paedagogus, II., xii. 127. •Tim. ii. 9 f. 


irdfu youv' Oaufiao-iu? 6 ricTpos 6 paKOipios Y"''«^i'*tis, <^r\(Tiv, waauTws H-^ iv 
TrXeyfiaaiv t] XP"*'''? ^ p-apyapiTais i?J ifiaTio-jJiw iroXuTeXei, dW o TTptTTei 
yufai^li' eiraYyeXXoiicVais OeoffePeiac, 8i' epyuK dyaOuf o-<j)as auxds koo-- 

The fact of the matter is that even Clement used, at any rate in 
his Paedacrocrus, manuals of extracts from Scripture classified 
according to their subjects. His Paedagogus or instructor is the 
distinguished successor of a line of humbler books of the same kind. 
The Christian catechist had his armoury of appropriate texts just as 
the missionary to the Jews had his. The extracts were arranged 
under headings : sayings of Moses, the Prophet, the Psalmist, the 
Sage, the Lord and the Apostle followed each other in various 
orders and with difPerent degrees of precision in attribution. The 
inevitable results were that the extracts were affected by their new 
neighbours in respect of their text, and that their proper ascrip- 
tion was lost sight of. As the learning and the security of the 
Church increased, these results were corrected. Complete Bibles 
in the Church chests superseded the manuals, and Origen (for ex- 
ample) laboured to restore the purity of the text. The new 
state of things is reflected in the Stromateis of Clement : there 
Jesus Son of Sirach receives credit for his wisdom, which in the 
Paedagogus is ascribed to wisdom, the Paedagogue, or Solomon ; 
and the text of the extracts conforms to the standard of the uncial 
manuscripts. But the literature which preceded Clement was 
popular rather than scholarly, and the phenomena presented by 
his use of Scripture in the Paedagogus contribute to confirm 
the conclusion that the argument based upon the silence of hi& 
predecessors is fallacious, and that their silence can fairly be 
construed as a denial of the Petrine origin or authorship of 1 

These examples of the use of 1 Peter made by Irenseus, Tertullian, 
and Clement of Alexandria have been given in full to show what the 
raw material of the evidence really is. Samples only as they are, they 
suffice to show that 1 Peter was recognised as St. Peter's Epistle 
about A.D. 200 in Gaul, Africa, and Alexandria. By a stretch of the 
imagination it might be supposed that Tertullian was dependent upon 
Clement for this knowledge ; but Irenxus and Clement represent 
a tradition which they inherited independently from a distant past. 
Now Clement was the earliest Christian scholar, whose works have 
come down to us, and Irenaeus is linked to the apostolic age by his 
connexion with Polycarp. 

In his Epistle to the Philippians, Polycarp, Bishop of Smyrna,. 


who died a martyr on 23rd February, a.d. 155 at the age of 86 years,^ 
has left, as Eusebius noted, a valuable witness to the earlier history 
of the New Testament Canon. 

So far as the Canonicity of 1 Peter is concerned the evidence of 
the Epistle is overwhelming. It is true that Polycarp does not give 
the name of the authority, which he uses so often. It would be un- 
reasonable to expect that he should. " Paul " and " the Lord '' are 
the only authors named. The words of the Lord have naturally a 
higher authority than those of His Apostles — at any rate at this stage 
in the development of the Canon. And St. Paul as the founder of 
the Church at Philippi had a special claim upon their obedience: 
" Neither I (Polycarp says) nor anyone like me can attain to the 
wisdom of the blessed and glorious Paul, who, when he came among 
you, before the face of the men of that time taught accurately and 
surely the word of truth, who also when he was absent wrote letters 
to you into which if you look you will be able to be built up in the 
faith given unto you."^ Other Scriptures, even the first Epistle of 
St. John, Polycarp's teacher, are used just as 1 Peter is used — 
anonymously and not always with a clear formula to stamp the 
quotations as quotations. 

The following passages contain clear cases of Polycarp's use of 
1 Peter: — 

(1. 1-3) a\}ve.y6ipr\v . . . on i^ P6(3aia ttjs mcrTeaj? ufAWf pi^a . . . juiexpi 
vuv SiajJieVei Kal Kap7ro<|>opei eis TOf Ku'pioi/ ■qfxwi' '\r]<Touw Xpioroc . . . 
€ts ov ouK iSoKTes iriareueTe \apS. di'eKXaXiiTw 
Kal SeSo^ao-fiecT]^ els tjK iroXXol ciriQujiouaii' elaeXOeii'.^ 

II. 8io dca^cuo'dfJLefoi rots da(t>ua9 u^iStv^ SouXeucrare tu 
0eu) . . . iricrreuCTarres eis Toi' CYetpaiTa to»' Kupioe r] fx S) y 
'lT)<roO>'XptaT6i'6K V€K p C) V Kai 86cTaauTw86|ai'^ Kal 

QpOVOy €K SE^lUf aUTOU . . . fir) dTToSlSofTCS KaKOf dkT 

KaKOu T| XoiSopiaf di'rl Xoi8opias^ t) ypof 9o»' d^rl 

Ypoi'Oou f\ Kardpai' drri Kardpas.^ 
V. KaXof ydp TO di'aKOTrreaOai diro rSiv eTri0up.iaii/ t£>v iv tw KOVfio), on 

iraaa eindupiia Kara tou tt v eu p. aros (rrpaTeueTai.^ 
VII. eirl To»' e| apx^S '^P-^*' irapaSoG^in-a Xoyof emoTpe'i)/w)X6i' »'ii«}>ot'Tes 

It pits tAs euxds^'* ital irpoaKapTepouvxes ftjcrTetais. 

'So Ba.rdenhewer, Geschichte der Altkirchlichen Litteratur, i. p. 149. 
'iii. 2. ' I Peter i. 8. * Compare i Peter i. 12. ^ i Peter i. 3. 

" I Peter i. 21. '' i Peter iii. 9. * Compare i Peter iii. 9. 

» I Peter ii. 11 conflated with Galatians v. 17. ^^ Peter iv. 7. 

VOL. V. 3 


VIII. TrpoaKapTepojfjiec TTJ eXmSi i^p.tiji' Kal tw oLppajSuci ttjs SiKaioaoi'Tjs 
r\}j.b>y, OS i<TTiv Xpiaros '|T]aous, os di'i^feyKev i^iiw;' ras 
dpaprias tw i8tu<To5|ji.aTieiTl to ^oXov,^ os d/xapTiai' 
OUK €iroiT]o-ci', ouSe eupedr) 86\os iv Tw aTOjxaTi 
aoTou.- dXXd 8t' i]p.d9, ii'a S^i^o-wfAei/ ei' auTw, irdrra UTrefi.eii'ei', 
)jiip,T]Tai our yei'ufjieOa ttjs uirofAOvris aoTou Kal edf irdaxwH-^'' 
Sid TO o i/ofi a a TO u, Z o^a.t,<ii ^lev auToi'.^ TouTOfydp 
iQ)xic Toc uTTOYpa^f'-P'O'' cflTjKe 8i' eauToo, Kai i^p,£is 
TOOTO eiTio'Teuaafici'.* 

X. In his ergo state et domini exemplar sequimini firmi m fide 
et inniutahiles, fraternitatis amatores diligentes invicem. . . .^ 
Omnes vobis invicem subiecti estate,^ conversationem vestram 
inreprehensibilem habentes in gentibus, ut ex bonis operibus 
vestris et vos laudem accipiatis et dominus in vobis nan 

^ I Peter ii. 24. ^ i Peter ii. 22. 

2 I Peter iv, 16. * i Peter ii. 21. 

"Compare i Peter iii. 8 (ii. 17). ^Compare i Peter v. 5. 

■^ I Peter ii. 12 : the paraphrase of the latter part of the verse (liroTTTcwovTes 
8o|do-(DO-i Tov ecov) is due to the next quotation (Isaiah Iii. 5), vae autem, per quem 
nomen domini blasphematur. 


This edition is based on a course of lectures delivered, in the first instance, to 
a class of honours men who were expected to use the late Professor Bigg's com- 
mentary as a text-book. The lectures were, therefore, made independently of that 
commentary and with a view to the exhibition of new material and processes rather 
than results. In particular, an attempt was made to illustrate the reference of the 
Septuagint and Jewish literature generally to the exegesis of the New Testament. 
In the reduction of these notes to their present form the commentaries of Alford, 
Bigg, Hort, Kiihl-Meyer, and Von Soden were consulted. 

The text is taken from the facsimile of the great Vatican Codex (B), the lines 
oi which are indicated by spaces. 

The editor gratefully acknowledges the kindness of the Rev. George Milligan 
D.D., and the Rev. R. St. John Parry, B.D., who read the commentary in proof. 

'Trerpov A . 

riETPOZ diTOO-ToXos lu Xu^ ckXcktoTs irapc mSriixois 8io- 1. I 
o-iropcts rioj'Tou TaXaTias Kair iraSoKiag 'Aaias Kara 2 

1 IS XS is the normal contraction of Mrio-oO Xpio-rov: so kv = Kvpiov, ©v = ©eoC. 
After *A<rias all other manuscripts and all the versions add Kal ^lOvvias : the original 
sciibe of Codex Vaticanus (B*) stands alone in the omission. 

Chapter I. — Vv. i, 2. Peter the High 
Commissioner of Jesus, who is Messiah 
of Greeks as of Jews, sends greeting 
after the Christian fashion, in which the 
Greek and Jewish formula; have been 
combined and transformed, to the 
Churches of Northern Asia Minor. 
They are the dispersion of the New 
Israel, chosen out of the whole world in 
accordance with God's foreknowledge 
of their fitness, to undergo the hallow- 
ing of His Spirit, and w th a view to 
their reception into His Church. For 
the result, and therefore the purpose, of 
their election is that they may profess 
obedience and receive the outward sign 
of sprinkling, being baptised into the 
death of Jesus Christ. For them may 
grace (and not mere greeting) and peace 
(God's peace not man's) be multiplied ! 
For discussion of writer and readers see 

Ver. I. eK\eKTOi9irap6iri8i]fi,- 
ois Siacriropds, elect sojourners of 
dispersion, a combination of titles of 
Israel appropriated to Christians in ac- 
cordance with the universal principle of 
the early Church, (i.) The Jews were 
the chosen race (ii. 9 from Isa. xliii. 20) 
as Moses said. Because He loved thy 
fathers therefore He chose their seed after 
them (Deut. iv. 37 ; cf. Rom. xi. 28). So 
Jesus said to His disciples, / have chosen 
you (John xv. 16, ig, etc.), and refers to 
them in the eschatological discourse as 
the elect (Mark xiii. 20). (ii.) Being 
chosen out of the world — in the world, 
indeed, but not of it, John xv. 16 ff. — 
Christians are alien sojourners during 
their life on earth. Their fatherland is 
the city that hath foundations (i. 7, ii. 11 ; 

Heb. xiii. 14; Phil. iii. 20). In Heb. xi. 
9-13 the Patriarchs are credited with the 
same idea and Philo says that the sages 
of Moses' school are all introduced as 
sojourners (p. 416 M). So Abraham said 
to the Sons of Heth, " I am a stranger and 
sojourner (TrapoiKOS Kal irapcirtSTjp.os = 

ll^ini 1^) withyou"(Gen.xxiii. 4); 
Jacob speaks of the days of the years of 

my pilgrimage PT)^^ as iropoiKti) ; 
and the Psalmist anticipates Peter and 
Heb. in the generalisation / am a 
stranger atid sojourner (irapoiKos Kal 
Trap€irC8T)|j.os) in the earth as all my 
fathers were (Ps. xxxix. 13). Deissmann 
(Bible Studies, p. 149) quotes two ex- 
amples of irapeiriStifAos from wills of the 
third century B.C., one of a Jew resident 
in the Fayyiim ('AiroWolviov [TrapcTrJiSTj- 
|Aov OS Kal crvpicTl 'I(i>va6as). In P. Tor. 
8 (B.C. 118) TapeiriSTifiovvTes and Karoj- 
KovvTts are contrasted, (iii.) Moses 
said to Israel thou shall be scattered 
among the kingdoms of the earth (Deut. 
xxviii. 25) ; and the rendering of theLXX 
Siao-TTopa is probably the earliest ex- 
ample of the technical designation {cf. 
John vii. 35) of the Jews, who — for what- 
ever reason — lived outside the Holy 
Land. The collective term (Rabbinic 

^7*713) implies the real unity of these 
scattered communities, whose scattering 
IS no longer regarded as God's punish- 
ment for sin. It thus serves well the 
purpose of one, who, like St. Paul, in- 
sists on the unity of the whole brother- 
hood of Christians (e.g., v. 9) ; but this 
application of the principle that the 
Church is the Israel of God is subordi- 
nate to others which imply that there is 




ttp6yv(ti<ny ©U^ irarpos iv dyiao-ixci in'cufia tos els uiraKOT)** 
1 ©V is the normal contraction of ©cov. 

no earthly correlative to it. When St. 
James addresses the twelve tribes which 
are in Dispersion, he may on the other 
hand be contrasting the saints of Jeru- 
salem with those abroad (as St. Paul did 
in the matter of the Collection) if indeed 
he is not speaking simply to his fellow- 
countrymen as a Jew to Jews. But St. 
Peter writes from " Babylon " and the 
capital of Christendom is no longer Jeru- 
salem. The collocation of irapciri- 
8 1] [J. o I s and Siacriropas implies that 
this scattering, which in the case of 
the type was God's punishment for sin, 
will not be permanent for the antitype. 
For the Christian Church the Jewish 
hope of the ingathering will be fulfilled, 
as is indicated by the emphatic I k \ «- 
KT0 19 — for Jesus said, '■^ The Son of 
Man . . . shall gather together his elect 
. . . from the uttermost part of the earth 
to the uttermost part of heaven" (Mark 
xiii. 26, 27; cf. Deut. xxx. 4). Compare 
Didache ix. 4, " For as this was broken 
[bread] scattered over the hills and being 
gathered together became one, so may 
thy Church be gathered together from 
the ends of the earth into thy kingdom" 
and Justin Martyr, Dial. 113, "As 
Moses ... so also Jesus the Christ 
(corresponding to J., the Son of Nun) 
shall turn again the Dispersion of the 
People . . . shall give us the possession 
eternally ". 

r\6vTov . . . 'Acrias- The order 
indicates the, route of the messenger, 
who landed presumably at Sinope or 
Amastris and, if the omission of Kai 
BiOvvias be accepted, left the country at 
Ephesus or Smyrna. The (Armenian) 
Acta of Phocas (Martyr of Sinope under 
Trajan) are addressed to the brethren 
dwelling in Pontus and Bithynia in 
Paphlagonia and in Mysia in Galatia and 
in Cappadocia and in Armenia (Cony- 
beare. Monuments of Early Christianity, 
p. 103). See Introduction. 

Ver. 2. The three clauses Kara . . ., 
Iv . . ., and els . . . qualify IkXck- 
Tois and perhaps also dirotrToXos (as 
Oecumenius) Peter himself is elect and 
shares their privileges but had no need 
to magnify his office, as had St. Paul. 
Yet see Acts xv. 7 ff. 

Kara ir p6yvft>iTiv. . . . The noun 
occurs only in Acts ii. 23 (speech of St. 

Peter) in reference to the slaying of 
Christ rfj wpi<rit,ivxt PovXfj Kai irpoyvu>arii 
Tov 0£ow, cf i. 20. The use of nouns 
instead of verbs is characteristic of this 
Epistle. The same idea is expressed 
more elaborately by St. Paul in Rom. viii. 
29 (q.v.). Cf Origen, Philocalia, xxv. 
Oecumenius infers that the Apostle is thus 
the equal of the prophets, especially 
Jeremiah {v. Jer. i. 5). — ev LyiatrpCi 
irvevfxaTOS, subjective genitive like 
Ocov, being elect they are within the 
sphere of the proper work of the Holy 
Spirit. The context excludes the render- 
ing hallowing of the [human) spirit. Peter 
uses the stereotyped phrase ; cf. 2 Thess. 
ii. 13 (which corresponds exactly to the 
whole context) eiXaro vp.a.% 6 Oeos o-tt' 
d.px'HS (Kara irp. 0. tt.) . . . Iv ayi- TTvevfjiaTos Kai tticttci a\y]- 
Oeias («is vir.). — els VTraKOTjv . . . I. 
X p I <r T o V, the goal or purpose of their 
election. Obedience is a technical term : 
sc. to God; cf. i. 14, where it is con- 
trasted with the ignorant disobedience of 
their past lives (i. 22). As Christians, 
they obeyed God and not men (Acts iv. 
ig, V. 29) ; God gives His Holy Spirit to 
them that obey Him (Acts v. 32). Com- 
pare the Pauline obedience of faith. This 
obedience implies a change of mind in 
Jew and in Gentile, which is effected by 
the sprinkling of blood of yesus Christ. 
They are now cleansed from sin, which is 
disobedience in Jew or Gentile. Jesus 
Christ, the mediator of the new covenant, 
sprinkles those whom God selected with 
His own blood, as Moses sprinkled the 
children of Israel who had promised 
obedience with the blood of oxen (Exod. 
xxiv. 7 f. ; cf. Heb. ix. 19). But refer- 
ences to other sprinklings of the O.T., 
unconnected with obedience, must not be 
excluded. The word pavTia-p.6% is appro- 
priated, for example, to the water in 
which the ashes of the heifer were dis- 
solved (Num. xix.); and a less obvious 
explanation is supported by Barnabas, 
" that by the remission of sins we might 
be purified, that is in the sprinkling of 
His blood for it stands written . . . by 
His bruise we were healed (Isa. liii. 5) ". 
Indeed the best commentary is supplied 
by the Epistle to the Hebrevi'S in which 
evidence of the O.T. is reviewed and the 
conclusion drawn that according to the 




irXT]0oi'0eiT). euXoyTjTos 6 ©s^ Kal ira rrip toO Ku ■f]\i.C}v I© 3 
XD 6 Kmh TO TToXu aurou IXcos di'aYei'filo'as TfJ-as ^ els 

' ©sis the normal contraction of ©€(5s: so Xs = Xpi<rT(5s, ks = Kvpios, Is = 'iTjaoOs. 
^Fon^fias a few cursives read v|Aas : the words are practically interchangeable 
in manuscripts. 

law everything is cleansed by blood. All 
the types were summed up in the fulfil- 
ment (see especially Heb. ix.) whether 
they related to the Covenant or to the 
Worship. So in Heb. xii. 24 the blood 
of Abel the first martyr is drawn into the 
composite picture of typical blood shed- 
dings. It would be possible to take 
vTTaKoy\v with Itjo-ov XpicTTOv, and to 
render either that ye might obey Jesus 
Christ {cf. i. 22 ; 2 Cor. x. 5) being 
sprinkled with His blood or that ye 
might obev as He obeyed even unto 
death (cf. ' Heb. v. 8 ; Phil. ii. 8). 
Xapis • . . irXt] 9 V V 6 e Li]. This 
lull lormula is found also in 2 Peter 
and Jude. For precedent see Dan. iii. 31. 
Its use here is not merely a convention 
peculiar to the Petrine school ; grace and 
peace are multiplied to match the growth 
of hostility with which the Christians ad- 
dressed are confronted, lest the word of 
Jtsus be fulfilled Sta to x\i(]0vv0TJvai ttjv 
avojJiiav \\ivyr\tr£rai t| dYttiTT] twv iroXXwv 
(Matt. xxiv. 12) ; cf. Rom. v. 20 f. In 
the Pastoral Epistles eXeos (cf. ver. 3) is 
inserted between x- and dp., so 2 John 3. 
From Gal. vi. 16 it appears that eXcos 
stood originally in the place which x<>^P''^ 
usurped (as distinctively Christian and 
reminiscent of the familar \aipiiv) ; so 
that the source will be Num. vi. 24-26. 
Kvpios • • • cXcqcrai o'€ . . . Kai Scot) 
<roi elp-qvTjv. 

Vv. 3-12. Bcnrdiction of the Name. 
The mention of God is followed by the 
Benediction of the Name as Jewish piety 
prescribed ; the formula the Holy One, 
blessed be He, being amplified by the 
Christian appreciation of their fuller 
knowledge. The Apostle surpasses the 
fervour of the Psalmist, Blessed be the 
Lord God of Israel inasmuch as the last 
mighty work surpasses all previous de- 
liverances. It falls naturally into three 
divisions. Vv. 3-5 have as their central 
figure the Father, w. 6-9 the Son, and 
vv. 10-12 the Spirit who is at last given, 
who inspired the prophets of old and now 
inspires the Christian missionaries. From 
the past which preceded their acceptance 
of God's choice of them and its outward 
sign St. Peter turns to consider their 
present condition and to illuminate it with 
the light of the future glory. 

Vv. 3-5. Blessed be God whom we 
have come to know as the God and 
Father of our Lord Jesus Christ! For 
He has granted to us the crowning mani- 
festation of His great mercy. He has 
raised Jesus Christ from the dead and us 
thereby to newness of life. So you may 
hope for and in part enjoy the inheritance 
which was prefigured by the Promised 
Land. This heavenly treasure God has 
kept for those whom He guards with 
His power. So your faith respond, He 
is guarding you for the salvation which 
will be revealed at the last. 

Ver. 3. evXoYilT<Ss. The verbal 
adjective is recognised, perhaps coined by 
the LXX as proper to the Benediction of 
the Name. This usage is reflected in 
N.T., Rom. i. 25, ix. 5; 2 Cor. i. 3, 
xi. 31 ; Eph. i. 3 ; note Mark xiv. 61. 
6 0eos...'f|n.wv, part ot the for- 
mula (cf. 2 Cor. i. 3 ; Eph. i. 3) — based 
on the saying " I ascend to your father 
and my father, unto your God and my 
God" (John xx. 17). KaToiToiroXv 
cXcos, the more elaborate KaTo. t^ 
irXovTOS TT^s x'^P'''"'''? aviToi) of Eph. i. 7 
(cf. ii. 4). a va7€vv»io-as [cf. i. 23). 
Else the verb only occurs in N.T. as 
variant to 7€vvii0fj av«i>0ev in Old Latin 
(and Irenaeus) text of John iii. 5, which 
prompted St. Peter's Christian use of the 
word, see especially i. 23. Later it is 
used to describe the outward sign of 
baptism {e.g., Justin Apol. i. 51) for the 
benefit of pagans as to the limitation of 
worshippers of Isis (Apuleius, Met. xi. 26, 
ut renatus quodammodo staatim sacrorum 
obsequio desponderetur). And of Mithras 
(in aeternum renati). Here the regenera- 
tion of the Christian corresponds to the . 
resurrection of Christ (Chrysostom on 
John) and implies a previous mystical 
or figurative death to sin — see ii. 24; 
iii. 17 f. ; iv. I — which is repeated in the 
practice of their unnatural virtue (iv. 1-4). ' 
The simple idea of regeneration underlies 
St. Paul's elaborations of the doctrine of 
the KaivT] KTio-is. Hort refers to Philo, 
de incorruptihilitate mundi (ii. 489 M.) 
where avaYcvvno-is is used for the 
more usual izaKiyyiViO-ia. — rebirth of the 
world — of the Stoics. IXiriSotoiaay. 
The omission of the definite article is 
characteristic of St. Peter. The Hope 




4 eXirtSa ^wcra"^ 8i' dk-aoTdaews IS Xo €ic viKptav els KX-qpo 
vo\iiav d<j)0apTot' i^^ dfAiacTOV icai djAdpoT to»' T€Tt]pri)JieVif)i/ e 

5 oupams €is ofias tous cf Sui'djjiei ©8 <j)pou poujieVoos Sid 

1 t<i)<ra = 5u«rav: the sign" for v is apt to be absorbed in the preceding line and 
so disregarded: it is used at the end of the line or sichu, whether or not the word 
in which it occurs has come to its end. 

^ij^is the common abbreviation for Kai: it is probably derived from cursive writ- 
ing in which letters were joined together and so varied in shape according to their 

is a recognised technical term (Acts 
xxiii. 6, etc.) of the Pharisees, cor- 
responding to ^"^ntOi- twfav stamps 
the Christian hope as Divine since life is 
God's prerogative {cf. i. 23 and the livhtg 
bread, water of John) and effective (cf. 
the corresponding use of dead faith, Jas. 
ii. 17, 26). Cf. Sap. iii. 4, ^ 8e eXirls 
avTwv aOavaaias irXiipirjs- St' a. with 
dvaYevvv]<ras rather than ^wo-av : three 
prepositional clauses are thus attached to 
a. as to eKXtKTOis (and airdo-ToXos) in 
ver. 2. The resurrection of Jesus is the 
means and guarantee of the spiritual 
resurrection of the Christian (i Cor. xv. 
14, 17) from the death of the sinful and 
fleshly life. 

Ver. 4. els kXtj p. . . . a^Lapa v- 
To V, as God's sons in virtue of their re- 
generation they are God's heirs (Gal. iv. 
7) and have an heavenly inheritance. 
The accumulated adjectives recall various 
images employed to describe it — and em- 
phasise the fact that it is eternal (Heb. 
ix. 15) and spiritual. It is a<|>eapTov, in- 
corruptible [cf. i. 23, iii. 4) because it be- 
longs to the future life which the risen 
dead (i Cor. xv. 52) share with God Him- 
self (Rom. i. 23 ; i Tim. i. 17). It is set 
. where " moth doth not corrupt (8ia<j>6€i- 
pei, Luke xii. 33 : Matt. vi. 19 ff. has 
a.^o.vLl,i.\.)" apart from this corruptible 
world {cf. Isa. .xxiv. 3). It is the incor- 
ruptible crown (i Cor. ix. 25). The 
second epithet d(i.iavTOv is applied to 
the great High Priest, Heb. vii. 26 {cf. 
Heb. xiii. 4 ; Jas. i. 27) and implies again 
separation from this sinful world of which 
it is written efitavare tt)v yr\v (aov Kal 
TT|v KXTjpovojxiav jxoD cOecrOe els pSe'- 
Xn7fj.a (Jer. ii. 7). Compare the descrip- 
tion of virtue in Sap. iv. 2, crT£<j)avTj<})0- 
poOo-a iroiiTrevei tov tSsv a|xiavTWV aOXwv 
d-ywva viKT]cro<ra. dp.dpavTov is 
peculiar to i Peter in N.T., cf. dfiapavTi- 
vov (v. 4) : it is perhaps derived from 
Sap. vi. 12, d|JittpavT<5s eo-riv t| <ro<{>ia, 
and thus presupposes the identification of 
eternal life with knowledge of God (John 

xvii. 3). Compare the application of Isa. 
xl. 6 f. (cited infra 24) in Jas. i. 11. All 
three suit or are associated with the 
wreath presented to the victor in the 
games — a metaphor which the Lord Him- 
self used according to the Apocalypse 
(ii. 10, cf. I Peter v. 4; Jas. i. 12). 
Origen (?) in Cramer's Catena notes that 
the words contradict Chiliasm. rer- 
T|pir|(ie'vTjv els tiijias, reserved (i) 
with a view to you, cf. John xii. 7, iva 
els TT)v Tjfxe'pav . . . T»)pT]<r[i, 2 Peter ii. 
4, els Kpioriv Tr]pov|Aevovs ; for same use 
of els in similar context see Rom. viii. 18. 
(2) . . . until you came — a sense which 
would suit the other examples of TTjpelv 

els. (3) • • • for you, els = 7 ^ dative 
(so Syriac), the writer or translator being 
influenced by els above and below. The 
inheritance is still, as it has always been, 
kept back, but the Christians are sure to 
succeed to it. So Enoch refers to the 
secrets of the righteous which shall be 
revealed (xxxviii. 3) ; the lot of the right- 
eous which the Son of Man preserves 
(xlviii. 7) ; and says Blessed are ye ye 
righteous and elect for glorious will be 
your lot . . . it will be said to the holy 
that they should seek in heaven the 
secrets of righteousness the heritage of 
faith (Iviii. 5). 

Ver. 5. The Christians addressed are 
— to complete the metaphor from other 
passages in the Epistle — a spiritual house 
(ii. v.), which is besieged by the devil 
(v. 8) but guarded and garrisoned by God's 
Power. So long as they have faith (v. 9) 
they are safe : " our faith lays hold upon 
this power and this power strengthens 
faith and so we are preserved" (Leigh- 
ton). Without responsive faith God's 
power is powerless to heal or to guard {cf. 
Mark vi. 5 f. and accounts of Jesus' mir- 
acles generally, Jas. i. 6 f.). The langu- 
age seems to echo Rom. i. 16, 8vva|Ais 
Beov els erwTTjpiav iravTi t4» irioTevovrt, 
combined with Gal. iii. 23 {cf. Phil. iv. 7) 
where also the distinctive 4>povpeiv oc- 
curs in similar context. The Power 

4 — 6. 



TTicTTe ws CIS CTWTT)ptai/ Itoi fiTji' diTOKaXucjjQTJi'ai li/ Kaipu 

eaxaTw • ec w dyaXXidaOc oXiyok' ap Ti ei Seok* ^ XuirTjOeVxcs ^ 6 

' Codex Alexandrinus with others adds ia-rt. after St'ov. 

" XviTTjeevTes is probably right, el Seov being parenthetical: the variants Xv-tt]- 
flevTos (first hand of Codex Sinaiticus and many cursives) and XviriiOfjvci (one 
cursive and the Vulgate) are due to the connexion of Se'ov with its context, the 
parenthetical character of the phrase being disregarded. 

(b^n"^1,!2^) of God is put for yehovah 
in the I'argum of Isa. xxxiii. 21 ; and the 
corresponding use of r\ 8vva| is found in 
Mark xiv. 62 (see Dalman, 200 f. ; and 
add y\ (i.e7aX<i)o-iJVT), a more exact render- 
ing, of Heb. i. 3, viii. i). In Philo God's 
powers are personified self-manifestations. 
619 (TWTTjpiav, K.T.X., is probably the 
third clause qualification of ((>poi>p. (cf. 
2, 3). Below, the salvation of souls is 
described as the goal of faith (g) in a 
passage where the IroifjiTiv, k.t.X., qualify 
(TWTTjpiav rather than KXT]povo|j.iav which 
is explained by (twt. . . . eorxaTO). Sal- 
vation is to St. Peter that salvation 
which is to be revealed in the future (cf. 
i. 9, ii. 2 ; so Rom. xiii. 11, vvv lyyvrcpov 
. , . i\ o-{i)TT]pitt). Partial anticipations 
he neglects ; for them as for Christ the 
glory follows the present suiTering. The 
idea of the revelation of salvation comes 
from Ps. xcviii. 2 {cf. Isa. Ivi. i) which 
has influenced St. Paul also (Rom. i. 
16 f.). €Toi(jLi]v seems to be simply 

the equivalent of ^'^^y prepared,-wh\ch 
St. Paul renders with more attention to 
current usage than etymology by pieX- 
Xovcrav (Rom. viii. 18 ; Gal. iii. 23 ; so 
I Peter v. i). This weaker sense begins 
with Deut. xxxii. 35 (LXX, irdpeo-Tiv 
£Toi|j.a. as Peter here) and prevails in 
new Hebrew (Tarphon said . . . the re- 
compense of the reward of the righteous 

is for the time to come, '^'y^ "T'^riJ^ri' 
Aboth, ii. 19). But the proper signific- 
ance of the word is recognised and utilised 
in the Parables of Jesus, Matt. xxiv. 4, 8. 

Kaipu eo'X"''''*!'' ^'^'" anarthrous as 
being technical term — indefinite as the 
time is unknown as well as in accordance 
with authors' custom [cf. Svvafjiis, irto-- 
T€ws, auTTjpiav above) ; cf. John ii. 18. 

Vv. 6-9. Exult then. These various 
temptations to which you are exposed 
cause present grief. But they are part of 
God's plan for you. Ev/en material per- 
ishable gold is tried in the fire. So is 
your faith tested that it may be purged of 
its dross and the good metal be djscox'ered 
when Jesus Christ is revealed. You love 
Him whom you never saw ; though you 
see Him not you believe on Him. Exult 

then with joy that anticipates your future 
glor}'. You arewinning the prize of your 
faith, the ultimate salvation of souls. St. 
Peter returns to the present and regards 
it from the point of view of those whom 
God is guarding — but only to advance 
again to the glorious future (7 fin, 9) 
when Jesus Christ the present object of 
their love and faith shall be revealed. He 
is the central figure of this sectionwhich is 
based upon two of His sayings which are 
appropriate to the circumstances of these 
His persecuted followers (so iv. 13) v. 
Matt. v. 12 = Apoc. xix. 7 from Ps. xxi. i, 
cxviii. 24. Compare J as. i. 2-4 and John 
cited below. 

Ver. 6. 6 V w. There are four possible 
antecedents, (i) Kaipu, (2) Jesus Christ, 
(3) God, (4) the state of things described 
in 3-5. (i) would imply that they must 
live in the future and is least probably 
right. (2) is supported by 8 but is un- 
likely at this point. The choice lies be- 
tween (3), God being hitherto the domin- 
ating figure ; and (4) : cf. Luke i. 47 = 
I Sam. ii. i a— d. with Iv in LXX as well 
as lirl. dyaXXido-OE. Indicative 
(with or without quasi future meaning) 
rather than Imperative. Bye form of 
d7d\ (Homer downwards) first 
found in LXX especially as assonant 

rendering of 'n'l;) : used later in bad 
sense (XoiSopetrai, Hesych) : here bor- 
rowed irom Matt. v. 11 f. xatpcTe koI 
dyaXXiaaOE. b\iyov, (i) for a little 
time, or (2) to a small extent (contrast 
John xvi. 6, iq XtJitt) ireirXTJpwKcv vifiuiv 
TT)v KapSiav). el 8 e o v, they cannot 
but feel grief at their trials (John xvi. 20, 
ifxets \vtrr\Qr[a-t<T9€ t| 8^ Xvtttj vftuv els 
Xttpdv -yevrjoreTai), but they must not in- 
dulge their natural weakness. To take 
the " necessity " as referring to their' 
trials (for not all the Saints are oppressed, 
Oec.) limits Xvir. to the external sense of 
vexation without reference to the feelings 
of the grieved corresponding to the feel- 
ings implied in dy. The contrast is thus 
destroyed, but this sense harass would 
suit the other military metaphor, tovs 
jf>povpovfie'voDS. — €v itoikCXois irei- 
pacr|iois, the adjective rules out the 




7 iv TTOiKiXois TreipacfJiois iva to Sokiixioc ^ ujau" ttjs irioreus 

iroXuTei ^ juioTepoi' XP"<''°" ^ou d7ro\Xup,EVou 8ia iru pos Se 

^ For SoKifiiov three cursives read Soxip-ov, a more familiar form of the adjective. 

' The ci in iroXvTeifjioTepov is used in place of the conventional i to show that 

the syllable is long : so T£i|iTJv, etc. The secondary uncials have iroXv Ti(i,twT€pov. 

limitation of ir. to external trials which 
St. James who has the entire phrase 
seems to put upon it. 

Ver. 7. TO SoKifiiov. The evi- 
dence of the papyri (Deissmann, Bible 
Studies, pp. 259 ft.) shows that 8oKip,ios 
is a bye form of the adjective Sotct-ftos 
approved ; so Ps. xii. 7, apYvpiov -irc'Trvp- 
wfie'vov 8oKip,iov {of. I Chron. xxxix. 4 ; 
Zech. xi. 3, where it occurs as v.l. for 
SoKtjAov). Hence the phrase (here and 
in Jas. i. 3 ?) corresponds exactly to St. 
Paul's TO TTJs riiACTepas ayaiTTis 7VI]- 
tr 10 V — "the genuineness ot your faith 
or " the approvedness "). So Arethas 
on Apoc. ix. 4, 01 8^ TO SoKipiov 
laiiTuiv 8i.a wvpos iropexofjievoi. The 
substantive 8.= " means of trial, testing " 
which does not suit this context, or a 
specimen of metal to be tested. — iroXv- 
TifioTcpov, to justify the common 
rendering (A.V., R.V.) according to which 
IT. K.T.X. are taken as in apposition to to 
80K., ov must be supplied as if omitted by 
haplography after iroX. But there is no 
need for emendation, if troX. be taken as 
predicate thrown forward for the sake of 
emphasis. — xpv<rov k.t.X. St. Peter 
adapts the familiar comparison of man's 
suffering to the fining-pot of precious 
metal, insisting on the superiority of the 
spiritual to the material gold. The stress 
lies on Sia irvpos. True faith is tested 
by trials, just as gold is proved by fire. It 
is more valuable than gold which is per- 
ishable. If men test gold thus, much 
more will God test faith which outlives 
the present age, cf. Hebrew ix. 23. Cf. 
use of TTvpcoo-iSj iv. 12. For the image, 
Zech. xiii. 9, 8oKip,a) aiiToiis is SoKip.- 
a^erai to xpvcrlov ; Ps. Ixvi. 10 ; Prov. 
xvii. 3; Sir. ii. 5, etc. — Tov diroX- 
Xvp,cvov, c/". John vi. 27, ttjv Ppio-iv 
TT)v air. (contrasted witla imperishable 
food; here gold generally is contrasted with 
faith) and 4>9apToIs apyvpia koX xpoo'i'i' 
below. — evpedf), cf. 2 Peter iii. 14, 
(nro\i8do-aT€ aor-TriXoi Kal d|X(6fiiT]Toi avTui 
EtipEdiivai, £v £ipi]vn ; Ps. xvii. 3, ISoki- 
fxao-as TT)v KapSiav p,ov . . . Kai ovx 
evpe'St] ev epoi aSiKia. — els eiraivov 
. . . must be taken with the whole sen- 
tence, unless Sv be supplied. So els 
might introduce the predicate (better •,• 

stronger) of evp., cf. Rom. vii. 10. els 

taken as = '^ expressing transition into 
a new state or condition (as Rom. vii. 10). 
— eiraivov is the verdict. " Well done 
good and faithful servant ; enter thou 
into the joy of thy Lord." The Christian 
is the true Jew and receives at last the 
praise which the name Judah signifies. 
In Rom. ii. 29, 6 «v tu KpvirTQ) 'iovSaios 
. . . ov 6 eiraivos ovk e| dvBpuTTuv <;iXX* 
Ik tot) Oeov, Paul follows the alteration 
of the original elop-oXoYTjo-us (Gen. xxix. 
35, LXX, and Philo) consequent upon the 

transference of the praise (mijn) from 
God to men (cf. Gen. xlix. 8, 'lov8a o-e 
alveo-aio'av oi d8eX(^oi crov). The old 
Israel set their hope on praise from the 
congregation (Sir. xxxix. 10) or glory 
from men, John v. 44 ; xii. 42 f. The 
new Israel looked for praise from God to 
balance the dispraise of men (Matt. v. 
II f ) ; so St. Peter adds lir. to the usual 
formula 86|av Kal Tifxi^v, Rom. ii. 7, 10 
(Ps. viii. 6) 8<5|t) Kal Tipfj earTe({>dv(i)0'as 
dvOpcoTTov, cf. o-Kevos els Tip.i]v, Rom. 
ix. 21, for the less obvious word. 
Hort compares Marcus Aurelius xii. 
II, p.T) iroiciv dXXo y\ oirep p,€'XXei 
6 06 OS eiraiveiv. — ev diroKaX-uij/ei 
Iv. Xv., when jfesiis Christ is revealed. 
The expression is derived from the saying 
Kara Ta ovTa eo"Tai t) Tjpepa 6 vios tov 
dv^pciirov diroKaX-uTrTeToi (Luke xvii. 30). 
As Judge He will pronounce the verdict 
of approval and bestow glory and honour. 
The reference to present glorified joy in 
the midst of trial suggests that the writer 
has advanced beyond the simple belief in 
a final theophany and contemplates a 
spiritual revelation of Jesus Christ as 
each Christian (cf. Gal. i. i6) realises 
the meaning of His Resurrection ; but cf. 
p,T| opuvTes below. 

Ver. 7. The Christians addressed 
were not personal disciples of Jesus but 
converts of the Apostles (12). As such 
they could claim Beatitude paKapioi oi 
[AT) l86vTes Kal TricrTevaavTes (John xx. 
29). Their love began and continues 
without sight of Him ; even now when 
they expect His coming they must still 
believe without seeing Him and exult. 
The Latin version ot Augustine, gives 




8oKi|jia^ofi,€Vou eupedT] ei§ ^iraivov ^ 8o|av Kal TetjATjc iv 

diroKaXu^/ei lo XS oi* ou\ ^ iSovres ^ dYcnraTe eis o*' apri p,T] 8 
opoji'Tes TTioreuorres 8e dyaX Xtdre Xtipa. dKeKXaXrj tu Kal 

ScSolao-fieKjj KOfxi.'t,6ii€voi to tc'Xos ttjs irtaTcus CTUTtjpi ai* 9 

\\iv)(u)v. irepl ^s o''«* TTjpias elel^rJTTjaav >(» ^iTjpaucTjo-ac irpo- 10 
cJiT] Tai 01 irepl Tt]s eiS ujxas )(dpiT09 irpo<j)T]Teuora res 

^ The first hand of Codex Vaticanus is alone in reading ovix, which could only 
be justified if followed by an aspirate. 

- For l86vT6s many manuscripts, headed by Codex Alexandrinus, read elSdrcs : 
this confusion between IStiv and ciSe'vai is common. 

three distinct clauses referring to the 
past, the present and the future climax 
whom you knew not; in whom now — not 
seeing ye believe ; whom whenyou see you 
will exult. But for lack of support it 
must be set aside in favour of the Greek 
text (which regards present as leading 
up to future culmination without a break) 
as being a redaction of the passage for 
separate use. els S v, with irio-TevovTes, 
|AT) opivTes being parenthesis added to 
explain force of ttio-t. (Heb. xi. i ; Rom. 
viii. 24). — \apS, dveKXaXtJTcj) Kal 
SeS o|ao-fx.e vp. Their faith enables 
them to pass beyond their present suffer- 
ings to the joy which belongs to the sub- 
sequent glories. Thus their joy being 
heavenly is unspeakable and glorified. 
Language cannot express the communion 
with God which the Christian like St. 
Paul may enjoy (2 Cor. xii. 3 f.) ; com- 
pare Rom. viii. 26, a-uro to irvevfia -uiTcp- 
evTvy\a.vei <rT€vaY|iot9 dXaXi^Tois. And 
this joy is glorified because it is an 
earnest of the glory which shall be re- 
vealed ; cf. iv. 14. 

Ver. 9. The connexion with mention 
of persecution suggests that the writer is 
here thinking of the saying, in your 
patience ye shall win your souls and per- 
haps also of the contrast between the 
persecutoi who has only power over the 
body. Whatever happen to the body 
the conclusion — the consummation of 
their faith — is assured them. — Kop.i^d- 
p, € V o I implies that already they are 
receiving what is due to them {cf. 
yi. 4) and therefore they rejoice with 
Hannah in God the Saviour. In the 
Attic Orators who use a refined form of 
colloquial Greek the verb is common in 
the sense of recovering debts, as in iMatt. 
XXV. 27, €KO|xio-d(XTiv oLv TO Ifidv. St. Paul 
applies it to future recompense (2 Cor. v. 
10, iva Kopii<nr]Tai eKaaros to. Sia tov 
<r<o|JiaTOS ; Eph. vi. 8; Col. iii. 25; cf. 2 
Mace. viii. 33, tov a|iov ttjs Svo-o-ePttas 

eKojiio-ttTo<iv) ; in Heb. iii. 4, it is 
used of receiving promises. — to tcXos. 
The common meaning fulfilment or con- 
summation gives a fair sense but the con- 
nection with Koixi£<5(ji6voi, is thus some- 
what strange. The parallel of v. 4, 
taken with Pindar, Ol. x(xi.) 81, Aopv- 
kXos 8' £4>Epe or-uYiJLds tc'Xos, suggests 
as a possible rendering because ye 
receive the reward. The Septuagint, 
again (Num. xxxi. 28, etc.), uses t. to 

translate DDD — proportion to be paid, 
lax. And this use is well estab- 
lished in Greek literature for to, tcXt], 
cf. Xvo-iTfXeiv, etc. Accordingly Suidas 
defines TeXos as to 8uSdp,evov tois 
PaaiXetJai. The particular connotations 
can hardly be pressed here but these 
uses give some colour of support to the 
Syriac rendering recompense and the 
mercedem of Augustine ; cf. Rom. vi. 22. 
— cwTTipCar \|»vx<i>'' = ffcoTHpiav 
above. \|;vxiiv is added to console the 
readers for their sufferings in accordance 
with Mark viii. 35, 8s 8' fi,v diroXeVei tt)V 
\|;vx'tiv avTov IveKev tov evayveXiov 
o-(oa-£t, axiTiiv = John xii. 25; cf. Luke 
xxi. 19 ; Jas. i. 21. The soul for St. 
Peter is the self or personality as lor 
Jesus Himself. 

Vv. 10-12. — The ancient prophets pro- 
phesied concerning the grace which was 
destined for you and enquired diligently 
about this salvation. They were the un- 
conscious instruments of the revelation of 
God and their first duty done continued 
to pore over the inspired descriptions of 
the sufferings and subsequent glories of 
the Messiah. They asked themselves to 
whom does this refer and when shall 
these things be. And to them the revela- 
tion was made that they were only the 
administrators of an estate which others 
— you in fact should enjoy. The subjects 
of their prophecies have now been pro- 
claimed to you by your Christian teachers 
who, like the prophets, were inspired by 




1 1 epaucoltTcs eis tiko tj itolov Kaipoc eSriXoo to iv auTois 
TTceufxa ^ irpoiJiapTupo jxei'Ok' ^ toi els Xpeicrro" iraOTJjjiaTa Kai ras 
^ Codex Vaticanus is alone in omitting Xpto-rov after irv6V|*a. 
^ Codex Alexandrinus with otliers has 'n-po)xapTvpov|xevov. 

the Holy Spirit — with this difference that 
now the Spirit has been sent from heaven 
whereas of old He dwelt only in minds 

of a few. And these are the mysteries 
into which angels long to peep. 

St. Peter has utilised a saying of Jesus 
to explain the great problem of unfulfilled 
prophecy and expounded it. Among the 
prophets he includes the so-called apoca- 
lyptic writers like Daniel and his suc- 
cessors. Gradually the coming of the 
Messiah and the dawn of the new age 
had been pushed further and further back 
until the inspired prophets realised that 
— as the Christians held — the Messiah 
would only come just before the end of all. 
The Messiah was not Hezekiah despite 
the Rabbis, nor yet the best of the Has- 
monean house as Enoch hoped. dir6KaXv> 
<J)9tj. Such was the revelation or Apoca- 
lypse from which the latest of the prophets 
derive their common name ; and St. Peter 
credits all the line with the curiosity which 
characterised the last of them and his 
own contemporaries ; cf. Acts ii. and 
Heb. xi. 13 ff. The saying in question 
on which St. Peter builds is reported 
differently : According to Matt. xiii. 17, 
Jesus said, iroXXol -n-pocjjTJTai Kal SiKaioi 
€iredv\i.t]<rav . . . according to Luke x. 24, 
■>rpo<f>'fiTau Kai ^ao-iXels TjOeX-rjcrav . . . 
according to St. Peter trpo^i\rai (10) .■<al 
ctYYcXoi. The mention of the righteous 
derives support from Heb. xi. 13-16, and 

John viii. 56, and an original 0^"^"^^^ 
*' the righteous " would easily be altered in 
the course of transmission into □"'"^l^''' 
= princes earthly or heavenly {cf. Dan. 
X. 21 ; LXX, MixatjX 6 aY7«Xos). The 
motive which prompted the interpretation 
aYY^Xoi is due to the influence of the 
Book of Enoch (see note below) which 
explains the writer's conception of the 

Ver. lo. The prophets were concerned 
with the Messianic salvation and searched 
their own writings and those of their pre- 
decessors for definite information about 
it. They are honoured by the Christians 
who realise that as a matter of fact they 
prophesied concerning the grace which 
was destined for the Christian Church. — 
TTJs els v( x'^P'"'''''?' ^^'^ grace 
which belongs to you, cf. ra, els XP''*^'''^*' 
iraO. (11). 

Ver. II. The construction of £is 

T.K.TT. Kaip6v and of irpo|xapT. is doubt- 
ful. epauvwvTes takes up eleJiJTTjo-av 
K.T.X. (10) ; the run of the sentence seems 
to naturally connect to, . . . So^a; with 
irpop,apT. and els . . . Kaipov with ISi]- 
Xo«. So Vulgate in quod vel quale 
tempus significaret . . . spiritus . . . prae- 
nuntians . . . passiones. But if els . . .• 
Kaipbv be unfit to be a direct object and 
TTpop-apT., perhaps, to have one of this 
kind, TO. . . . So^as must be governed 
by l8i]Xov. It is possible also to dis- 
sociate Tiva from Kaipov and to render 
in reference to whom and what time ike 
Spirit signified . . . ; cf. Eph. v. 22, 
kyii Se Xe'yw els Xpio-Tov, Acts ii. 25. If 
Tvya be taken with Kaipov, the two words 
correspond to the two questions of the 
disciples, Whejt ? . . . and what shall be 
the sign ? (Mark xiii, 4). Faihng to dis- 
cover at wliat time, the prophets asked at 
what kind of time ; their answer received 
a certain endorsement in the eschatolo- 
gical discourse of Jesus (Mark xiii. 5 ff, 
and parallels). — 1817X0^, cf. Heb. ix. 8, 
TOVTO StjXovvtos tov FlvevfJiaTos. The 
word implies discernment on the part of 
the student (Heb. xii. 27, to St eTi a7ra| 
Si]Xol . . .). What time . . . did point 
unto of R.V. is unjustifiable ; a simple 
accusative is required, i.e., either (i.) iroiov 
K. or (ii.) Tiva tj it. k. (els being deleted 
as dittography of -es) or (iii.) Ta . . . 
8(i|as. — TO TTveijiJia [Xpio-ToC], the 
full phrase is a natural one for a Christian 
to employ — Christ being here the proper 
name = Jesus Christ and not the title. 
Kvpios in the O.T. was commonly inter- 
preted as referring to Our Lord ; and 
XC. is a frequent v.l. for KG. Hence 
Barnabas (v.q.), 01 irpotjjTjTai dir' avjToO 
exov TT)v X^P'-'' ^i'? auTov €irpo4)'j]Tevicrav, 
— tr po|jiapTDpop.evov only occurs 
here. If papTvpGp,ai (the proper sense) 
determine the meaning of the compound 
render ''protesting {calling God to wit- 
ness) beforehand ". If usage justify con- 
fusion with (AapTvpeiv, be witness \of\ 
render testifying beforehand or (publicly .) 
— T dels XviraOiifxaTa, the doctrine 
that the Messiah must suffer and so enter 
into His glory was stated by the prophets 
(e.g. Isa. iii.) but neglected by tlie Jews 
of the first century (John xii. 34). Be- 
lievers were reminded of it by the risen 
Lord Himself (Luke xxiv. 26, 46) and put 
it in the forefront of their demonstraiio 

II — 12. 



fie tA TOuTa 

8(55os oTs d TTCKaXuiljOT] oTi oux ^ auTots 12 
^ auTcii S. cov dia]Y Y^'^'H "H'^'' ^'^°' '""'^^ ^" 

1 For 8iTjK<5vovv Dr. Rendel Harris (Side-Lights on New Testament Research, 
p. 207) conjectures that Suvoovvto should be read in accordance with the statement 
of the Book of Enoch, " I contemplated them (the things heard in the vision) not 
for the present generation but for one that was far distant". See Henoch, i. 2, 
Kttl ovK Is Tov vvv Ycvcav 8icvoov|j.i]v aXXa iir\ ir6pp<D Tjvtrav kyit XaXu. Siavoias 
of verse 13 is cited in confirmation of the conjecture. 

evangelica (Acts iii. 18, xvii. 3, xxvi. 23). 
The phrase corresponds exactly to the 

original "~l^ ^^!2n • *^' standing for 

the 7 (periphrasis for construct, state). — 
Tos (xera Tovra 86|as, the plural 
(rlories implies some comprehension of the 
later doctrine, e.g., John, which recog- 
>iised that the glory of Jesus was parti- 
ally manifested during His earthly life; 
although the definition subsequent reflects 
the primitive simplicity and if it be pressed 
the glories must be explained as referring 
to the resurrection ascension triumph over 
angels as well as the glorious session 
(viii. 21 f.). — 0I9 a'TreKaXv({>OT), so 
St. Peter argues that Joel prophesied the 
last things {cf. Sir. xlviii. 24) and that 
David foresaw and spoke concerning the 
resurrection (Acts ii, 17, 31, cf. iii. 24). 
Compare Dan. ix. 2, xii. 4, etc., lor ex- 
amples of partial revelations of this kind 
proper to apocalyptic writers. Heb. I.e. 
siipr. credits the Patriarchs with the 
same insight. — ovx eavTots vfiiv 
8 €, negative and positive presentation of 
the past for emphasis is common in this 
Epistle. — 8it]k6vovv avra, "they 
were supplying, conveying the revelations 
granted to them — primary the prophecy 
and the revealed solution ol it alike," 
cf. iv. 10, els cavTovs aviTO 8iaKovovv- 
xeg. The context shows, if the word 
8iaKov£iv does not itself connote it, that 
herein they were stewards of God's mani- 
fold grace — channels of communication. 
For Ace. with 8i.aKov. cf, 2 Cor. iii. 3, 
ItticttoXt) XpKTTov 8iaKovT)6€io-a V(^' 
"qiJicov, viii. 19, rfj x^pi-Ti TavTi) TJ) 810- 
Kovovp,cvT] xxf)' iqfAoiv, from which it may 
be inferred that 8. connotes what the 
context here suggests, cf. a vvv avijY- 
YcXtj, have been at the present dispensa- 
tion declared ; d. is taken from the great 
proof text relating to the calling of the 
Gentiles, ols ovik dvTiYY*^''! dKovovortv, 
Isa. Hi. 15 cited Rom. xv. 21. " But St. 
Peter probably meant more by the word 
. . . the phrase includes not only the 
announcement of the historical facts of 
the Gospel, but, yet more, their implicit 
teachings as to the counsels of God and 

the hopes revealed for men " (Hort). — 
8td Twv cvaYY-^P-*', God spake 
through the evangelists {cf. Isa. Ixi. i, 
apud Rom. x. 15) as through the pro- 
phets. Matt. i. 22, ii. 15, etc. Both are 
simply God's messengers. For accusative 

after eviaYY- </• use of "TC^^, = gladden 
■with good tidings (Isa. Ixi. i). So 
iTTwxol evaYYcXi^ovrai (Matt. xi. 5 ; 
Luke vii. 22) is substituted for the original 
TTTwxots cuaYYeXi^ecrdai (Luke iv'. 18 = 
Isa. Ixi. i) if the prophecy which Jesus 
appropriated and which forms the basis 
of the Christian use of the word. — 
IT V e V n a T I K.T.X. The evangelists 
preached by the Spirit, as Stephen spoke 
(Acts vi. 10), Tip irvevnari w eXdXei. In 
Sir. xlviii. 24, if the Greek and Hebrew 
texts are trustworthy, irvevjAaTi the 
simple Dative (TrvcvjAaTt (ieYaXw etSev 
TO, eo-xara i.e. Isaiah) corresponds* 

to nT^H • '^f' insertion of Iv here in 
v.l. The visible descent of the Holy 
Spirit is contrasted with the indwel- 
ling Spirit which inspired the pro- 
phets. The Holy Spirit was given, when 
Jesus was glorified, as never before, ovk 
Ik ft^rpov (John iii. 34). Vulgate renders 
by ablative absolute. — els d . . . irapa- 
Kvtj/ai, after expanding the first part of 
Jesus' saying (and its context ye sec) St. 
Peter at last reaches the second in its 
secondary form. He combines with it as 
its proper Scripture, the prophecy of 
Enoch (ix. i) <oX dKovaavres oi re'o-- 
(rapes |AeYdXoi dpxdYY*^*"" • • • ffo-?^- 
Kv\|/av lirl TTjv yr[v Ik twv ayitjiV tov 
ovpavov. St. Paul spiritualises the idea 
"to me . . . this grace was given to 
preach to the Gentiles ... in order that 
now might be made known to the princi- 
palities and the authorities in heavenly 
places by means of the Church the verj-' 
varied wisdom of God" (Eph. iii. 8 ft.). 
St. Peter reproduces faithfully the sim- 
plicity of the original and represents 
this longing as still unsatisfied since the 
Church is not yet perfect or complete. 
It thus becomes part of the sympathetic 
groaning and travailing of the whole 
creation (Rom. viii. 22 f.). In iii. 21 St. 
Peter states on the same authority that 



ayycXKrafAeVwi' Trceup-ari ^ dyiu oLtto o'TaXef'Tt. dir' oopai'ou 

13 €1$ d einOufiouaii' dy y^^^'' irapaKuij/ai. 810 dcal^'oi 
rds 6CT<j)uas T'fis Siacoias ojiui' f6<j>oi'T€S ^ re Xcioj; eXiriCTaTC 

14 cm TT)~ 4>epop,€VT]>' ujjLii' x^P*-" ^^ diroKaXu»|/€i IS Xu. ws 
^ To irveijfjiaTi Codex Sinaiticus, with other manuscripts of less weight, prefixes 

^ ve<j>ovTes for vt]<|>ovt6S. 

Christ preached to the spirits in prison ; 
adding that when he ascended all angels 
were subjected to Him. The apparent 
contradiction is due to the discrepancy 
between the ideal and its gradual realisa- 
tion and not to an imperfect coordination 
of these conceptions of the universal 
sovereignty of God. See i Cor. xv. 25 f., 
Heb. ii. 7 £, not yet do we see . . . — 
7rapaKvi|rai, has lost its suggestion of 
peeping through its use in the LXX for 

riptl^ ^ook forth though it is not em- 
ployed by them in the places where God 
is said to look dowji from heaven (Ps.xiv. 

2, etc.). The patristic commentators 
seem to hold by the Evangelist rather 
than the Apostle in respect to the saying, 
as they refer exclusively for illustration 
to the O.T. figures, Moses (Heb xi. 26), 
Isaiah (John xii. 41). Oecumenius notes 
that Daniel is called by the angel a man 
of longings (Dan. ix. 25). That the 
angels of Peter are due to Enoch and 
secondary seems to be borne out by the 
Targum of Eccles. i. 8, " In all the words 
that are prepared (about) to come to pass 
in the world the ancient prophets wearied 
themselves and could not find their 

Vv. 13-21. Practical admonitions. In 
this section St. Peter is engrossed with 
the conception of the Church as the new 
Israel which has been delivered from 
idolatry — the spiritual Egypt — by a far 
more excellent sacrifice. Jesus Himself 
endorsed such adaptation of the direc- 
tions given for the 'typical deliverance 
(Luke xii. 35) and the principle that the 
v/orshippers of Jehovah must be like 
Him (John iv. 23 f . ; Matt. v. ^8, etc.). 

Ver. 13. 8 1(5 introduces the practical 
inference. — d va^oxra p, e v o i, k.t.X.., 
the reference to the directions for celebra- 
tion of the Passover (Exod. xii. 11, ovtws 
8e 4)dYe<r9e aixo • ai 6a4)ves ■iip&iv irepi- 
e^cdtrpe'vat . . . perd cnrov8T]s ) is unmis- 
takable. The actual deliverance of the 
Christians is still in the future ; they 
must be always ready against the coming 
of the Lord. Oec. refers to Job xxxviii, 

3. The particular compound occurs only 
twice in LXX — once in this phrase of the 

manly woman in Prov. xxxi. 17, dva^cocra- 
pevrj Icrxvpws fr^v hir^vv aiiTTJs, where it 
implies preparation for serious work. In 
2 Kings iv. 29 ff. (Elisha's mission of 
Gehazi which is in some ways a type 
fulfilled by Jesus' mission of the Seventy, 
cf. Luke X. 4), ^wcrai ttjv 6or<J>vv <rov is 
the preparation for an urgent errand. 
The addition of ttjs Siavoias implies that 
the readiness required is spiritual. St. 
Paul uses KapSia in the same way (Eph. 
i. 18, 7r£<|>a>Tio'p€vo'us tovs 6<|>8aXpovs 
TTJs Kap8ias tipuv) and from Mark xii. 30 
= Deut. vi. 4 f. it appears that 8idvoia is 

a recognised equivalent of ^|2^ heart. 
— vi7<|>ovT6s reXciws. In cases like 
this it is natural to take the adverb with 
the preceding verb. tcXeicos (only 
here in N.T.) has much the same force as 
tt)s Siavoias ; so the adjective is applied 
to the antitype as contrasted with the type 
in Heb. ix, 11, T'fjs . . . reXcioTtpos 
o-KTivT)s and Jas. i. 25, vdpov reXeiov tov 
TT^s IXeuScpias. For vi^4)ovt€s cf. iv. 7 
and v. 8, vr^\j/aT€ 7pT)-yopi)(raT€, I Thess. 
v. 8, Ypiryopclipev Kal vtitjjupev. Sobriety 
is necessary to watchfulness. The origin 
of this use of the word (not in the LXX) 
is to be found in the parable of Luke xii. 
45 f. ; it has special point in view of the 
Kcopoi; and irorois, in which they were 
prone to indulge. — t tjv <|)€popevT)v 
■upiv x*'P''*' is an adaption of the 
common Greek idiom (Homer down- 
wards) (fjcpciv x«, to confer a favour {cf. 
Sir. viii. 19, fit) dva<{>epeT(o <roi x'^P'''') 
and is thus analogous to St. Paul's use 
of x<»-pi£«<''6ai (see Rom. viii. 32). The 
present participle has its natural force. 
Peter does not distinguish between the 
present and the climax ; already the new 
age which is the last has begun. Thexdpis 
is the final deliverance and its use here 
is another link with the type : €8<ok£v 6 
Kvpios TTjv x^P'''' ''■*? Xotj) avToi) (Exod. 
xii. 36). — ev diroKaXiJx)/ci M'qcrov 
X pier TOV, Jesus Christ is being re- 
vt aled or is revealing the salvation. The 
revelation began with the resurrection cf. 
<j>av€ptu6''vTos and continues to the cul- 
mination (7). 
Ver. 14. ws, inasmuch as you are, cf. 




TeKi/a uiraK0T]9 • firj <TuaxT)fiaTtl^6p,€ fat ^ rats irpoxepoj' ci' 

TTJ dyi/oia ufiwi' eirt 6u|i,iais * d\Xd Kara, to" KaXeVarra ufids 15 

ayio" ical auTol ayioi iv ird orj di'a(rrpo<j>Tj yecri Otjtc • 

SioTi yeypairrai on ayioi ideaQe on e yu dyios ' Kal eii6, 17 

Trarepa eTTiKaXeicrGe roc dirpo acjiroXiifjnrTws Kpi I'Oi'Ta Kara 

TO cKaoTOu epyoi/ ec 4>6^a) Toi/ ttJs irapoiKias ujxcii' XP0''°*' 

^ The termination a~utrxi\^aTil6\i.(vai is probably due to the following rals. 

n. 2, 5, ni. 7, etc. — t €Kva viraKOTis, 
obedient corresponds to St. Paul's viol 
TTJs direiOeias (Col. iii. 6 ; Eph. ii. 2, 
V. 6). Both phrases reflect the Hebrew 

use of T^, " followed by word of quality 

characteristic, etc." (B.D.B., s.v., 8). 
For T€Kva in place of usual vioi in this 
idiom, cf. Hos. g, rcKva oSiKias and Eph. 
ii. 3, TCKva opyrjs. Here it suits better 
with ^pi^y] (ii. i). — a-va\y\}Larit,6- 
p, € V a k, from Rom. xii. 2, p.T] trvcrxTjp.a- 
rit,i(r9e tw aluvi towtw. The feminine 
is peculiar to B whose scribe was perhaps 
influenced by the Alexandrian identifica- 
tion of woman with the flesh (John i. 131 
or regarded such conformity as woman- 
ish. The participle has the force of an 
imperative. The Christians needed to 
be warned against conformity to the 
manners and morals of their countrymen, 
which were incompatible with their new 
faith (see v. 2-4). The use of crxiip-a in 
Isa. iii. 17, perhaps assists the use of 
<rv(rx. in connection with lusts. — Iv xfj 
dyvoiq. vy.u>v. It was a Jewish axiom 
that the Gentiles were ignorant (Acts 
xvii. 30; Eph. iv. 17 f.). Christian 
teachers demonstrated the equal ignor- 
ance of the Jews (Peter, Acts iii. 17; 
Paul, in Rom.). So Jesus had pronounced 
even the teachers of Israel to be blind 
and promised them knowledge of the 
truth (John viii. 32 ff., cf. interview with 
Nicodemus) ; whereas speaking to the 
Samaritan woman He adopted the Jew- 
ish standpoint (John iv. 22) — cf. 2 Kings 
xvii. 29-41 with Isa. ii. 3 ; Baruch. iv. 4, 
}vaKapio( Icrpev 'l(rpaT)X on, ra dpECToi 
TOV 6€OV Tip.iv yvo)o-Ta IcTTlV. 

Vv. 15 f. The command Ye shall be 
holv for I am holy is connected originally 
with the deliverance from Egypt and the 
distinction between clean and unclean, 
which lays down the principle of separa- 
tion involved in the Exodus (Lev. xi. 44- 
46, etc.; cf. Isa. Hi. 11). St. Peter com- 
bines the Scripture with the Word of 
Jesus for Kard t^v . . . corresponds to 
uis of Matt. v. 48. Gentiles needed God's 

summons before they could regard Him 
as their heavenly Father ; hence Him 
that called you. Compare Deut. xviii. 
13 (whence reXeios ot Matt. I.e.) where 
also contrast with abominations of ths 
the heathen. — ay lov is better taken as 
predicate than as substantive, since 6 
KaXEcras (KaXwv) is well-established as a 
title of God in His relation to Gentile 
Christians (cf. ii, 9, etc.). — I v -rr d o- ■{] 
dvao-rpo ({>-|j, cf. i. 18, ii. 12, iii. i, 
2, i5 ; Tobit iv. 19, icrOt ircTratScvpe'vos Iv 
Trdo-ji d. o-ov. The corresponding verb, 
dvaaTpE4>ca-0ai is found as rendering of 

•r'^py in the same sense (Prov. xx. 7, 

dvacTpe'^ieTai dp.topos) ; both verb and 
noun are so used in late Greek authors 
(especially Epictetus). — y e v •»] 6 tj t c be- 
come as y oil were not or show yourselves 
as you are ; the latter sense suits d. which 
is distinctively outward behaviour. 

Ver. 17, c/". Rom. ii. lof , € I iroTepa 
eiriKaXeio-Oe, if ye invoke as Father : — 
reminiscence of Jer. iii. 19, el irarepa 
EirtKaXeio-Oe pe (so Q. perhaps after 
I Peter, for eliro irarepa KaXeatTt pe) 
cf Ps. Ixxxix. 27, avris e-TriKaXetreTat 
pe riariip pov eX <rv. There may be a 
reference to the use of the Lord's Prayer 
(surname the Judge Father) ; but the 
context of Jer. I.e. corresponds closely 
to the thought here : " All the nations 
shall be gathered ... to Jerusalem, 
neither shall they walk any more after 
the stubbornness of their evil heart. In 
those days . . . Judah and Israel shall 
come together out of the land of cap- 
tivity . . . and I said ' My father ye shall 
call me'." — dir poo-uiroXij pirTw s 
summarises St. Peter's inference frort 
experience at Caesarea (Acts x. 34) Kara- 
XapPdvopai on ovk Ictiv irpoo-wiroXi]- 
pTTTTjs 6 0£<5s. Adjective and adverb are 
formed from Xap^dvciv irp^atoirov of 

LXX = "»1C h^tl^i receive (lift up) the 
face of, i.e., be favourable and later 
partial, to. The degeneration of the 
phrase was due to the natural contrast 




1 8 dvaarpd^)!) re • elSoTcs on ou ct>6ap toIs dpyuptw r\ \pu(Ti(i) 
i\uTpu9y\re Ik Tr]S fiaTaias up-uc di'aorrpo 4»TJs iraTpoirapa- 

1 9 SoTOu • dWd Tijiio) aifiart uis djiwoo dp,(ofi,ou Kal d ctttiXoo 

between the face and the heart of a man, 
which was stamped on the Greek equiva- 
lent by the use of irp<5o-ojirov for mask of 
the actor ox hypocrite. — KpLvovr a. If 
the tense be pressed, compare the saying 
of Jesus recorded in John xii. 31, vvv 
Kpicris ecTTiv Tov Koo-fiov TotjTOV. Rom. 
ii. i5 is referred to the last Judgment by 
8ia XpicTTov Mtjotov. But the present 
participle may be timeless as in 6 KaXuv, 
6 PoTTTiSwy, etc. — k ara to e Katrrov 
£ p Y o V, a commonplace Jewish and 
Christian, cf. Ps. xii. 12 (cited Rom. ii. 6), 
aril dxoSuo-cis eKao-Tti) Kara to. ep^a 
avrov (Hebrew has the work). R. Aqiba 
used to say . . . The world is judged by 
grace and everything is according to the 
work {Pirqe Aboth., iii. 24). For col- 
lective singular lifework, cf. also i Cor. 
iii. 13-15, etc. — ev ^o^ia, Fear is not 
entirely a technical term in N.T. Chris- 
tians needed the warning to fear God (so 
Luke xii. 5 ; 2 Cor. v. 10), although love 
might be proper to the perfect — Gnostic 
or Pharisee — i John iv. 18, The natural 
and acquired senses exist side by side, as 
appears in the use of a<|)opos. Compare 
a<:{>oPos ov SvvaTai SiKaicoOi^vai (Sir. i, 
(22 with cv TOVTU a({>oj3d9 €i(ii (Ps. 
xxvii. 2, Symmachus) = in Him I am con- 
fident. — TOV T'fjs iropoiKias XP"" 
V o V, during your earthly pilgrimage, 
which corresponds to the sojourn of 
Israel in Egypt (Acts xiii. 17). If God is 
their Father, heaven must be their home 
(i. 4) ; their life on earth is therefore a 
sojourn (see on i. i). St. Paul has his 
own use of the metaphor (Eph. ii. 19). 
Gentile Christians are no longer strangers 
and sojourners, but fellow-citizens of the 

Ver. 18. Amplification of Isa. Iii. 3 f., 
Awpeav c'7rpd0T]T6 Kai ov p,6Ta dpYvpiov 

XvTptO011O-£O-0€ (cf. Xlv. 13) . . . €15 

AiyuiTTov KarePr) 6 Xaos |aov to irpoTepov 
irapoiKTJo-ai Ik€i. The deliverance firom 
Babylon corresponds to the deliver- 
ance from Egypt. To these the Chris- 
tians added a third and appropriated to it 
the descriptions of its predecessors. — ov 
4> 6 a p T o I «, K. T. \. The preceding 
negative relief to positive statement is 
characteristic of St. Peter, who here 
found it in his original (Isa. ^c). <|>6ap- 
Tois echoes diroXXvp.e'vo'u and is prob- 
ably an allusion to the Golden Calf of 
which it was said These be thy gods O 

Israel, which brought thee up out of the 
land of Egypt (Exod. xxxii. 14). Accord- 
ing to Sap. xiv. 8, it is the proper name 
for an idol : to h\ <|>9apTbv 0£os 
So the dative represents the agent and 
not only the instrument of the deliver- 
ance. — p.aTaias supports the view taken 
of <j>6., for the gods of the nations are 

vanity, p.dTaia ^Iin (J^^- ^- 3' etc.). — 
iraTpoTrapaSoTov, ancestral, here- 
ditary. The adjective indicates the source 
of the influence, which their old way of 
life — patrius mos, patrii rittis — still exer- 
cised over them. The ancient religion 
had a strength — not merely vis inertiae — 
which often baffled both Jewish ani 
Christian missionaries : "to subvert a 
custom delivered bo us from ancestors the 
heathen say is not reasonable" (Clem. 
Ac. Protr. x.). This power of the dead 
hand is exemplified in the pains taken by 
the Stoics and New Pythagoreans to con- 
serve the popular religion and its myths 
by allegorical interpretation. Among the 
Jews this natural conservatism was highly 
developed ; St. Paul was a zealot for the 
ancestral laws. But the combination of 
patriarch and tradition does not prove 
that the persons addressed were Jewish 
Christians. The law, according to which 
the Jews regulated their life, was Divine, 
its mediator Moses ; and there is a note 
of depreciation in the words not that it is 
derived from Moses only from the Fathers 
(John vii. 22). iraTpo is contrasted with 
iraT^pa (17) as irapaSoTov with the direct 

Ver. 19. The blood of Christ, the true 
paschal lamb, was the ^means or) agent 
of your redemption. The type contem- 
plated is composite ; the lamb is the 

yearling sheep (ntl^ -n-pdPoTov, but 

Targum-Onkelos has '^^J<5 lamb and 

n"lt^ is rendered dp,v<is in Lev. xii. 8 ; 
Num. XV. II ; Deut. xiv. 4) prescribed for 
the Passover (Exod. xii. 5). But the des- 
cription perfect (tA€iov D^72,n) ^^ 
glossed by dp,wp.ov {cf. Heb. xii. 14), 
which is the common translation of 

Q"i^]^ in this connection, and d«rir£- 
XoD which summarises the description 
of sacrificial victims generally {v. Lev. 
xxii. 22, etc.). dpiwpos would be unintel- 
ligible to the Gentile, because it has 
acquired a peculiar meaning from the 

iS— 21. 



Xu TTpoeycwo- p,EVou fikv irpo Kara PoXtJs Koafj-ou <|>ai'€ 20, 21 

pwSeVros 8e iir' iorxa. tou tuv xP^'''^*' ^^' toos 81 aurou 

Hebrew □1?^ blemish. aairiXos is used 
by Symmachus in Job xv. 15, for "T^V 
Hesychius treats aiririXog. a|ji.(o|xos and 
KaOapds as synonyms. — t i |x C <p is set 
over against (ftdaprols as iroXvTip.. against 
aTroXXv|ji.£Votj ; cf. Ps. cxvi. 15, Tip,ios 
IvavTiov KvpCov 6 Odvaros twv oaiuv and 
X(0ov . . . EVTi.p.ov (ii. 4). 

Ver. 20. As the paschal lamb was 
taken on the tenth day of the month 
(Exod. xiii. 3) so Christ was foreknown 
before the creation and existed before 
His manifestation. The preexistence of 
Moses is stated in similar terms in As- 
sumption of Moses, i. 12-14, " ^od created 
the world on behalf of His people. But 
He was not pleased to manifest this pur- 
pose of creation from the foundation of 
the world in order that the Gentiles 
might thereby be convicted. . . . Ac- 
cordingly He designed and devised me 
and He prepared me before the founda- 
tion of the world that I should be the 
mediator of His Covenant." So of the 
Messiah, Enoch (xlviii. 3, 6) says : " His 
name was called before the Lord of 
spirits before the sun and the signs of 
the zodiac were created. . . . He was 
chosen and hidden with God before the 
world was created. At the end of time 
God will reveal him to the world." Alex- 
andrian Judaism took over from Greek 
philosophy (Pythagoras, Plato, Aristotle) 
the doctrine of the preexistence of all 
souls. So in the Secrets of Enoch (xxiii. 
5) it is said " Every soul was created 
eternally before the foundation of the 
world". The author of Wisdom was a 
goodly child and obtained a good soul or 
rather being good came into a body unde- 
filed (Sap. viii. 19 f.) ; and Philo found 
Scriptural warrant in the first of the two 
accounts of Cr^ ation (Gen. i. 26 f.). Out- 
side Alexandria, apart from the Essenes 
(Joseph, B. J., ii. 154-157) the general 
doctrine does not appear to have been 
accepted. But the belief in the preexist- 
ence of the Name of the Messiah if not 
the Messiah Himself was not unknown in 
Palestine and was latent in many of the 
current ideals. The doctrine of Trypho 
was probably part of the general reaction 
from the position reached by the Jewish 
thinkers (a.d.) and appropriated by the 
Christians. There are many hints in the 
O.T. which Christians exploited without 
violence and the development of angel- 
ology offered great assistance. Current 

conceptions of Angels and Wisdom as 
well as of the Messiah all led up to this 
belief. Apart from the express declara- 
tions of Jesus recorded by St. John, it is 
clear that St. Peter held to the real and 
not merely ideal pre-existence of Christ, 
not deriving it from St. Paul or St. John 
and Heb. It is no mere corollary of 
God's omniscience that the spirit of 
Christ was in the prophets. — ir p o e- 
Y V w«r p. £ V o v, cf, Kara Trpoyvcoo-iv, ver. 
2 ; only here of Messiah, perhaps as a 
greater Jeremiah [cf. Jer. i. 5) — but see 
the description of Moses cited above. — 
irpo KttTaPoXrjs k 6 a p. o v. The 
phrase does not occur in LXX but Matt. 

xiii. 35 = Ps. Ixxviii. 2 renders mp '^J?^ 

by airo KaTapoXrjs (LXX air' apxris) 
Philo has KaraPoXTj yevi(Tf.vt% and al 
icaTaPoXai o-Trepp.aTwv and uses ck k. = 
afresh. In 2 Mace. ii. 29, KaTa^oXii 
is used of the foundation of a house ; cf. 
KaraaKcvd^Eiv in Heb. — <|> avcpuOev- 
Tos, of the past manifestation of Christ. 
In V. I of the future implies previous 
hidden existence, c/. i Tim. iii. 16 (quota- 
tion of current quasi-creed) £4>avEp(iidT] ev 
T^ K<5(rp,^. The manifestation consists 
in the resurrection and glorification evi- 
denced by descent of spirit (21) : cf. 
Peter's sermon in Acts ii., risen, exalted, 
yesus has sent the spirit : therefore let all 
the house of Israel know surely that God 
hath made Him both Lord and Christ. 
St. Paul speaks in the same way of the 
revelation of the secret, which is Christ 
in you ; see especially Col. i. 25-27. 
Compare John i. 14. — e ir* i<T\6.Tov 
Twv xp°'''"'» **' '^*^ end of the times, 
cf. kit' kayarov twv '^p.cpuv (Heb. i. i 
and LXX). The deliverance effected 
certo tempore by Christ's blood is eter- 
nally efficacious, cf. aluviov Xvirpcocriv 
c(ipdp,cvos Heb., ix. 12 and the more 
popular statement of the same idea in 
Apoc. xiii. 8, the lamb slain from the 
foundation of the world. 

Ver. 21. 81' V fids, /or the sake of 
you Gentiles, i.e., iva ti|ids irpoo-aYaYXJ 
Tw Oeo), iii. 18. The resurrection of Jesus 
and His glorification are the basis of 
their faith in God and inspire not merely 
faith but hope. — 8 t* a o t o v. Compare 
for form Acts iii. iC, ■q -it^o-tis if| 8i' airov 
and for thought Rom. v. 2 ; Eph. ii. 18 — 
irio-Tovs els 9e6v. This construc- 
tion occurs not infrequently in the Bezan 
text and is simply equivalent to ir. with 




"irioTous ^ €ts ©^ Tor e yeipain^a auroi' cic vi Kpue Kal 8o|av' 
ouTw SofTa • wore ttji' irt cmw ufiuc Kal eXirtSa eZvai eis 
22 ©i' • Tag <J»ox°^5 ufidv i^ykiKOTes cf ttj uiraKOT] rris dXifjGei 

a; ^ 619 (|>i\a8£X(|>iai' dKuiroKpiTOk * €K Kap Sias dXXr^Xou; 

1 For iriOTovs Codex Sinaiticus and others substitute the participle -iricrTcvovTas 
in order to avoid the unfamiliar construction with the adjective. 

^ Manuscripts of secondary importance add 8ia irvev'ixaTOs after T-qs a\T]6€ias 
and (with the original hand of Codex Sinaiticus) KaOapas before KapSias. The 
latter addition might be regarded as a mistaken emendation of an accidental repeti- 
tion of KapSias ; but in the course of transmission such safeguards are commonly 
added to Scriptural texts. The third hand of Codex Sinaiticus substitutes dX-qOivTis 
after KapSias. 

the Dative (Acts xvi. 15) corresponding 
to ^ \t2^2' ^^^ '"'• keeping construc- 
tion has changed its meaning. Already 
it is semi-technical = believing, sc. in 
Jesus and here irio-Tiv ... els deov fol- 
lows immediately. So the verb irioTe- 
Tjovras is a true gloss ; the addition of 
els Oeov corrects the common conception 
of faith, which ultimately gave rise to a 
distinction between belief in Christ and 
belief in God. — 8 <S|av air io Sovra, 
so e.g., the prophecy (Isa. Hi. 13) 6 irais 
pov . . . 8o|acr0iio-€Tai <r({>oSpa was ful- 
filled when the lame man was healed by 
St. Peter and St. John ; o Beo% 'APpaap 
. . . l8o|a(rev tov iraiSa aviTov 'Itjo-oOv 
(Acts iii. 13). But the glory is prim- 
arily and generally the glorious resurrec- 
tion and ascension, in which state Jesus 
sent the Holy Spirit {fiv to irvevpa on 
ovxw l8o|darOT), John). — &crre . . . 
6e6v. Kal IXiriSa may be part of the 
subject of clvai els Oeov, 50 that your 
faith and hope are in God, or predicate so 
that your faith is also hope tn God. In 
either case eXiris is rather confidence 
than hope, In accordance with LXX usage 

(= nn^HX ^"d supplies an adequate 
climax — patient faith leads up to the ap- 
propriation of the Hope of Israel. 

Vv. 22-25. The combination of puri- 
fication of souls with love of the brother- 
hood suggests that the temptations to 
relapses were due to former intimacies 
and relationships which were not over- 
come by the spiritual brotherhood which 
they entered. Different grades of society 
were doubtless represented in all Chris- 
tian churches and those who were marked 
out for leaders by their wealth and posi- 
tion were naturally slow to love the 
slaves and outcasts. As at Corinth old 
intimacies and congenial society led the 
better classes (iv. 3 f.) to fall back on the 
clubs to which they had belonged and in 

the company of their equals to sneer at 
their new brothers — "the brethren" 
(ii. i). St. Peter reminds them that they 
must purify their souls from the taint — 
with a side-glance perhaps at the rites 
proper to the associations in question. 
They must love the brotherhood and its 
members as such. Earthly relationships 
are done away by their regeneration ; they 
have exchanged the flesh for the spirit. 
The section is full of echoes ; compare 
iqYViKdres with £7101, (15), Iv aYiaapu (2), 
T'g ■uiraKO'fj with re'Kva v. (14), dvaYC- 
YevvTjpe'vot with dvayewtjcras (3), <{)OapTTJs 
with <{>6apTois (18), cviaYY^Xio-OeV with 
Tfciv ciiaYYeXio-apevwv (12). It should be 
compared throughout with Eph. iv. 18- 
24. — Tois . . . ■nv^iKOTes from Jer. vi. 16, 
" see what is the good way and walk in 
it and y 011 shall find purification (aYviapov 
LXX) to your souls, a. usually of cere- 
monial purification in LXX. Compare 
Jas. iv. 8, ayvia-are Kap8ias 8iij/vxou 
{cf. clvvit6kpitov). The perfect participle 
is used as indicating the ground of the 
admonition, so dvaYeyewTipevoi (23). 
Pagan rites professed to purify the 
worshipper but cannot affect the soul, the 
self or the heart any more than the Jewish 
ceremonies can (Heb. ix. 9 f.). Scripture 
declares 6 4>oPos Kvpiov a.yv6q (Ps. xix. 
10). They must realise that they have 
cleansed themselves ideally at baptism, 
cf. I John iii. 3 and 15 f. above with con- 
text. — ev T'Q viraKO'Q Ttjs dXtjBe- 
i a s, in your obedience to the truth, cf. 
Jer. I.e. above. They are no longer igno- 
rant (14) but have learned the truth (cf. 
John xvii. 17-19, and 7vc6o-€0-6e ttjv d., 
John viii, 32) from the missionaries. They 
must persist in the obedience to it which 
they then professed, in contrast with 
those who are disobedient to the truth 
(Rom. ii. 8 ; f/. 2Thess. ii. 12). Hortsays: 
"St. Peter rather means the dependence 
of Christian obedience on the possession 

22 — 25. 



dyaTTrj aare Ikt€vu)S di'ttye yeyvr]\iiyoi ook ck CTiropds ^ 23 
4)0apTfjs dWd d<j)9dpT0u 8id \6yov t,C)VT0S ©8 Kat p.e'fo 

Tos.^ SiOTi iraora adpl us X°P'''°5 toil irdaa So^a auTTjs ws 24 
di-Sos •)(6pTou iiy]pa.vQii] 6 X^P"""®? '^°-'- ^° d>'0os e^e'ireaei' 

TO 8e pTJfAa Ku jxeVei €is Toi' aiw ka • touto 8^ earn' to 25 

' The three great uncials (Sinaiticus, Alexandrinus and Ephraemi Rescriptus) put 
4>9opas for cr-iropas keeping (t>9apTT]9 : the \'ariant was probably a paraphrase of 
the whole phrase and possibly implied the identification of d<|i 
Oeovi Kal p,£vovTOS. 

^ The addition of els rhv aluva to jievovTOS is due to verse 25. 

9apT0v) with ^wvtos 

of the truth," relying on Eph. iv. 24, and 
the probability that " St. Peter would have 
distinctly used some such language as Iv 
T(o -uiraKoveiv T'g dXtjOeicj. ". In regard to 
the latter point it should be observed that 
St. Peter is curiously fond of using nouns 
instead of verbs (e.g., 2). — els 4> "■^"•S*' 
X <(> I a V, love of the brethren, Vulgate, in 
frateruitalis amore, mutual love which 
exists between brothers. It is the prim- 
ary Christian duty, Matt, xxiii. 8, the 
first fruits of their profession of which St. 
Paul has no need to remind the Thessa- 
lonians, i Thess. iv. 9. — d v-u-ttiJk p i- 
T o V, unfeigned, contrasted with the love 
which they professed towards their fellow 
Christians (cf. ii. i) which was neither 
hearty nor eager. There was pretence 
among them whether due to imperfect 
sympathy of Jew for Gentile or of wealthy 
and honourable Gentiles for those who 
were neither the one nor the other. For 
a vivid illustration of this feigning see 
Jas. ii. 15 f. and ii. 1-5, etc., for the fric- 
tion between rich and poor. — dXXi^X- 
ovs ayaTfrffrare. St. John's sum- 
mary of the teaching of Jesus (John xiii. 
34 f., XV. 12, 17) which he repeated in 
extreme old age at Ephesus, till the dis- 
ciples were weary of it : " Magister quare 
semper hoc loqueris ". His answer was 
worthy of him : "Quia praeceptum Do- 
mini est et si solum fiat sufficit (Hieron. 
in Gal. vi. 10). — eKTevcis, intentius 
(Vulg.), in LXX of ''strong crying to 

God" (Jonah iii. 8 = nptPQ violently, 
cf. Jud. iv. 12 ; Joel i. 14 ; 3 Mace. v. 9 : in 
Polybius of a warm commendation (xxxi. 
22, 12) a warm and friendly welcome (viii. 
21, i), a warm and magnificent reception 
(xxxiii. 16 4). 

Ver. 23. dva7eYevvT|p.e'voi. So 
St. John dYaTTup-cv aXXi^Xovs Sti . . . 
irds 6 dya-irtiiv eK tov flcov y€ytvvt]Tai ; 
cf. Eph. iv. 17, V. 2. — eK aTropds 
d<|>9dpTov, i.e., of God regarded as 

VOL. V. 4 

Father and perhaps also as Sower {cf. 
ver, 24) ; the two conceptions are com- 
bined in I John iii. g, irds 6 Y67evvr]pe'vos 
Ik tov Oeov dpapTiav oti iroiei on a'lripfj.a 
awTOv pevei. Compare Philo, Leg. All., 
p. 123 M. Aeiav . . . I| oiiSevos YevvT)- 
Toij Xap.|3dvoucrav ttjv onropdv . . . dXX* 
vir* aiiTov Toi) Beov. — 8 id X 6 7 o v . . . 
p, e' V o V T o s, the connection of ^uvtos k. 
pev. is doubtful ; the following quotation 
might justify the abiding word and Heb. 
iv. 22, the living word in accordance 
with Deut. xxxii. 47 — cf. 3, IXiriSa ^ucrav. 
On the other hand the rendering of the 
Vulgate, per verbum dei vivi et perman- 
entis, is supported by Dan. vi. 26 (avTos 
ydp lo-Tiv Oeos pe'vwv Kai £cjv) and sup- 
ports St. Peter's argument : earthly rela- 
tionships must perish with all flesh and 
its glory ; spiritual kinship abides, be- 
cause it is based on the relation of 
the kinsfolk to God living and abiding. 
For the word of God as the means of 
regeneration, cf. Jas. i. 18, povXTjOels 
direKtJTiaev T|pds Xoyu dXtjOeias. For its 
identification with prjpa of the quotation, 
cf. Acts X. 36 f. 

Ver. 24 f. = Isa. xl. 6-8, adduced as 
endorsement of the comparison instituted 
between natural generation and divine 
regeneration, with gloss explaining the 
saying of Jehovah {cf. Heb. i. i f.). The 
only divergences from the LXX (which 
omits — as Jerome notes, perhaps through 
homcedeuton — quia spiritus dei flavit in 
eo : vere foenum est populus ; asuit foe- 
num cecidit flos) are that ws is inserted 
before x- (so Targum), and that atrrTJs is 
put for dvOptiirov (so Heb., etc.) and 
Kvpiov for TOV 8eov i^paiv (in accordance 
with the proper reading of yehovah in 
the omitted verse). 

Ver. 25. rh evaYVcXio-Olv comes 
from & cvaYVeXi^($pcvos Zeiwv of Isa. xl 
9 which the Targum explains as referring 
to the prophets. 






II. I pfjjxa TO eoaYYeXto-0£~ eis u/ias. aTTo6i\j.evoi, 

KaKiac Kal Trdira SoXoc Kal uiro Kpiaic Kal <|>6i'ous ^ t^, Trdaas 
2 KaraXaXiots us dpriyet'CTiTa |3pe()>T) to XoyiKoi' aSoXof 

1 (j>dvov9 is an error (peculiar to Codex Vaticanus) for ({>9ovovs. 

Chapter II. — Vv. i-io. Continuation 
of practical ailmonition with appeal to 
additional ground-principles illustrating 
the thesis of i. lo. 

Ver. I. Put away then all malice — all 
guile and hypocrisy and envy — all back- 
biting, ovv resumes 8io (i. 13). The 
faults to be ^ut away fall into three 
groups, divided by the prefix all, and cor- 
respond to the virtues of i. 22 (viroKpioriv 
dvviroKpiTOv). The special connection 
of the command with the preceding Scrip- 
ture would require the expression of the 
latent idea, that such faults as these are 
inspired by the prejudices of the natural 
man and belong to the fashion of the 
world, which is passing away (i. John ii. 
17). — d iroQifkivoi, putting off. Again 
participle with imperative force. St. Peter 
regards the metaphor of removal as based 
on the idea ot washing off filth, cf. <rap- 
Kos diroBeo-is pvirov (iii. 21). St. James 
(i. 21, 810 aiTod e fkev 01 iracrav pvrra- 
piav Kal irepio'o'eiav k a k i a 9) which 
seems to combine these two phrases and 
to deduce the familiarity of the spiritual 
sense of filth {cf. Apoc. xxii. 11, pvTrapbs 
Ka-yios). St. Paul has the same word 
but associates it with the putting off of 
clothing (Col. iii. 5 ff. ; Eph. iv. 22 ; Rom. 
xiii. I2^all followed by evSv<ra(r6ai,). — 
K a K I a V, probably malice rather than 
wickedness. Peter is occupied with their 
mutual relations and considering what 
hinders brotherly love, not their vices, if 
any, as vice is commonly reckoned. So 
James associates the removal of KaKia 
with courtesy ; and St. Paul says let all 
bitterness and anger and wrath and 
shouting and ill-speaking be removed 
from you with all malice (Eph. iv. 31; 
cf. Col. iii. 8). K. is generally eagerness 
to hurt one's neighbour (Suidas) — the 
feeling which prompts backbitings and 
may be subdivided into guile, hypocrisy, 
and envy. — S6X0 v. Guile was character- 
istic of Jacob, the eponymous hero of the 
Jews, but not part of the true Israelite 
(iSe d\T)6ci>s 'l(rpaT]XiTT]s cv u SoXos ovk 
cerriv John i. 47). It was also rife 
among the Greeks (p,€o-Tovs . . . SoXov, 
Rom. i. 29) as the Western world has 
judged from experience (Greek and grec 
= cardsharper ; compare characters of 
Odysseus and Hermes). 8. is here con- 

trasted with obedience to the truth (i. 22), 
vii. 22, iii. 10. — vir($Kpi(riv is best ex- 
plained by the saying Isaiah prophesied 
about you hypocrites. . . . This people 
honours me with their tips but their heart 
is far away from me (Mark vii. 6f. = Isa. 

xxix. 13). It stands for H^H profane, 

impure in Symmachus' version of Ps. 
xxxv. 16 ; so viroKpiTT)S in LXX of Job 
(xxxi/. 30, xxxvi. 13), and Aquila (Prov. 
xi. g), etc. In 2 Mace. vi. 25, v is used of 
(unreal ? — not secret) apostasy perhaps 
in accordance with the earlier sense of 

1^, which only in post-Biblical Hebrew 
and Aramaic = hypocrisy. In His re- 
peated denunciations of the hypocrites 
Jesus repeated the Pharisees description 
of the Sadducees that live in hypocrisy 
with the saints (Ps, Sol. iv. 7). Polybius 
has V. in the classical sense of oratorical 
delivery, and once contrasted with the 
purpose of speakers (xxxv. 2, 13). — 
KaTaXaXids, detractiones (Vulgate), 
of external slanders in ii. 12, iii. 11. For 
internal calumnies, cf. Jas. iv. 11 ; 2 Cor. 
xii. 20 illustrates one special case, for 
(j>vo-iuo'6i,s KaraXaXial correspond to els 
iiirep Tov Evbs (f>tio'iov(r6E Kara tov 
kripov of I Cor. iv. 6 [cf. i. 12). 

Ver. 2. ws, inasmuch as you are new- 
born babes : cf. ava-yeYevvrjuevoi (i. 23). 
The development of the metaphor rests 
upon the saying, unless ye be turned and 
become as the children (is to, iraiSia) 
ye shall not enter into the kingdom of 
heaven (Matt, xviii. 3). — Ppc4>T) (only 
here in metaphorical sense) is substituted 
for 'TraiSia (preserved by St. Paul in i Cor. 
xiv. 20) as = babes at the breast. A iraiSiov 
might have lost its traditional innocence 
but not a Ppe'<|>os (= either child unborn 
as Luke i. 41, or suckling in classical 
Greek). For the origin of the metaphor, 
which appears also in the saying of 
R. Jose, "the proselyte is a child just 
born," compare Isa, xxviii. 9, Whom 
will he teach knowledge ? . . . Them 
that are weaned from the milk and 
drawn from the breasts, which the Tar- 
gum renders, To whom was the law 
given ? . . . Was it not to the house of 
Israel whith is beloved beyond all peoples ? 
— TO . . . YoXa. The quotation of 
ver. 3 suggests that the milk is Christ; 




"yd Xa iTTnTo9r\<jaT€ Iva iv aurw au^Tjdrjre^ els auTTjptai' 3, 4 
ci eyeuaa oOe on xPT'tos o Ks irpos o»' irpoo'epxop.e cot 
XtOof tyCu'Ta uir' d Opoiiroji' fiec diroSe'p.^fo*' -irapd 8c 
0S ckXektoi' cVret )io>' • Kal aurol ws Xi0oi Joji'tcs oikoSo- 5 

jxciaOe oiKOS iri'eoiJiaTiKos eis UpaTeufia ayioj' dj'eKe'yKai 

' The variant dliwOfTC for ai|T)ftfT€ illustrates the possibilities of variation and 
consequently of emendation : at the same time it directs attention to the omni- 
potence of God and the relative impotence of man. 

compare St. Paul's explanation of the 
tradition of the Rock which followed the 
Israelites in the desert (i Cor. x. 4) and 
the living water of John iv. 14. Milk 
is the proper food for babes ; compare 
Isa. Iv. I, buy . . . milk (LXX, o-r^ap) 
zvithout money (cf. i. 18). This milk is 
guileless {cf. SoXov of ver. i) pure or un- 
adulterated (cf. (it)S« SoXovvtcs tov \6yov 
Tov 6eov, 2 Cor. iv. 2). The interpreta- 
tion of XoyiKov (pertaining to Xoyos) is 
doubtful. But the use of Xoyos just 
above (i. 23) probably indicates the sense 
which St. Peter put upon the adjective he 
"borrowed (?) from Rom. xii. i, tt)v 
XoyiKTiv Xarpeiav. There and elsewhere 
X. = rationabilis, spiritual ; here belong- 
ing to contained in the Word of God, 
delivered by prophet or by evangelist. 
St. Paul in his use of X. and of the meta- 
phor of milk (solid food, i Cor. iii. i ff.) 
follows Philo and the Stoics. — tvo . . . 
or<i>TT)piav, that fed thereon ye may 
grow up [cf. Eph. iv. 14 f.) unto salvation ; 
cf. Jas. i. 21, "receive the ingrafted word 
which is able to save your souls ". 

Ver. 3. St. Peter adopts the language 
of Ps. xxxiv. 9, omitting Kai eSerc as inap- 
propriate to ydXa. XP^<'"''0S (identical in 
sound with \pia-r6%) = dulcis (Vulg.) or 
kind {cf. xp^tJ'TOTirjs Ocoii, Rom. ii. 4, xi. 
22). Compare Heb. vi. 4 f. Yevo-ap,evovs 
TTJs Supcds TTJs eTTO-upaviov . . . Kal 
KaXov Y€V(rap.cvovs 6cov p'fj|xa. 

Vv. 4-10. Passages of scripture prov- 
ing that Christ is called stone are first 
utilised, then quoted, and finally ex- 
pounded. The transition from milk to 
the stone may be explained by the pro- 
phecy the hills shall flow zvith milk (Joel 
iii. 18), as the stone becomes a mountain 
according to Dan. iii. 21 f. ; or by the 
legend to which St. Paul refers (i Cor. x. 
4) ; compare also irorio-ai of Isa. xliii. 20, 
which is used in ver. 9. This collection 
of texts can be traced back through Rom. 
ix. 32 f. to its origin in the saying of 
Mark xii. 10 f. ; Cyprian (Test. ii. 16 f.) 
gives a still richer form. 

Ver. 4. irpos fiv irpocrcpx* from 

Ps. xxxiv. 6, irpoo-eXOdvTCS irpos aurov 
(Heb. and Targum, they looked unto 
Him ; Syriac, look ye . . .), Cyprian 
uses Isa. ii. 2 f. ; Ps. xxiii. 3 f. to prove 
that the stone becomes a mountain to 
which the Gentiles come and the just 
ascend. — Xi0ov ^wvra, a paradox 
which has no obvious precedent in O.T. 
Gen. xlix. 24 speaks of the Shepherd the 
stone of Israel, but Onkelos and LXX 

substitute '^^^^^ thy father for l^t^ 
stone. The Targum of Isa. viii. 14, how- 
ever, has in?2 "13,^^ "■ ^t^iking stone, for 
n^J^ which might be taken as meaning 

reviving or living stone, if connected 
with the foregoing instead of the follow- 
ing words. The LXX supports this con- 
nection and secures a good sense by in- 
serting a negative; the Targum gives 
a bad sense throughout. vir' . . . 
€VTup.ov, though by men rejected, yet 
in God's sight elect precious. diroSeSoK. 
comes from Ps. cxviii. 22 (see ver. 7) ; 
IkX. 6VT. from Isa. xxviii. 6 (see ver. 6). 
dvSpcjirodv is probably due to Rabbinic 

exegesis " read not ^'^^13, builders but 

□"7^ 123 ^''"^ of men ". St. Peter insists 
upon the contrast between God's judg- 
ment and man's in the sermon of Acts ii. 
Ver. 5. Fulfilment of the saying, 
Destroy this temple and in three days 
I will raise it (John ii. 19). Christians 
live to God through Jesus Christ (Rom. 
vi. 11). For this development of the 
figure of building, cf. especially Eph. ii. 
20 ff. —<r6e, indicative 
rather than imperative. " It is remarkable 
that St. Peter habitually uses the aorist> 
for his imperatives, even when we might 
expect the present ; the only exceptions 
(two or three) are preceded by words re- 
moving all ambiguity, ii. 11, 17, iv. 12 f. " 
(Hort). — oIkos . • . a. y\.ov, a spiritual 
house for an holy priesthood. The con- 
nection with priesthood (Heb. x. 21) and 
the offering of sacrifices points to the 
special sense of the House of God, i.e.. 




6TTi'eufiaTi Kois 6uo-ias cuTrpoaSe ktous ©S 8ia IS Xu 8t on 
irepieYCi iv YP^'^'^T ^^°" ti0t)|jii ck leiiav \iQov ckXcktoj' 

dKpo Y'^^'t'^^^o'' ei'TcifJioi' Kol 6 iricrreuwi' cir' au tu ou nt) 

7 Karaiaxui' Bf\ • up.ii' ouc i^ tcijat) tois irioTcoouo-ti' • diri 
oToGffi.i' ^ 8 e XiOos oc d ireSoKip.aaai' ot oiKo SojAOOt'Tes outos 
e Y^^'T^T ^^5 Kc4)aXTH' yuivias naX XiOos irpoa KOfifiaros Kai 

^ For airiffTovo-iv Codex Alexandrinus, with others, reads dir€i6oii<riv. 

the Temple ; '[c/". (iv. 17; i Tim. iii. 5) 
vaos OS lorre vficis, i Cor. iii. 16 ; Eph. 
ii. 21. So Heb. iii. 5 f., ov (Xpio-rov) 
olKiis e<r\i.ev t||j,€is . . . — '\ t pa. rev ft. a, 
body of priests, in Exod. xix. 6 (Heb. 
priests) xxiii. 22 ; 2 Mace. ii. 17 ; cf. 9 
i«/ra. Here Hort prefers the equally legi- 
timate sense, act of priesthood. Usage 
supports the first and only possible ety- 
mology the second. The ideal of a 
national priesthood is realised, Isa. Ixi. 6. 
— OLVcvcY''*'''' • • • Xpto-Tov. to 
offer up spiritual sacrifices acceptable to 
God through Jesus Christ. — 8 1 a "I t) a o v 
X. is better taken with dv. than eiiirpoo-S. ; 
cf. Heb. xiii. 15, 8u* avToii, where the 
thankoffering is singled out as the fit 
type ot the Christian sacrifice. Spiritual 
sacrifices are in their nature acceptable to 
God (John iv. 23) and Christians are en- 
abled to offer them through Jesus Christ. 
dva<}>£peiv in this sense is peculiar to 
LXX, J as. and Heb. 

Ver. 6. ir€pi6x«<- ev YP«i4"'n> *^ 
is contained in Scripture. The formula 
occurs in Josephus (Ant. xi. 7, PovXo| 
Ytveo-eai irdvTa KaOws Iv [ttj eirio-ToX-nJ 
•irepi€x€t) and is chosen for its compre- 
hensiveness. — It e p t ^ X « •• is intransitive 
as the simple verb and other compounds 
often are; cf. irepioxii, contents. Acts viii. 
32. — Y p a <{> f), being a technical term, has 
no article. — 1 8oi» . . . KOTaiaxwOfi, 
formal quotation of Isa. xxviii. 16, preced- 
ing quotation from Psalms, as prophets 
always precede the writings. The LXX 
has 180V «|xpd\X<o Iy" «U to, e£|Ae'Xia 
(unique expansion of normal 6£|j.c\i(o = 
-fD"! of Heb., cf. eis tol 6. below ; Targum, 
^^^^ I will appoint) Z«to>v XiOov -iroXv- 
TtXTJ (it. duplicate of evTifiov ; Heb., a 
stone a stone; Targum, a king a king ; 
pointing to Jewish Messianic interpreta- 
tion) cKXeKTOV oKp. evT. els Ta OcjiAia 
awTTJs [a foundation a foundation, Heb.) 
Kai 6 iruffTewwv {+ eir' avroi ^AQ) ov (jltj 

KaraiaxwO^ (= X^ll"' for tt^TT^ of 
Heb. = shall not make haste ; Targum, 
when tribulation come shall not be moved). 

The chief difference is that St. Peter 
omits all reference to the foundation, 
and substitutes TidT]p.i ; LXX is conflate, 
lp.pdXX(i> els being the original reading 
and xd Oep,. added by some purist to pre- 
serve the meaning of the Hebrew root. 
This omission may be due to the fact that 
Christians emphasised the idea that the 
stone was a corner stone binding the two 
wings of the Church together (Eph. ii. 20) 
and regarded this as inconsistent with 
els Ke<f>. 

Ver. 7 f. The second quotation is con- 
nected with the first by means of the 
parenthetic interpretation : The "pre- 
cious "-ness of the stone is for yoti who 
believe but for the unbelievers it is . . . 
"a stone of stumbling". It is a stereo- 
typed conflation of Ps. cxviii. 22 and Isa. 
viii. 14, which are so firmly cemented 
together that the whole is cited here 
where only the latter part is in point. 
The same idea of the two-fold aspect ot 
Christ occurs in St. Paul more than 
once ; e.g., Christ crucified to Jews a 
stumbling-block . , . but to you ^iho be- 
lieve ... I Cor. i. 23. The problem in- 
volved is discussed by Origen who ad- 
duces the different effects of the sun's 
light. — r\ Tip.!], the Tip.ij involved in the 
use of the adjective evrip-ov., or rather 

Heb. rr^p"^ underlying it. The play 

on the peculiar sense thus required does 
not exclude the ordinary meaning honour 
(for which cf. i. 7 ; Rom. ii. 10). — \l9o s 
8v . . . Y«v£as = Ps. I.e. (LXX)— the 
prophetic statement in scriptural phrase 
of the fact of their unbelief. The idea 
may be that the raising of the stone to be 
head of the corner makes it a stumbling- 
block but in any case \£6os . . . o-Ka- 
vSdXov is needed to explain this. — X l6o<s 
irpoo'Kdpp.aTOS k. it. o-k. from Isa. 
viii. 14 ; LXX paraphrases the original, 
which St. Peter's manual preserves,, 
reading Kai ovx is KiBu Trpoo'Kopp.aTL 
o'vvavT'qa'ecrOe oiihe <Ls ireTpas tttwjji- 
ari (common confusion of construct, with 
Gen.). — ot . • . direiOovvTes, des- 




Trerpa aKafSdXou ot irpocTKO irroucnv tu Xoyw Atti crroui'Tes 8 
6is o Kal iri Qr]<Tav • ^ u|xets 8e yivo^ cKXeKTOK PaaiXeiov 9 
Updreufia cGcos ayco" Xaos eis ircpiiroiTjcTH' • ottws Tas dperas 

e^ay yeiXrjTC tou eK ctkotous u|xas KaXc'o-avTOS €19 to 

1 In view of " the argument which is intended to carry one back to the opening 
of the prophetic passage," Dr. Rendel Harris {Side-Lights on New Testament 
Research, pp. 209 f.) proposes to substitute cTeOt) for eTefir^o-ov. 

cription of the unbelieving in terms of 
the last quotation, who stumble at the 
word being disobedient, tw \6y<a is pro- 
bably to be taken with irp. or both irp. 
and a. in spite of the stone being identi- 
fied with the Lord. Stumbling at the 
word is an expression used by Jesus 
(Mark iv. 17, Sia tov \6yov <rKav8aX(- 
^ovrai ; Matt. xv. 12, aKovaavxes tov 
X<5yov eo-Kav8aXi<j-6Ti<7ov ; John vi. 60, 
TOVTO — 6 Xdyos ovTos — vixas (TKavSa- 
Xi^ei). For d. cf. iv. 17, t«v airciOovvTwv 
TO) TOV 6«ov cirayycX(a). — e Is 8 k o I 
i T i9r\ar av. whereunto also (actually) 
they were appointed. ereOTjo-av comes 
from Tt9T|p.i (6) ; stone and stumbler 
alike were appointed by God to fulfil 
their functions in His Purpose. For the 
sake of the unlearned he only implies and 
does not assert in so many words that 
God appointed them to stumble and 
disobey ; but his view is that of St. Paul 
(see Rom. ix., xi., especially ix. 17, 22) ; 
cf. Luke ii. 34. Did5'mus distinguishes 
betv\een their voluntary unbelief and 
their appointed fall. If any are tempted 
to adopt such ingenious evasions of 
the plain sense it is well to recall the 
words of Origen : " If in the reading of 
scripture you stumble at what is really a 
noble tliought, the stone of stnmbling 
and rock of offence, blame yourself. You 
must not despair of this stone . . . con- 
taining hidden thoughts so that the say- 
ing may come to pass, And the believer 
shall not be shamed. Believe first of all 
and you will find beneath this reputed 
stumbling-block much holy profit (in Jer. 
xliv. (li.) 22, Horn, xxxix. = Philocalia x.). 
Vv. 9 f. The Church, God's new people, 
has all the privileges which belonged to 
the Jews. In enumerating them he draws 
upon a current conflation of Isa. xliii. 
20 f.jiroTiorai TO ycvos |aov to esXeKTov 
(i) Xaov [jLov ov n-€pieiroiT)aa.p,T)v (4) tos 
apexds jjLOv Si-qyeicrGai with Exod. xix. 
65, vp,€is Se €a«<rOe p.01 (Bao-iXeiov lepd- 
T£vp.a (2) Kal eOvos aytov (3) ecr€(r6i p,oi 
Xoos ■ircpioijo'ios (4) dirb iravTtui' Tuiv 
e9vu)V (1) ; and Ps. cvii. 14, Kal I5''17*V*'' 
avTovs Kal Ik (tkioLs OavaTOv . . . e|op,o- 

XoyirjtraaOcov tu KvpCco ra IX^tj owtov Kal 
TO. Oa-updcria avTov tois viols twv av9- 
puiruv — to which is appended Hos. i. 
6, 8. — y ^vos IkXcktiSv, Isa. I.e. LXX 
(Heb., my people my chosen) ; ye'vos, race 
implies that all the individual members 
of it have a common Father (God) and 
are therefore brethren (cf. viol yeVovs 
'APpad^, Acts xiii. 26) ; cf. i. 1, 6. — 
^ao-CXeiov lepaTevp-a, a royal 
priesthood, from Exod. I.e. LXX (Heb., a 
kingdom ojf priests = Apoc. i. 6, PaaiXeiav 
Upcis). Christians share Christ's prero- 
gatives. The priesthood is the chief point 
(see ii. 5) it is royal. Clement of Alex- 
andria says : " Since we have been sum- 
moned to the kingdom and are anointed 
(sc. as Kings) ". The comparison of Mel- 
chizedek with Christ perhaps underlies 
the appropriation of the title. — eOvos 
a y I o V, to the Jew familiar, with the use 
of eOvTi for Gentiles, as much a paradox 
as Christ crucified. But Xads, the com- 
mon rendering of Q^ in this connexion 
is wanted below, and St. Peter is content 
to follow his authority. — Xais eis 
irepiiroiTjo-iv, a people for possession 

= J-j'^^jp QV- The source of the Greek 
phrase is MalT iii. 17, but the Hebrew 
titlevariously rendered occurs in the two 
great passages drawn upon. Deut. (vii. 
6, etc.) has Xaos ircpiovo-ios which is 
adopted by St. Paul (Tit. ii. 14) ; but the 
phrase eis tt. is well established in the 
Christian vocabulary, Heb. x. 39 ; i Thess. 
V. 9 ; 2 Thess. ii. 14, and the whole title 
is apparently abbreviated to irepiiroiiicris 
in Eph. i. 14. — 8 ir ws . • . ^ 5 *V Y «" 
i X Ti T €, from Isa. I.e. + Ps. I.e., the latter 
containing the matter of the following . 
designation ot God. In Isa. tos a p e- 

T a s p.ov stands for ^^l^Hil '">' /"'«"/' '' 
and this sense reappears in Esther xiv. 
ro. dvoi|ai (TT^pa eOvwv els apcTaS 
paTaiciiv, the praises of idols. Else- 
where it stands for lini glory (Hab. 
iii. 3 ; Zach. vi. 13). In the books of 
Maccabees (especially the fourth) it has 
its ordinary sense of virtue, which cannot 




I O OaufxaoTOJ' auToG <f)ws • oi ttotc ou Xaos viiy 8e Xaos ©5 oi 
llouKT| XeTjficVoi ('uf Se i\e TjGeVres. dyainiTol irapaKaXw 

<&S irapoiKous Kai 7rap£-n-iSi]p.ou9 dire )(^<r6ai ^ rwv aapKiKCJ 
1 2 cTri0u(ji.i(i)»' aiTiKes arpaTeuocTai itard tt]s vj/uxtJS tt)v di'a 

OTpo<|>T)i' ^ up.cji' cf TOis i&v^aiv KaXrji' iv'a £►' oi KaTaXaXoOaii' 

^ For direxeo-Sai Codex Alexandrinus and others read o'7r€x€«rOe : e and at are 

interchangeable in the manuscripts. 

^ Codex Vaticanus omits exovres, which is formally required to govern avao-rpo- 
(J)Y|v. If aTTe'xeo-Oai represents the infinitive, exovros would be more grammatical. 

be excluded altogether here. The whole 
clause is in fact the pivot on which the 
Epistle turns. Hitherto Peter has ad- 
dressed himself to the Christians and 
their mutual relations, now he turns to 
consider their relations to the outside 
world (i. II f.). In 2 Peter i. 3, d. corre- 
sponds to 0€ia SvvajxiS) a sense which 
might be supported by Ps. I.e. (for dis- 
cussion of other — very uncertain — evi- 
dence see Deissmann, Bible Studies, pp. 
95 ff., 362) and the events of Pentecost 
(see especially Acts ii. 11). — roi) . . . 
4) «<> s is derived from Ps. I.e. ; the natural 
antithesis light is readily supplied {ef. 
Eph. V. 8, 14) ; darkness = heathenism in 
cf. 10. f 

Ver. 10, from Hosea i. 6, ii. 1(3) ; cf. 
Rom. ix. 25 (has Ka\e<r<i> KaXcaov of 
Hos.) ; the terms are so familiar that 
lAov is omitted by Peter as unnecessary 
[ef. Y^vos Ik. for to 7, |aov I.). 

Vv. II f. indicate generally the subject 
to be discussed. Beloved I exhort you 
to abstain from the lusts of the flesh, be- 
cause they wage war against the soul. 
Slanders and even torments can only 
affect the body. But the lusts natural 
or acquired which you have renounced 
may hinder your salvation, as they have 
already impeded your mutual love. For 
the sake of your old friends and kinsfolk 
refuse to yield to their solicitations. If 
rebuffed they resort to persecution of 
whatever kind, remember that it is only a 
passing episode of your brief exile. Let 
your conduct give them no excuse for 
reproach ; so may they recognise God's 
power manifest not on your lips but in 
your lives. — a.ya.'Kr\T oL, not an empty 
formulae but explanation of the writer's 
motive. He set before them the great 
commandment and now adds to it as 
Jesus did, Love one another as I have 
loved you, John xiii. 34. — «s '"'• Kal 
iropeTTiSiifjiovs with dTr€x» (motive 
for abstinence in emphatic position) rather 
than TrapaKaXw (as vov6eT£iT« is d8£X<|)<5v, 
2 Thess. iii. 15 — the motive of exhorta- 

tion is here expressed by 01,7.) echoes 
'TrapEiriSiJiJiois of i. i and irapoiKias of 

i. 17. The combination (= ^"^i^^HT "1^) 
occurs twice in LXX (Gen. xxxiii. 4 ; Ps. 
xxxix. 13). Christians are in the world, 
not of the world. — dire'xso'Oa t, cf. 
Plato, Phaedo, 82 C, true philosophers, 
aTre'xovTai twv Kara to cufia eiriOvjiiaii' 
diraawv — not for fear of poverty, like the 
vulgar, nor for fear of disgrace, like the 
ambitious, but because only so can he, 
departing m perfect purity, come to the 
company of the gods". — tuv aapKi- 
Kwv ciri9vp,iuv, the lusts of the flish. 
St. Peter borrows St. Paul's phrase, r|p,€is 
TrdvTes dv«(rTpd<|)Tin£v iroTe £V Tai? eiri- 
6vp.iais TTJs crapKos ■qp.olv ttoiovvtcs toi 
6eXi]p,aTa ttjs aapKOS Kal twv Siavoiuv 
(Eph. ii. 3), but uses it in his own way 
in a sense as wide as tois Ko<rp.iKds c. 
(Tit. ii. 12). For the flesh is the earthly 
life [ef. Col. iii. 5) the transitory mode of 
existence of the soul which is by such 
abstinence to be preserved (i. 9). — 
aiTivcs ... TJ/vx^S, beeanse they 
are campaigning against the soul. — 
(TTpoTe-uovTai, (cf. iv. if., for mili- 
tary metaphor) perhaps derived from Rom. 
vii. 23, " I perceive a different law in my 
members warring against (dvTicrTpoTe- 
v(5p,£vov) the law of my mind ;" cf. Jas. 
iv. I, the pleasures which war in 3-our 
members, and 4 Mace. ix. 23, Updv Kal 
eipycvY^ CTpaTeiav CTpaTcvaao-Se irepl ttjs 
cvacPcias. — KaTa ttjs 4''«'X''i'* The 
lusts of this earthly life are the real 
enemy for they affect the soul. Compare 
Matt. x. 28, which may refer to the Devil 
and not to God, and the Pauline parallel, 
■q o-dp^ eTri6vp,€i KttTa tov irvexip.aTOS 
. . . TovTa ydp dWr^Xois dvTiKtiTai 
(Gal. V. 17). 

Ver. 12. Adaptation of the saying, 
oTTCds iSuaiv vfiuv Ta KaXd cpya Kal 
So^dauatv tov iraTtpa vp,(i>v tov ev tois 
ovpavois (Matt. v. 16). The good be- 
haviour on which the resolved dvao-Tpe- 
({>e(rdai permits stress to be laid is the 

lo — 15. 



6 jjLwi' «i)s KaKOiroiuf eK tuv KaXwv epYWf eTroTrreooi'Tcs 

8o|(i o-uori TOf ©»' cc iq|i€pa cirio-KOiTTis. uTTord YT''^ ^3 

irdoTf] dk'OpbtTTi nf) KTicrei 8id rof Kt' eixe ^aaiXci is 

UTTC pe'xoi'Ti eixe ^17^1^° °'''' «**5 ^'•' auToC irepi irofjiecois cis 1 4 
ckSikt) aif KaKOTTOiiu*' eirat voc 8e dYa0o^rola)^' • on outws 15 

i<nt,v TO OeXrjixa xou 0D dyado iroioGk'Tas (|)eip.ou ttjj* 

fruit of the abstinence of ver. 11; c/. 
Heb. xiii. 8 ; Jas. iii. 13. This second 
admonition is disjointed formally — against 
formal grammar — from the first; cf. Eph. 
iv. I f., irapaKaXw . . . vfxas . . . dve- 
X<$P'Cvoi. — evTois e6v€criv, the people 
of God (ii. 9) is a correlative term and 
implies the existence of the nations, who 
are ignorant and disobedient. The situa- 
tion of the Churches addressed justifies 
the use of Dispersion in i. i. But the point 
of the words here is this : you— the new 
Israel must succeed where the old failed, 
as it is written my name is blasphemed 
ev Tois iBv€<n,v on your account (Isa. Hi. 
5; LXX, cited Rom. ii. 24).— tva . . . 
€ir KTK OTTTJ s, iti Order that as a result 
of your good works they may be initiated 
into your secrets and come to glorify God 
in respect to your conduct when He at last 
visits the world, though now they calum- 
niate you as evildoers in this matter. — 
evw in the case of the thing in which, 
i.e., your behaviour generally ; cf. iii. 16, 
iv, 4, and for So^. tov 6e6v Iv, iv. 11, 16. 
— K araXaXo v<r I. V « s k. Particular 
accusations are given in iv. 15. This 
popular estimate of Christians is reflected 
in Suetonius' statement : Adflicti suppli- 
ciis Christiani, genus hominium super- 
stitionis novae et malcficae (Ner. 16). — 
eiroTTTtvovTes takes Ace. in iii. 2 {over- 
look, behold, as in Symmachus' version of 
Ps. X. 14, xxxiii. 13) ; but here the avail- 
able objects are either appropriated (6e6v 
with 8o|.) or far off (avao-Tpo<j)iiv). It will 
therefore have its ordinar}^ sense oi become 
eir oir TTj s, be initiated. The Chris- 
tians were from the point of view of their 
former friends members of a secret asso- 
ciation, initiates of a new mystery, the 
secrecy of which gave rise to slanders 
such as later Christians brought a.gainst 
the older mysteries and the jews. St. 
Peter hopes that, if the behaviour of 
Christians corresponds to their profession, 
their neighbours will become initiated into 
their open secrets (for as St. Paul insists 
this hidden mystery has now been re- 
vealed and published). — 8o|daci>o-iv 
TOV 6 € 6 V. come to glorify God — like 
the centurion, who said of the crucified 
Jesus, Truly this was the Son of God 

(Mark xv. 39) — i.e., recognise the finger 
of God either in the behaviour of the 
Christians or in the whole economy (see 
Rom. xi.). — €v T\\kipa eir i a" ko it r\^, 
from Isa. x. 3, What will ye do — ye the 
oppressors of the poor of my people — in 

day of visitation (jflpQ Dl'') '•*• (Tar- 
gum), when your sins are visited upon 
you. But St. Peter looks for the repent- 
ance of the heathen at the last visitation 
{cf. iv. 6), though the prophet found no 
escape for his own contemporaries. Com- 
pare Luke xix. 44. 

Vv. 13-17. The duty of the Christian 
towards the State ; compare Rom. xiii. 
1-7. — T a (T ^ avd p (oiT ivQ ktictci, 
every human institution, including rulers 
(14), masters (18), and husbands (iii. i). 
KTi^eiv is used ordinarily in many senses, 
e.g., of peopling a country, of founding a 
city, of setting up games, feasts, altar, 
etc. In Biblical Greek and its descend- 
ants it is appropriated to creation. Here 
KTio-is is apparently selected as the most 
comprehensive word available ; and the 
acquired connotation — creation by God — 
is ruled out by the adjective dvOpuirtvo. 
It thus refers to all human institutions 
which man set up with the object of 
maintaining the world which God created. 
— 8 la TOV K-upLov, for the sake of the 
Lord. 8id may be (i) retrospective — 
i.e., because Jesus said. Render what is 
Csesar's to Cassar or, generally, because 
God is the source of all duly-constituted 
authority; or (ii.) prospective/or the sake 
of jfesus {Jehovah) ; your loyalty re- 
dounding to the credit of your Master in 
heaven. — ^aaiXci, the Roman Em- 
peror, as in Apoc. xvii. g, etc.; Jos^phus 
B.J., v. 136, v. infra. — vire p e xo vti, 
pre-eminent, supreme, absolute, as in Sap. 
vi. 5, where tois vwept'xovo-iv corresponds 
to those who are underlings of His Sove- 
reignty (4), to whom power was given 
from, the Lord (3) ; cf. 81* aviTOv below. — 
T\y e^6iT iv, properly Governors of pro- 
vinces, but Plutarch uses the singular = 
Imperator. Peter rather follows the con- 
ventional rendering of the saying of Jesus, 
Itti T)Y£fj.ov<«>v KOI ^aciXctov a"Ta6i]cr€c9€, 
interpreted in the light of popular usage 




l6 rStv a^povioy di'Gpoiirwi' ayvfocria • ibs iXtuQepoi Kat (itj 

<i»S ciTiKdXu|j.|xa e\o Tcs ttjs KaKias ttji' eXeuOEpiaf 6.W ws 

1706 8ou\oi TTcirras Tifii^ o-axe • tt|1' oLScX^iott) ra dyairaTe 

iStok Qv 4)0 peiaOe, toi' ^aaiXea rei fxarc. 01 oiK^rai otto 
Ta(ra6|ji.ei'oi €»' irai'Tl <|>6Pa) tois SecnroTais, ou fxdi'oi' tois 

19 dyadoiS Kai eiriciKeai dXXd Kal tois aKoXioi;. touto 

{cf. Luke xxi. 12) or of Jer. xxxix. 3, y]y€- 
^6v€s PacriXe'cds Ba^vXuvos. Contrast 
vague general term, clotio-iai; virepex ' ws 

. . . which St. Paul employed before his 
visit to Rome. — irepir., as being sent 
through the Emperor, 8id implies that 
the governors are sent by God acting 
through the Emperor ; so Rom. xiii. 1-7 
(cf. Sap. vi. 3) and John xix. 11, cl |xt) tjv 
ScSop-cVov cot, av(i>6€v. — els ekSiktjo'iv, 
K.T.X. The ruler executes God's ven- 
geance (Rom. xii. ig) and voices God's 
approval (Ps. xxii. 25, irapo. <rov 6 eiraivos 
ftov). The former function of governors 
has naturally become prominent, the latter 
is exemplified in the crowns, decrees and 
panegyrics with which the Greek and 
Jewish States rewarded their benefactors 
if not mere well-doers. — o v t u s . . . 
since this is so (referring to 13 f.) God's 
will is that . . . (cf. Matt, xviii. 14, 
ovTcos ovK ecTTiv OeXTjp.a where ovtws 
refers to the preceding parable) rather 
than God's will is thus Jiamcly that 
. . . or . . . well-doing thus. Since 
God has set up governors who express 
His approval of well-doers, you as well- 
doers will receive official praise and thus 
be enabled to silence the slanderers. 
St. Peter is thinking of the verdict pro- 
nounced in the case of St. Paul and of 
Jesus himself. — ({>Lp.ovv, (i) muzzle (i 
Cor. ix. 9), (2) silence as Jesus did (Matt, 
xxii. 34, €c|>inu(r€v tovs laSSovKatovs). 
— TT)v 0.7 v€i) cr I av, arareword — perhaps 
borrowed from Job xxxv. 16, €v aYvcocria 
pi]fi.aTa papijvci, He multipUeth words 
without knowledge. In i Cor. xv, 34, 
dYVbiciav V'^P 8eov ruves iyovtriv, it is 
derived from Sap. xiii. i, ols Traprjv 6eov 
d-yvuo-ia. It is the opposite of Yvuxrts 
(aYVjocrtas t£ Kai yviicrecos, Plato, Soph., 
267 B) cf. oYVOta, of Jews who crucified 
Jesus, Acts iii. 17.— t civ d<j)p6vti>v = 
the foolish men who calumniate you (12). 
d. is very common in the Wisdom litera- 
ture (especially Proverbs) ; as used by 
Our Lord (Luke xi. 40) and St. Paul (2 Cor. 
xi.) ; it implies lack of insight, a point of 
view determined by external appearances. 
Ver. 16. is eXevOcpoi, the con- 
trast with TTJs KaKias supports the 
connection of I. in thought with dyaOo- 

TToioOvTas, which explains the nature of 
the self-subjection required. Christians 
are free (Matt. xvii. 26 f. q.v. ; John viii. 
36 ; Gal. ii. 4) and therefore must sub- 
mit to authority. Peter generalises sum- 
marily St. Paul's argument in Gal. v, 13, 
which refers to internal relations. — Kai 
(XTj . . . k\iv9 6piixv, and not having 
your freedom as a cloak of your malice. 
For €ir. cf. Menander (apud Stobaeum 
Florileg.) itXovtos 8^ iroXXcov Itt iKaXv p. |a' 
lo-Tiv KttKwv. The verb is used in Ps. 

cited Rom. iv. 7 = "^Q^ '■> and this sense 
may perhaps be contemplated here ; early 
Christians regarded their freedom as con- 
stituting a propitiation for future as for 
past sins. 

Ver. 17. Sweeping clause based partly 
on Rom. xiii. 7 f. (cf. Matt. xxii. 21), 
partly on Prov. xxiv. 21, (}>oPov tov Oebv 
vU Kal PaaiXea Kal p,T]06T£p<i> avTuv 
dir€i6Ti<rT)s. — iravras TifjiiicraTe. 
The aorist imperative is used because the 
present would be ambiguous ; cf. dird- 
SoTE, Rom. I.e., and for matter, Rom. xii. 
10, rfi Tiixfj dXXi]Xovs irpoTjYOVfjievoi, 
since iravras covers both the brotherhood 
and tJie emperor. — o i o I k e t a i, voca- 
tive ; the word is chosen as being milder 
than SovXos and also as suggesting the 
parallel between slaves and Christians 
who are God's household (ii. 5) — viro- 
Tao-<ro|X£voi has force of imperative 
resuming ■uiroTdYTjTe or goes with rifi- 
iio-are (17) as being a particular applica- 
tion of that general principle. — tois 
SecririSTOis, to your masters, not ex- 
cluding God, the Master of all, as is indi- 
cated by the insertion of in all fear (cf. 

17, etc.) and tois dyaOots Kal ettieikeo'iv 
(cf. Ps. Ixxxvi. 4, <ru Kvpios xP'n<'"''os koI 
e-TTieiKTis). — TOIS (TKoXtoIs, the per- 
verse, cf. Phil. ii. 15, ivo ye'vqo-Oe . . . 
TEKva Ocov dp,a)p,a ^.eVov yEveds (tkoXios 
Kal 8i.E(rTpa)xp.evT]s, where the full phrase 
is cited from Deut. xxxii. 5 (o-k. = *^'^V/) . 
The Vulgate has dyscoUs = SvctkoXois; 
Hesychius, o-KoXi<5s- d8iKos; Prov. xxviii. 

18, 6 o-KoXiats 6801s ■7rop«v(5p.evos x* o 

7rOpEvd|JlEVOS 8lKaib>S- 

Vv. 19 f. Summary application of the 
teaching of Jesus recorded in Luke vi. 27- 




^ap X*^P'5 ^^ ^'■°^ o-uciSt] o-if 09 u'n'o<|>^pci ns Xuiras irdoxwi' 

dSiKws. TTolov ydp kXc'os ei d )xapT(ivoi'T€S Kal ko Xa^jt^o- 20 

|jLecoi ^ uTro|i€ f eire ; dXX' el dyaOoTrot oOfTes Kal Tr6.(T\ov tcs 

1JTV0|JLei'£lT€, ToG TO X^P^S """Clpd 03. CIS TOUTO yap CKXl^OTJTe 21 

oTi Kal Xs tTraOei' u Trcp ujioic up.ii' utto Xip.irdfUi' uiroypap, 

p,of ica CTraKoXoufli^ otjTai tols ixfecif auTou • 6s 2 2 

dp.apTiak' ouK eTroiirjo-ei' ouSe eop^Orj 86X09 iv tcj <TTop,aTi 

auTOO OS Xoi Sopoufxevos ouk av reXoiSopei -irdo-xwi' ouk 23 

^ The third corrector of Codex Sinaiticus puts KoXa^ojievoi for KoXa(t>ito|xevoi with 
the assent of some cursives. Such variations may be due to careless copying or 
they may result from erroneous expansion and interpretation of abbreviations. 

36 = Matt. V. 39-48. — X <* p <• s seems to 
be an abbreviation of the O.T. idiom to 

find favour \\^) with God — cf. X'^^P*'^ 

•Trapa deQ (20) — taken from St. Luke's ver- 
sion of the saying, el dyairare Toris dya- 
ircivTas viftas, iroia vpiv x^'^P*'^ eanv (vi. 
32). — Compare x*P'''''«s = ^")2J"^ '^^^ 

lohich is acceptable in Prov. x. 32. — 8 1. d 
-<rvv€i8it)<riv 6eov, (i.) because God 
is conscious of your condition (6eov sub- 
jective genitive), a reproduction of tliy 
Father which seeth that which is hidden 
. . . (Matt. vi. 4, etc.) ; so <rvv€t8. in 
-definite philosophical sense of conscience 
is usually followed by possessive geni- 
tive OR (ii.) because you are conscious of 
{jod (8. objective genitive), cf. <r. dp,ap- 
T^as, Heb. x. 2. The latter construction 
is preferable : the phrase interprets 8id 
Tov Kijpiov with the help of the Pauline 
expression 8id ttjv «r. (Rom. xiii. 5 ; i Cor. 
X. 25) employed in the same context. — 
-Trdax"'' d8iK0)S, emphatic. Peter 
has to take account of the possibility 
which Jesus ignored, that Christians 
might deserve persecution ; cf. 20, 25. — 
iroiov kXcos, what praise rather than 
2vhat kind of reputation (kX. neutral as in 
Thuc. ii. 45) cf. iToia. X'^P*'^ riva. pio-flfSv, 
Matt. kX. (only twice in Job in LXX) 
corresponds to eiraivos above : X^P*^' 
irapd 0€u shows that the praise of the 
Master who reads the heart is intended. — 
KoXa4)i56H.€voi., from description 
of the Passion, Mark xiv, 65, i^p^avTiJ 
TIV6S . . . KoXa<j)i5€iv avTov : cf. Matt. 
v. 39, oaris o"€ pairi^ei. So also St. 
Paul recalls the parallel between Christ's 
and the Christians' sufferings (i Cor. iv. 
11) KoXa4>k^(ipi€6a. — dy a9 ox o t ov V- 
T€9, opposed to dfiaprdvovTes, explains 
dSiKws (19). — xa.p IS, see on x* ver. 19. 

Ver. 21. € I s T o V T o, 5C. to do well 
and to suffer, if need be, without flinch- 

ing, as Christ did. — c k X -r^ tj t e, sc. by 
God ; cf. 8id TT)v o-weiSTjo-tv Oeov. — 
ciraOev vitkp nfipciv, ver. 22 supplies 
the essential point, which would be readily 
supplied, but Christ's suffering was un- 
deserved (SiKaios ■viTT^p dSiKoiv, iii. 18). — 
K a I also with reference to the similar 
experience of Christians ; so Phil. ii. 5, 

TOVTO <{)pOVeiT€ £V VpiV 8 Kttl Iv XplCTU. 

— ■£» iroypa|j,pdv (i) outline, 2 Mace. 
ii. 28, to enlarge upon the outlines of our 
abridgment ; (2) copy-head, pattern, to be 
traced over by writing-pupils (Plato, 
Protag., 227 D ; Clement of Alexandria, 
Strom., V. 8, 49, gives three examples of 
which peSitaix^j/xOuTrXiiKTpov cr^nyS is 
one). — €'jraKoXov0Vio-'r)T€, remini- 
scence of Jesus' word to Peter, aKoXov- 
Oi^o-eis vo-T€pov, John xiii. 36. 

Ver. 22 = Isa. liii. 9, dp,, being put for 

dvop.iav (D?2n) ^"^ *^P" SdXos (so 
^ca AQ, etc.) for 8(5Xov ( = Heb.) of 
LXX. The latter variation is due to con- 
junction of Zeph. iii. 13, ov prj evpcdfj e'v 
Tu (TTopaTt aiiTwv YXoi<r<ra 80X10 : Christ 
being identified with the Remnant. The 
former appears in the Targum : " that 
they might not remain who work sin and 
might not speak guile with their mouth ". 
Ver. 23. Combination of the Scripture 
ovK dvoiyei ri o-rdfia (Isa. liii. 7) with 
the saying orav oveiSio-toatv Kai 8i<«>|a)<riv 
(Matt. V. it). For X018. cf. i Cor. iv, 
12. XoiSopovpevoi eviXoyovptv (eiirwciv 
irdv irovqpov of Matt. I.e.), John ix. 28, 
the Jews IXoiSdpTjaav the once blina 
man as Jesus' disciple and, for O.T. type 
Deut. xxxiii. 8, e\oi8iipT](rav aiirbv ciri 
v8aT0s dvTiXoyias (Levi = Christ the 
Priest, cf. dvTiXoyia, Heb. \ii. 3)-— <> ^^^^ 
T| ir £ £ X € I, the prophecy direiXiio-ei tois 
diretOoi)aiv (Isa. Ixvi. 14) is yet to be ful- 
filled (Luke xiii. 27). Oec. notes that He 
threatened Judas, seeking to deter him 
and reviled the Pharisees, but not in re- 



11.24—25. III. 

24TJTreiXei TrapcSi Sou 8e tu Kpeti/OKTi SiKaius * os rds d|xapTia9 
ufiuc auTos &yr\ veyKei' €►' tw aoifia ti auroC 6iri to |oXo" 
Iva Tais dfiapTiais d ■jroyei'Ofi.ei'oi rfj 8i(j;oO<''u>'i1 j^^crwixei' • ou 

25 TW ixuXuiri ^ t(i0T)Tai. us irpoPaTa irXai'cJfAe I'd dXXd eirc- 

OTpd4)T] Tc cui' eirl Toi/ iroip,^ i/a Kal eTT-iaKOirof tw \J/uxw»' 
III. I ufAwf. ofioi ws Y"'"''^*^^^ uiroTao- a6]X€vai tois ISiois 

' The superfluous; avTov after ov t« lAwXwiru is omitted by Codex Vaticanus and 
other authorities. It would be repugnant to the ear of a Greek, but is not there- 
fore to be regarded as necessarily absent from the original. 

died because He took our sins upon Him- 
self {cf. Num. iv. 33, ol -1)101 vjauv ... 
dvoicrovo'iv tt|v iropveiav -uiJioiv). There- 
fore our sins perished and we have died to 
them, Col. ii. 14.— iva • . . ? T o" o* H^ « ♦'• 
Compare Targum of Isa. liii. 10, "and 
from before Jehovah it was the will to 
refine and purify the remnant of His 
people that He might cleanse from sins 
their souls : they shall see the kingdom of 
His Christ and . . . prolong their days ". 
— air oyev 6 \i.€voi — (i.) die (Herodo- 
tus, Thucydides) as opposite of 7€v6|a£voi, 
come into being or (ii.) be free from, a.s 
in Thuc. i. 39, Toiv dfj,apTT]fxdTci>v diro- 
YCv6fj.6voi. The Dative requires (i.), cf. 
Kom. vi. 2, oiTiV€s a'KeQa,vo\i,ev tt) djjiap- 
Tiqi. The idea is naturally deduced 
from Isa. liii., Christ bore our sins and 
delivered His soul to death, therefore He 
shall see His seed living because sinless. 
— ov . . . iaQr\re from Isa. liii. 5; 
p.oJX(i>iri, properly the weal or scar pro- 
duced by scourgeing (Sir. xxviii. 17, ttXtiyt) 
fiao-TiYos iroiet (xuXcu-Tras) thus the pro- 
phecy was fulfilled according to Matt, 
xxvii. 26, (|>paYE\\wo-a;. The original 
has ia.Qi\\i.ev. The paradox is especially 
pointed in an address to slaves who were 
frequently scourged. 

Ver. 25 = Isa. liii. 6, iravTcg ws irpo- 
^ara eTr\avqOi]fi,€v combined with Ez. 
xxxiv. 6, where this conception of the 
people and their teachers {the shepherds 
of Israel) is elaborated and the latter de- 
nounced because to irXaviip-evov ovik 
eTreo-Tpe'vl/aTc. Further the use of this 
metaphor in the context presupposes the 
saying / am the good shepherd. . . . I lay 
down my life for the sheep (John xii. 15). 
— eir io- K otto V, cf. Ez. xxxiv. 11, ISov 
kyii €K^r]Ti]ati) to. Trpd^aTd p.ov Kal 
ciriaKEvl/ofxai axird. It is to be noted 
that the command which Jesus laid on 
Peter, feeding sheep, comes from Ez. I.e. 

Chapter III. — Vv. 1-6. Duty of 
wives (Eph. v. 21-24; Col. iii. 18; Tit. 
ii. 4) — Submissiveness and true adorn- 

tort. — TrapcSCSov. It is doubtful what 
object, it any, is to be supplied. The 
narrative of the Passion suggests two 
renderings : (i.) He delivered Himself 
(lavTov omitted as in Plato, Phaedrus, 
250 E). Cf. Luke xxiii. 46 (Ps. xxxi. 5), 
irapaTiOcfJiai, to irvEvixd p.ov and Isa. liii. 
6 ; Kvpios TrapeSodKcv avTov, ib. 12 irape- 
8<J9t]. (ii.) He delivered the persecutors 
(latent in passive participles XoiS. and 
■7rdo-x«^v), when He said Father forgive 
thitn. In ordinary Greek irapaSiSup.i 
without object = permit ; but this hardly 
justifies the rendering He gave way to 
{cf. SoT£ tcJttov t-q opYfj, Rom. xii. 19), 
i.e., permitted God to fulfil His will. But 
most probably irap. tw . . . represents 

the Hebrew ellipse, 1 ^\^ 7J commit to 
Jehovah (Ps. xxii. 9) for the normal com- 
mit, way, works, cause ; LXX (Syriac) 
has TjXirio-tv = Matt, xxvii. 43. Compare 
Joseph. Ant. vii. g, 2, David irepl irdvTcov 
liriTpexj/as KpiTTJ tw Oew. — tw k p i- 
vovTiSiKaius, cf.i. 17; the award 
was the glory. 

Ver. 24. Christ was not only well-doer 
h\xt benefactor. — to.? dp.. . . . dviive- 
YK€v comes from Isa. liii. 12, LXX, koX 

ttVTos dftapT^a; iroXXwv dvijveYKCv (^^^ 

usually translated Xap.pdv€iv), used also 
Heb. ix. 28. Christ is the perfect sin- 
offering : " Himself the victim and Him- 
self the priest. The form of expression 
offered up our sins is due to the double 

use of rib^IDri for '''" ^^^ sin-offering. 
— «v TW o-wp-aTi ovTov, a Pauline 
phrase derived from the saying. This is 
my body which is for von (i Cor. xi. 24), 
explaining aviTos of Isa. I.e. — liri to 
I v X o V, replaces the normal comple- 
ment of dva<|>epeiv, eirl to OvaiaaTiipiov, 
in view of the moral which is to be 
drawn from the sacrificial language 
adopted. So Jas. ii. 21, eirl to Ovaio- 
o-Tiipiov is substituted for eirdvw twv 
|t5Xwv of the original description of the 
offering of Isaac, Gen. xxii. g. Christ 




&v^pdaiv • Iva ci Tii'cs ^ direiGouo-ii' tw Xoyw SioL -riis Twv yui'aiKu 

dcao-Tpo<}>Tis akco X6 you KcpS-qSiio-oi'Tai eiroTrreuCTak'Tes 2 

TT)" iv 4>6P(i> dy»'T]i/ dca <rTpo4>T)i' ufjtuic. wv' eorw 00^ o 3 

c^wOck cp-irXoKTis Tpix^*' f^ -irepiGe'aews XP"0''^'' ^ cvSucrews 

ifiaTiaT K6ap.os * dXX' 6 KpuTrros rfis KapSias dv'GpwTTOS 4 

^ The variant oiruves for ei nves serves as a reminder that in uncial manuscripts 
6- is apt to be confused with O and that words were not written separately from one 

ment. — to is 18 10 is avS pa a- iv, your 

own husbands, the motive for submissive- 
ness, Eph. v. 22; Tit. ii. 4. St. Peter 
assumes knowledge of the reason alleged 
by St. Paul (Eph. I.e. ; i Cor. xi. 3) after 
Gen. iii. 16, avTcSs <rov Kvpicvaci. — Kai 
el . . . Xoyw, even if in some cases your 
husbands are disobedient to the word 
(ii. 8), i.e., remain heathens in spite of the 
preaching of the Gospel. St. Paul found 
it necessary to impress upon the Corin- 
thian Church that this incompatibility of 
religion did not justify dissolution of mar- 
riage (i Cor. xii. 10 ff.). — a v ev \6yov, 
without word from their wives. Peter 
deliberately introduces X. in its ordinary 
sense immediately after the technical tw 
X. — an example of what the grammarians 
call antanaclasis and men a pun. In his 
provision for the present and future wel- 
fare of the heathen husbands whose 
wives come under his jurisdiction he 
echoes the natural aspiration of Jews and 
Greeks ; so Ben Sira said, a silent woman 
is a gift of the Lord ... a loud cryini{ 
woman and a scold shall be sought out 
to drive away enemies (Sir. xxvi. 14, 27) 
and Sophocles, Silence is the proper orna- 
ment (Ko<r|AOs) /o>' women (Ajax 293). St. 
Paul forbids women to preach or even 
ask questions at church meeting (1 Cor. 
xiv. 34 : at Corinth they had been used to 
prophesy and pray). — iva . . . KcpS-r]- 
6i7<rovTai, be won, cf. iva KcpSi^o-w in 
I Cor. ix. 20 ff. = iva . . . ccocru, ib. 22, 
{cf.vW, 16.). 

Ver. 2. Itt OTtr (.vv avTi<i, having 
contemplated; see on ii. 12. ttjv . . . 
vp-uv. ev (jx^^o), cf. i. 17 and Eph. 
v. 21. ■u'7roTa<r<r(5p.€voi dXXijXois «v (f>(Spa> 
XpiaTov • ai yvvaiKcs : as no object is 
expressed, tov 6eov must be supplied. — 
ayvi^v, not m&Te\y chaste but pure, cf, 
i. 22 and iii. 4. 

Ver. 3. The description of the external 
ornaments proper to heathen society 
seems to be based on Isa. iii. 17-23, where 
the destruction of the hair, jewels and 
raiment of the daughters of Zion i- fore- 
told. — cixirXoKTJs Tpix^v, braiding 

of hair, i Tim. ii. 19, irXe'yixao-iv koi 
Xpvo-i<i> refers to the golden combs and 
nets used for the purpose; cf. ep.irX^Kia, 

Isa. iii. 18, for D''D''3.'!2^- Juvenal de- 
scribes the elaborate coiffures w^hich Ro- 
man fashion prescribed for the Park and 
attendance at the Mysteries of Adonis : tot 
premit ordinibus tot adhuc compagibus 
altum aedificat caput (Sat. vi. 492-504). 
Clement of Alexandria quotes i Peter iii. 
1-4, in his discussion of the whole subject 
(Paed., III. xi.) ; and in regard to this 
particular point says diroxpTl paXd<r<r€iv 
Tas TpixO'S Kai dva8eicr6ai ttjv Kop.T|v 
cvteXus irepovfj tivi Xit-[J 'Trapa tov 
avx^va . . . Kai yap at irEpiTrXoKai twv 
Tpi}(C)V at ETaipiKal Kai ai tuv ceipuv 
dvaS£o-€is • • • KOTTTOvcri ras rpixas 
d-jroTiXXovo-ai Tais iravovpyois £|AirXo- 
Kais, because of which they do not even 
touch their own head for fear of disturb- 
ing their hair — nay more sleep comes to 
them with terror lest they should un- 
awares spoil TO O^T)pa TTJS cp.irXoKTJs 
(p. 290 P). — IT cpiOeccus XP'"*'"^'"'* 
i.e., rings bracelets, etc., enumerated in 
Isa.. I.e. — EvSvaecos ip.aTi(iiv. Stress 
might be laid on Koo-pos, or the crowning 
prohibition regarded as an exaggeration 
intended to counteract an ingrained bias. 
In either case the expression points to a 
remarkable precedent for this teaching in 
Plato's Republic IV., iii. ff. " Plato's as- 
signment of common duties and common 
training to the two sexes is part of a 
well-reasoned and deliberate attempt by 
the Socratic school to improve the posi- 
tion of women in Greece. . . . Socrates' 
teaching inaugurated an era of protest 
against the old Hellenic view of things. 
... In later times the Stoics constituted ' 
themselves champions of similar views" 
(Adam, ad loc). Accordingly gymnastics 
must be practised by women as by men : 
diroSvTc'ov 8t) Tats Ttuv <|ivXdK(i>v -ywailiv 

CTTClTTCp dp£TT)V dvTl ipaTlUJV dp<|>l(- 


Ver. 4. Yours be the secret man of the 
heart not the out7vard ornament. A better 
antithesis and a pretty paradox would be 




iv Tw d4)0dpTw Tou i^CTuxioo Kai irpaeus irKeufiaros o cori*' 

5 ecciTTiof TOO 00 TToXu TeXe?. ouTWS ydp iro T€ Kai ai dyioi 
yucaiKes at cXiri^ouaai ets ©»' cKoafAoui' laurds u Trorao'- 

6 (TOiievai Tois iSiois dfSpdaii' • <i»s Idppa virfiKOuev tw 
'Appadfj. Kupio>' auTor KaXouaa. tjs iyevr]Q-r] T6 TCKca, dya- 


7 SoTToioG crai, Kai piT) (|>oPoup,E I'ai p.t^Scp.iai' tttoticti 

- 1 


^ TTTwo-iv for irT6if)<rtv illustrates the danger of cursive writing, in which the liga- 
ture of two letters is apt to alter the normal shape of one or both. 

secured by supplying avOpcu'Tros with 6 
€|<o0£v and taking k. as predicate: your 
ornament be cf. ovtws exoo-fiovv lavxds 
(ver. 5). But the order in ver. 3 is 
against this and a Greek reader would 
naturally think of the other sense of k. = 
world universe and remember that man 
is a microcosm and " the universe the 
greatest and most perfect man " (Philo, 
p. 471 M.). — 6 KpxiiTTos TTJs KapSias 
avSpuiros, the hidden mafi that is the 
heart (or which belongs to the heart) is 
the equivalent of the Pauline inner man 
(Rom. vii. 22), i.e., Mind as contrasted 
with the outward man, i.e., flesh (Rom. 
I.e., cf. 2 Cor. iv. 16). St. Peter employs 
the terms used in the Sermon on the 
Mount ; cf. St. Paul's 6 Iv rui KpvirT&i 
'lovSaios and ireptTOftTj KapSCas, Rom. ii. 
29. — Iv Toj d({>6dpT(i>, clothed in the 
incorruptible thing (or ornament, sc. k6- 
orpu) contrasted with corruptible goldens ; 
cf. Jas. ii. 2, dvTjp . . . Iv IcOrJTi 
XafiTrpa. — tov . . , irvevp-aTos, 
namely, the meek and quiet spirit. The 
adjectives are perhaps derived from the 
version of Isa. Ixvi. 2, known to Clement 
of Rome (Ep. i. xiii. 4), liri riva E-mpXetj/u 
dX\* T\ liri Tov irpavv Kat T|(rvx''°'' '**'■'■ 
Tpcpovrd pov TO, Xdyia. Jesus professed 
Himself, irpavs Kai Taireivbs T'jj KapSta. 
For -TTvevpaTos compare irvevpa dyi- 
coorvvTis, Rom. i. 4. In Rom. ii. 29, -n-v. is 
coupled with heart as contrasted with 
flesh and outwardness, o which spirit 
or the posssesion of which reference. — 
iroXvTcXes suggests use of conception 
of Wisdom which i? precious above rubies 
(Prov. iii. 15, etc.); cf. Jas. i. 21, iii. 13, 
Iv irpaijTirjTi ao<j>ias and description of 
the wisdom from above, ib. 17. 

Ver. 5. ir o T e refers vaguely to O.T. 
history as part of a i . . . 6 c o v. Refer- 
ences to the holy women of the O.T. are 
rare in N.T. and this appeal to their ex- 
ample illustrates the affinity of Peter to 
Heb. (xi. II, 35). Hannah is the ob- 
viously appropriate type {cf. Luke i. with 
2 Sam. I f.) ; but Peter is thinking of the 
traditional idealisation of Sarah. 

Ver. 6. us . . . KaXovcra. The 

only evidence that can be adduced from 
the O.T. narrative is Sarah laughed zvith- 
in herself and said . . . "but my lord is 
old " (Gen. xviii. 12). The phrase, if 
pressed, implies a nominal subjection as of 
a slave to her lord, but the context at any 
rate excludes atiy hope in God. Philo, 
who starts with the assumption that 
Sarah is Virtue, evades the difficulty ; her 
laughter was the expression of her joy, 
she denied it for fear of usurping God's 
prerogative of laughter (de Abr., ii. p. 
30 M). The Rabbinic commentaries 
dwell upon the title accorded to Abraham 
and draw the same inference as Peter ; 
but there are also traces of a tendency to 
exalt Sarah " the princess " as superior 
to her husband in the gift of prophecy, 
which St. Peter may wish to correct (as 
St. James corrects the exaggerated re- 
spect paid to Elijah, Jas. v. 17). — ■^ s . . . 
T « K V a. Christian women became chil- 
dren of Sarah who is Virtue or Wisdom 
(Philo) just as men became children of 
Abraham. But the fact that they were 
Christians is still in the background ; the 
essential point is that they must do the 
works traditionally ascribed to Sarah {cf. 
Rom. iv. ; John viii.) and so justify their 
technical parentage, whether natural or 
acquired. Oec. compares Isa. Ii. 2, Sarah 
your mother. — d yaBoiroiovaai, the 
present participle emphasises the need 
for continuance of the behaviour appro- 
priate to children of Sarah. — p tj . . . 
TT T d 1] o- 1 V, from Prov. iii. 25, LXX. 
Peter regards Sarah's falsehood (Gen. I.e.) 
as the yielding to a sudden terror for 
which she was rebuked by God. Fear- 
lessness then is part of the character 
which is set before them for imitation 
and it is the result of obedience to the 
voice of Wisdom. Rabbinic exegesis as 
sociates the ideas of ornament with the 
promised child and that of peace between 
husband and wife with the whole incident. 
Ver. 7. Dttty of husbands to their 
wives. Application of principle iravras 
Tip-qoraTe. — Kara yvwaiv, for the 

5— lo. 



ofioiug auvoi KoCvres Kara Y>'<«><n" ws daOefeo-Tepw aKC j ei 

Tw Yu^a>'K£i(<> diro t'e/ioi'Tes xeip-Tjc ws ^al cruyKXTjpot'Ofiois 

X<ipiTos ^cjTJs els TO p,T] eyKOTTTeo-Gai rais irpoaeuxais ujiaiv. 

TO 8c tAos, irdi'Tes 6 p.6(|>poi'es o-ufxiraGeis 4)iXd8e\(|)oi 8 

euo-irXay x^°'' TaTreiv6<J)pov'es • p.Tj dTroSiSocTes KaKo dvTi KaKou 9 
T) XoiSopi av di'Ti XoiSopias • too vavriov 8e euXoyou tcs, 

OTi CIS touto c KXrj0T]Te, Iva cuXoyia" KXif]po»'op.iiaT)Te. 610 

woman is the weaker vessel — the pot — 
which the stronger — the cauldron — may 
easily smash (Sir. xiii. 2). ws, k.t.X. 
point with comma after yvutriv and rifiiiv. 
<r K £ V € i. The comparison of Creator 
and creature to potter and clay is found 
first in Isa. xxix. 16, but is latent in the 

description of the creation ('^J^'^) of 
Adam from the dust of the earth (Gen. ii. 
7 f.). In the prophets it is developed 
and applied variously (Isa. xlv. 9 f., Ixiv. 
8 ; Jer. xviii, 6). In Sap. xv. 7, there is 
an elaborate description of the maker of 
clay images, in which ckevos replaces 
irXao-jio and vessels which serve clean 
uses are distinguished from the contrary 
sort. Thence St. Paul adopts the figure 
and employs it to illustrate the absolute 
sovereignty of the Creator, as Isaiah had 
done (see Rom. ix. 21), distinguishing 
vessels intended for honour from those in- 
tended for dishonour. Lastly 2 Tim. ii. 
20 exemplifies the particular application 
of the figure, on which Peter's use of 
orKcuog rests — Iv (AeydX'n 8^ oIrio. (i Peter 
ii. 5, iv. 17) . . . K.T.X. The comparative 
do-Ocvco-Te'pcd proves that both husband 
and wife are vessels and assists to exclude 
the notion that St. Paul could mean 
to call a wife the vessel of her husband 
in I Thess. iv. 4. — us • • • t^'HS, 
inasmuch as they are also heirs with you 
of the grace (i. 10, 13) of life (ii. 24) : the 
heavenly inheritance is not distributed ac- 
cording to earthly custom, which gave 
the wife no rights of her own. — £ Is... 
tifxcdv. If the prayers are those of all 
(ver. 8) compare i Cor. vii. (ttjv 6(|>eiXt)v 
airo8i86Tci> . . . tva <rxoXd(r»jT£ rf) irpo- 
o-cvxTJ)' Peter teaches that married life 
need not — if the wife be properly hon- 
oured — hinder religious duties, as St. 
Paul feared {ib. 32 ff.). If vp.wv = you 
husbands (as v.l. (rvYKXT)pov(i|j.oi, requires) 
cf. Jas. V. 4. 

Vv. 8 f. Sweeping clause addressed to 
all, inculcating detailed (|>iXa8£X(|>ia after 
Rom. xii. 10, 15-17. 

Ver. 8. rh . , . T i\o%, finally. 
Oecumenius brings out the possible con- 
notations of the word goal and also the 

law for all love since love is the end of 
the law. — 6 )x(i({>povcs, of one mind, 
united, an Epic word. St. Paul's to avTO 
({>pov£iv but here wider than parallel ex- 
pressing Rom. xii. 16, rh a-iiTo £ls 
dXXi]Xovs <j)povotivT€S. — (TvixiradEis 
summarises x^^^P^''*' H'«Ta \a\.p6vTti>v 
kKo-Uiv p,£Ta KXaiovTwv of Rom. xii. 
15 ; cf. Heb. iv. 15 (of Christ), x. 34 
(particular example of sympathy with 
" the prisoners"). — <|> i X d 8 e X <|> o i, cf. 
i. 22 ; Rom. xii. 10, t-q <|>i.Xa8£X(j>i<j^ 
els dXXi]Xovs <|>iXdo-T0pY0i. — € ii o- ir X- 
07x^01, kind-hearted, in Eph. iv. 
32 (only here in N.T.) coupled with 
kind . . . forgiving one anothe' ; 
epithet of Jehovah in Prayer of Manasses, 
ver. 7 = compassionate, in accordance 
with metaphorical use of airXdyxva k.t.X. 
derived from different senses of Qn"^- 
Here = lv8v<rao-6€ ... to, cnrXdyx''* 
TTJs \pi\(rr6T't]To^, Col. — Tairetvo- 
<}> p o V c s = Tois TaiTEivois o'vvairayop.f- 
voi, Rom. xii. 16, cf. Prov. xxix. 23, LXX, 
insolence humbleth a man but the humble 
(Ta'ir£ivd4>povas) jfehovah stayeth with 
glory (k. vppis). 

Ver. 9. fx T| . . . K a K o V, from Rom. 
xii. 17 ; cf. I Thess. v. 15 ; Prov. xx. 22, 
Say not I will recompense evil (LXX 
TCaofxai Tov ex^pov) : an approximation 
to Christ's repeal oi the lex talionis (Matt. 
V. 38 ff.) which Plato first opposed among 
the Greeks (see Crito., p. 49, with Adam's 
note). — XoiSopiav dvTi X0180- 
p ( a s refers to pattern left by Christ (ii. 
23). — TovvavT^ov, contrariwise. — 
£iiXoyovvT£S with X018., I Cor. iv. 
21 ; cf. Rom. xii. 14, ev\oy elre tovis 8ni- 
KOVTas =-= Luke vi. 28. — oti . . . kXtj- 
povop.ii<rTjT£, Christians must do as 
they hope to be done by. They are 
the new Israel called to inherit blessing 
in place of the Jews, who are reprobate 
like Esau ; cf. Heb. xii. 17, iaT£ yap oti 
Kal (lETc'ireiTa Oe'Xcjv KXT)povop.T)a-ai ttjv 
ctiXoyiav d'jr£8oKip,d<r6T). So St. Paul re- 
verses the current view which identified 
the Jews with Isaac and the Gentiles 
with Ishmael (Gal. iv. 22 ff.). 

Vv. 10-12 = Ps. xxxiv. 12-170. intro- 




yap Q{k<i}\> ^WTjc dyaTrd", kol ISeii' 'pfxepa; dya 6ds, 

irauCTCiTCJ TT] i" yXwo- aaf diro KaKou, Kal x^i ^i] tou p.T) XaXTJaai 
1 1 So Xoi'. eKKXcikdrci) 8e aTTO KaKoC Kal ttoit] craTOJ dyaGof • 

l2^T]Tr] o-dru eipi^i'Tji', Kal 8i w^dro) aun^i', on 6 4)daX|jiol Ku 

eirl SiKai ous, Kal wra auToO els 8e'T]o-ii' auTwi' • Trpoatoiroi' 

1386 Ku €irl TTOioucTas KaKd. Kal tis 6 KaKcScrajc ufJ-ds, 

14 el Tou dyaOou ^tj Xwral^ yet'oiaOe^ dX X' el Kal Trda)(0i,Te 81 d 

8iKaioaui'T]i', fiuKd pioi. t6»' 8e 4>6Pok' au Tutv fiT) <j>o3T]0TiTe 

1 For 5i]\&>Tal three secondary uncials substitute fAifiiiTai,. 

^ Codex Vaticanus is alone in reading ye'vouo-Oe for yevrio-Se (the first haad of 
Codex Sinaiticus has yeveaOau). 

duced by mere ydp as familiar. The lips 
of Christians who wish to love life must 
be free from cursing and from guile as 
were Christ's (cf. Isa. apud ii. 23). If 
Jehovah is to hear their petition as He 
heard Christ's they also must turn from 
evil and do good (cf. ayadoTtoielv above) 
seeking peace within and without the 

Ver. 10. Peter omits the rhetorical 
question tis Icttiv avOpu'Tros, which in- 
troduces 6 Be\mv in the original (LXX 
= Hebrew) but is influenced by it in the 
substitution of the third for the second 
person throughout. The change of 
dyaTTwv ( = Hebrew) to dyaTrav Kai re- 
moves the barbarisms diXwv ^loijv and 
dyaiTbiv ISeiv ( = Hebrew) and secures 
the balance between the clauses disturbed 
by the omission of the opening words. — 
ISciv r\\t.. dyadds is the natural 
sequel of the alteration of the original 
(days to see good), which is already found 
in the LXX (iqp,. I. dya 6 d s). — t wn v = 
earthly life in the original corresponding 
to days. The text adopted by Peter 
makes it mean eternal life, parallel good 
days. Only with this interpretation is the 
quotation pertinent to his exhortation : cf. 
that ye might inherit blessing (g) with 
fellow -inheritors of the grace of life (7). — 
IT a V cr d T o>, k. t. \., parallel p,T) . . . 
XoiSopiav (9) ; cf.n. 22 f. 

Ver. 12. irpoo-ctfirov Kvptov, 
'JehovaKs face, i.e., wrath (Targum, ^Ae 
face of Jehovah was angry) as the fol- 
lowing clause, to cut off the remembrance 
of them . . . shows ; cf. Lam. iv. 16 ; 
Ps. xxi. 9. But Peter stops short and 
leaves room for repentance. 

Ver. 13. K a K (o o* cd V echoes iroiovv- 
Tas KaKa (as ^ tj X. t o v d y. echoes 
TTOiTjo-dToj dyaOov) ; but the phrase comes 
also from O.T. : Isa. 1. 9, Kvpio? Potj- 
6i](rci ftoi • TIS KaK<oo-ei fit ; — to v d y a- 

60V ^TjXcdTai. The phrase sums up 
ver. II. All that was good in Judaism, 
however it may have been perverted, finds 
its fulfilment in the new Israel (Rom. x. 
2). Some Jews were zealots, l3oasting 
their zeal for the Lord or His Law, like 
Phinehas and the Hasmonaeans (i Mace, 
ii. passim) : all Christians should be zea- 
lots for that which is good. So Paul says 
of himself as Pharisee that he was a zealot 
for his ancestral traditiotis (Gal. i. 14). 
For him as for the colleague of Simon 
the Zealot the word retained a flavour of 
its technical sense ; cf. Tit. ii. 14, that He 
might cleanse for Himself a peculiar 
people, zealot of good (xaXuv) works ; cf. 
similar use of d<()u»piap.£'vos = Pharisee 
(Rom. i. i). T o V dy. in emphatic posi- 

Ver. 14. aXX' . . . paKdpiot. 
Nay if ye should actually suffer — if some 
one, despite the prophet (13), should harm 
you — for the sake of righteousness, blessed 
are ye. Peter appeals to the saying, 
IxaKupioi ol 8£Si(i)YfJ>.EV0i, evcK£v SiKai- 
oo-vvi]s (Matt. V. 10). — IT daxoiTc, €l 
with optative (cf. 17, el OeXoi) is used to 
represent anything as generally possible 
without regard to the general" or actual 
situation at the moment (Blass, Grammar, 
p. 213). The addition of Kai implies that 
the contingency is unlikely to occur and 
is best represented by an emphasis on 
should. The meaning of the verb is de- 
termined by KaKuo-uv above, if ye should 
be harmed, i.e., by persons unspecified 
(avTuv). — 8 iKaiocriivT]v perhaps sug- 
gested 5T]X(i)Tat, cf. I Mace. ii. 27-29, iras 

6 S'ljXwV TO) VOp,(i> , . . cIeXOc'tU . . . TOTC 

KaTePTjcav iroXXoi Jtjtovvtcs Sik. Kai 
Kpi|jia. — t bv Se ^6^ ov . . . vp.uv. 
An adaptation of Isa. viii. 12 f. LXX, tov 
ik 4)dPov avTov pt) <J)oPt)6tjt€ oiSe prj 
TapaxflTJTe • Kvpiov avTov dyidaaTe Kal 
auTos eo-Tot a-ov ^6^0%. The scripture 

Ill — 17. 



Kv 8e Toi' XP ^ dyiaaa re iv rals KapSiats u fiwi' Itoijaoi dci 15 
irpos diroXoyiai' iracTl tw aiTOui'Ti ufids Xoyo irepi tt]S 

ci*' eX TTiSos ■ dXXd fierd irpa uttjtos Kal 4>6pou 

©■uceiStjo-ic exofTcs dyaQi^f * i^a ei* <S Kara XaXeiaGc ^ Kar- 16 

aiaxo" QCxTiv ot cirTjpedl^oi' tcs up.aji' ■n]v dyafiT) ei* XS 

dcao-Tpo<j>iii' • KpcLTToi' ydp dyaOo TroioocTag et QeKoi 17 

^ Three secondary uncials read 6eov ((5N) for XpicrrcJv (Xp). 

2 For Iv w KaTaXaXeio-fle Codex Sinaiticus with other authorities reads iv <S 
KaraXaXwo-iv vfxoiv <Ls KQKO-iroiciv — an assimilation of the text to ii. 12. 

corresponding to the saying, Fear not 
them that kill the body ; but fear rather 
him that can destroy both soul and body 
(Matt. X. 28 parallels Luke xii. 4 f. where 
the description of God is modified). The 
sense of the original, /^ar not what they 
(the people) fear ; Jehovah of Hosts Htm 
shall ye count holy and let Him be the 
object of your fear, has been in part 
abandoned. For it is simpler to take the 
fear as referring to the evil with which 
their enemies try to terrify them, than to 
supply the idea that their enemies employ 
the means by which they themselves 
would be intimidated. Compare iii. 6. — 
Tov xp''*'"''ov, gloss on Kvpiov = Je- 
hovah ; cf. ii. 3. — I V rats KapSiais 
sc. mere profession. Peter is probably 
thinking of the prescribed prayer, Hal- 
lowed b.e thy name, elsewhere in N.T. it 
belongs to God to sanctify Christ and 
men. — etoi|jioi del irpbs diro- 
X o Y I o V, ready for reply. The con- 
trast between the inward hope (parallels 
sanctification of Christ in the heart) and 
the spoken defence of it is not insisted 
upon ; the second Se is not to be accepted. 
The use of the noun in place of verb is 
<:haracteristic of St. Peter. The play upon 
diroXoyiav back-word and Xoyov cannot 
be reproduced. Properly speech in de- 
fence, d. is used metaphorically (NB 
iravTi) here as by St. Paul in i Cor. ix. 3, 
.r\ €|ATi diroXoyia tois e|xe avaKpivovcriv ; 
where also, though another technical 
word is introduced, no reference is in- 
tended to formal proceedings in a court of 
law. St. Peter is thinking of the promise 
which he himself once forfeited lor un- 
worthy fear, / will give you mouth and 
wisdom (Luke xxi. 14 f., xii. 11, uses 
diroXoyEio^ai ; Matt. x. 19, XaXetv). — 
IT a V T I . . . Xoyov, to every one (for 
dative cf. i Cor. ix. 3) that asketh of yon 
an account. The phrase (compare Demos- 
thenes Against Onetor, p. 868, IvekoiXovv 
Kal Xoyov airiffTovv) recalls the Parable 
•of the Steward of Unrighteousness, of 

whom his lord demanded an account 
(Luke xvi. i ff.), as also the metaphor of 
iv. 10, ws KttXol oiKovop,oi.. — p. c T d 
irpai5TT|TOS Ka I <^6^ov, with meek- 
ness (cf. ver. 4) and fear of God (Isa. I.e. 
has the same play on the senses of fear). 
— (TV V € i 8 1) or t V exovTSS ay aOrfv, 
intermediate step between 8id a. 0€ov 
and the quasi-personification of or. d. in 
ver. 21 ; so St. Paul says ovScv ydp 
cp.avTw <ruvoi8a (i Cor. iv. 4) but goes on 
beyond the contrast between self-judg- 
ment and that of other mtn to God's 
judgment. Ver. 17 supplies the explana- 
tion here. — i va . . . dvaaTpo(|)i]v, 
generalisation of Peter's personal experi- 
ence at Pentecost, when the Jews first 
scoffed and then were pierced to the 
heart (Acts ii. 13, 37). Misrepresentation 
is apparently the extent of their present 
suffering (17) and this they are encour- 
aged to hope may be stopped. The 
heathen will somehow be put to shame 
even if they are not converted (ii. 12). — 
£v w, in the matter in respect of which ; 
see ii. 12. — e irTjped^ovTes, occurs 
in Luke vi. 28, -Kpovivxia-Qi irepl t&jv 
ciTTjpeaSdvTuv vp-ds, and therefore consti- 
tutes another hint of contact between St. 
Luke and Peter {cf. xap\.<i, ii. 19). Aris- 
totle defines EirT]p6ao-pd^ as " hindrance 
to the wishes of another not for the sake 
of gaining an5^thing oneself but in order 
to baulk the other " — the spirit of the 
dog in the manger. Ordinarily the verb 
means to libel, cf. XaX-rjo-ai 86Xov (10). — 
■upoiv . . . dvao'Tpo4>i]v, your 
(possessive genitive precedes noun in 
Hellenistic Greek) good-in-Christ beha- 
viour : ev Xpio-Toi (iv. 14, 16) is practically 
equivalent to Christian, cf. if any is in 
Christ a new creature. 

Ver. 17. KpeiTTov, cf. ii. ig f., where 
xdpis kXeos correspond to picdov irepio"- 
o-<5v of the sources. — el Oe'Xot to 
O^Xripa Oeov. Again optative im- 
plies that it is a purely hypothetical case 
(c/. ver. 14). For the semi-personification 




l8 TO 0eXT)|ia Tou ©6 ird axcif f\ KaKOTroiouc ras * on Kal Xs 

airal ttc pi dfiapTiwi' eTraSei/ SiKaios uirep dSiKw" Iva 

iq^ds TrpoCTaydYD GavaTuOeis p.e>' crap ki j^wottoitjGcIs 8e 

of the will of God compare Eph. i. ii, 
where the OE\T]|xa has a ^ovXi] ; so Paul 
is Apostle through the will of God (i Cor. 
i. I ; 2 Cor. i. i). For the pleonastic ex- 
pression cf. the verbal parallel lav tis 
fleXt) TO 6eXT||i,a avTov iroieiv, John vii. 
17. So God's patience was waiting 
(ver. 20). 

Ver. 18. The advantage of suffering for 
well-doing is exemplified in the experience 
of Christ, who gained thereby quickening 
(ver. 21) and gloty (ver. 22). How far the 
pattern applies to the Christian is not 
clear. Christ suffered once for all according 
to Heb. ix. 24-28 ; the Christian suffers/or 
a little (v. 10). But does the Christian 
suffer also for sins ? St. Paul and Igna- 
tius speak of themselves as Tr€pi\|/TijJia 
'TrepiKaddpiJ.aTa ; compare the value of 
righteous men for Sodom. But even if 
Peter contemplated this parallel it is quite 
subordinate to the main idea, in which 
{spirit) eveti to the spirits in prison he 
went and preached them that disobeyed 
once upon a time when the patience of 
God was waiting in the days of Noah 
while the ark was being fitted out. . . . 
The spirits who disobeyed in the days of 
Noah are the sons of God described in 
Gen. vi. 1-4. But there as in the case of 
Sarah St. Peter depends on the current 
tradition in which the original myth has 
been modified and amplified. This de- 
pendence supplies an adequate explanation 
of the difficulties which have been found 
here and in ver. 21, provided that the 
plain statement of the preaching in Hades 
is not prejudged to be impossible. The 
important points in the tradition as given 
in the Book of Enoch ^vi.-xvi. cf. Jubilees 
V.) are as follows : the angels who lusted 
after the daughters of men descended in 
the days of Jared as his name (Descent) 
shows. The children of this unlawful 
union were the Nephilim and the Eliud. 
They also taught men all evil arts so 
that they perished appealing to God for 
justice. At last Enoch was sent to pro- 
nounce the sentence of condemnation 
upon these watchers, who in terror be- 
sought him to present a petition to God 
on their behalf. God refused to grant 
them peace. They were spirits eternal 
and immortal who transgressed the line 
of demarcation between men and angels 
and disobeyed the law that spiritual beings 
do not marry and beget children like men. 

Accordingly they are bound and their 
children slay one another leaving their 
disembodied spirits to propagate sin in 
the world even after it has been purged 
by the Flood. But Christians believed 
that Christ came to seek and to save the 
lost and the captives ; all things are to be 
subjected to Him. So Peter supplements 
the tradition which he accepts. For him 
it was not merely important as connected 
with the only existing type of the Last 
Judgment or an alternative explanation 
of the origin and continuance of sin 
but also as the greatest proof of the 
complete victory of Christ over the most 
obstinate and worst of sinners. — I v w sc. 
irvevixaTi : as a bodiless spirit in the 
period between the Passion (18) and the 
Resurrection-Ascension (22). — k a i, even 
to the typical rebels who had sinned past 
forgiveness according to pre-Christian 
notions. — t ois «v (|>vXaK'f]irvc'up.- 
a o- 1 V, the spirits in prison, i.e., the 
angels of Gen. I.e. who were identified 
with my spirit of Gen. vi. 3, and there- 
fore described as having been sent to the 
earth by God in one form of the legend 
(Jubilees, I.e.). The name contains also 
the point of their offending (Enoch sum- 
marised above) ; cf. 2 Peter ii. 4 ; -Jude 6 ; 
and the prophecy of Isa. Ixi. i (which 
Jesus claimed, Luke iv. 8 f.), K^pvlai 
alxtiaXaiTOis d((>eo'iv. These spirits were 
in ward when Christ preached to them in 
accordance with God s sentence, bind 
them in the depths of the earth (Jub. 
V. 6). — I Ki^pij^ev = €VTj YY«Xt<raTO, cf. 
Luke iv. 8. Before Christ came, they 
had not heard the Gospel of God's Reign. 
Enoch's mediation failed. But at Christ's 
preaching they repented like the men of 
Nineveh ; for it is said that angels sub- 
jected themselves to Him (22, cf. v-noTav- 
o-eo-Oai, throughout the Epistle. — d tt e- 
idr\fr o.<T Lv iroTe, their historic dis- 
obedience or rebellion is latent in the nar- 
rative of Gen. vi. and expounded by 
Enoch ; cf. ii. 7 f., iii. i, iv. 17. In LXX 

dir. commonly = rebel ()T^^). — d "tt «- 
IeSex^to • • • |JiaKpo6vp.ia, 

God's long-suffering was waiting. I'he 
reading dira^ eleSe'xeTO is attractive, as 
supplying a reference to the present 
period of waiting which precedes the 
second and final Judgment (Rom. ii. 4, 
ix. 22). The tradition lengthens the 
period of irdpco-is (Rom. iii. 25) ; but 

l8 — 21. 



ivvevfiaTi • Iv <u Kal ^ rot? Iv <()uXaKTJ iri'cufia orii' iropeuScl? 19 

tKr^pu ^ec dirciOiicrao-ii' iro e ore dTreleSe'xcTO ^ i^ tou ©9 20 

fiaKpodup.ia ei* i^|x^pai9 Nwe Kara (TKCua^oficVTjs kciPcj 

TOU €is ^i' oXiyoi TOU Tc'oTi OKTw «(/uxai 8ieaw0T)crai' Si' 08a- 

Tos • 8 Kal ufjids dvTiTUTro" vuv aoSj^Ei pdima|yia ou trap- 21 

Kos d-rroOecns pu irou dXXd aut'ciSi^CTC ws dyaOiis eircpwrr] 

^ Dr. Rendel Harris would restore c v<ix after ev (^ nal (^), supposing that a scribe 
has blundered " in dropping some repeated letters" (a case of haplografhy). See 
Side-Lights on New Testament Research, p. 208. 

* Erasmus supposing an haplography read aira^ l^eS^X''"''* fo'' a'w«|€8«xeTo. 

St. Peter limits it by adding whil$ the Ark 
was being fitted out in accordance with 
Gen. If Adam's transgression be taken 
as the origin ot sin the long-suffering is 
still greater. The idea seems to be due 
to €vt6v|iT]6Tiv, / reflected, of the LXX, 
which stands for the unworthy anthropo- 
morphism of the Hebrew / repented in 
Gen. vi. 6. Compare for language Jas. 
V, 7 ; Matt. xxiv. 37 f. ; Luke xvii. 26 f. — 
els TJ V, sc. entered and. — 6X^701, 
K. r. X. St. Peter hints that here in the 
typical narrative is the basis of the 
disciple's question, «l 6X^701 ol vti>t,6^i- 
voi (Luke xiii. 23). — 6 ktw \{rvx(>'^i so 
Gen. vii. 7 ; tjf. = persons (of both sexes). 
cf. Acts ii. 41, etc. The usage occurs in 

Greek of all periods ; so XI^Q^ in He- 
brew and soul in English. — 8 t « o- « t)- 
o-av 81' vSaros, were brought safe 
through water. Both local and instru- 
mental meanings of 81 are contemplated. 
The former is an obvious summary of the 
whole narrative ; cf. also Sia to v8&jp 
(Gen. vii. 7). The latter is implied in 
the statement that the water increased 
and lifted up the ark {ib. 17 f.) ; though it 
fits better the antitype. So Josephus 
(Ant. L, iii. 2) says that " the ark was 
strong so that from no side was it worsted 
by the violence of the water and Noah with 
his household 8i.acr(d£cTai ". Peter lays 
stress on the water (rather than the ark as 
e.g., Heb. xi.) for the sake of the parallel 
with Baptism (Rom. vi. 3 ; cf. St. Paul's 
application of the Passage of the Red 
Sea, I Cor. x. i f.). 

Ver. 21. Baptism is generally the 
antitype of the deliverance of Noah. 
Christians pass through water (in both 
senses) to salvation ; in each microcosm 
are the sins which must be washed away 
and the remnant which is to be saved. 
Therefore the antitypical water saves us 
(8 = TO viSbip > 8£' vSaTos) being ov 
(rapKo?, K.T.Xu ; cf. Tit. iii. 5. — p o ir t i- 
(T p. a, if not an interpolation explains 

VOL. V. 5 

6 ovT. which corresponding to the (pre- 
existent) type {cf. Heb. ix. 24 the earthly 
temple is dvTiTvira tuv oXtjOivwv). The 
following definition by exclusion con- 
trasts Christian baptism with Jewish and 
pagan lustrations and also with the Deluge 
which was a removal of sin-fouled flesh 
from the sinners of old (iv. 6) ; the former 
affected the flesh and not the conscience 
(Heb. ix. 13 f.), the latter removed the 
flesh but not the spiritual defilement pro- 
ceeding from past sin. o-apKiSs and o-uvei- 
Sijo-eus stand before their belongings for 
emphasis and not merely in accordance 
with prevalent custom. For diroOeo-ic 
pvirov compare Isa. iv. 4 (sequel of the 
des^cription of the daughters of Zion which 
is used above iii. 3), Jehovah shall wash 
away their filth (tov pwov : LXX chival- 
rously prefixes of the sons and), i-m- 
puTT]p.a is explained by Oecumenius as 
meaning earnest, pledge as in Byzantine 
Greek law. Its use for the questions put 
to the candidate in the baptismal service 
(dost thou renou nee . ..?) is probably 
due to St. Peter here. In ordinary Greek 
(Herodotus and Thucydides) it = question 
(eir. having no force, as if implying a 
second additional question arising out of 
the first). Here the noun corresponds to 
the verb as used in Isa. Ixv. i, quoted by 
St. Paul in Rom. x. 20, lp,<{)avT)s eyevdpTjv 
Tois Ip^ ptj eirepwTbia-i = (i) a seeking, 
quest after God or (2) request addressed to 
God (supported by els ; cf. the formula 
evTeviis els to ^ao-^Xeus ovopa, a petition 
addressed to the king's majesty). In 
the latter case Peter will still be thinking 
as above and below of the disobedient 
spirits who presented a petition (IpuTTj- 
<ris) to God inspired by an evil con- 
science (see Enoch summarised above). 
At any rate o-uveiS. is probably subjective 
or possessive rather than objective geni- 
tive. The believer who comes to bap- 
tism has believed in Christ and repented 
of his past sins, renoixnc^s them and the 



III. 22. IV. 


2 2 fxa CIS ©^ St di'aoTdcre w? I& X8 os Io-tii' cc Sc |ta ©d^ iropeu- 

0€is els oupavbv vvorayiy riav auTu dyY^'^'^'' "h iiou- 

IV. I aiuc Kal Sucdpie we X6 ouc TraOoj'TOs ^ aapKi* koI ufieis ttjc 

ao TT]V ccKOiai' oirXicra aGe • on 6 iraQtitv aapKi ircirauTai 

2dftapTiais* els to p,T]K^Ti dkOpco irwi' ^Tri0u|xiais dXXd 

GeXr^fiaTi ©3 TOf iiri Xonroc iv orapKi ^io> aai xp(5»'0>' • 

3 dpKCTos Y^P ^ ° irapeXT]Xu0us XP*^*"^' ^ t6 PouXT]p.a tw" 

^ After Ocov the Vulgate adds degluttiens mortem ut vitae aeternae heredes efficia- 

2 The variant aiTo9av<JvTOs for iraWyTOs is a simple case of erroneous transcrip- 
tion which does not affect the sense. Codex Alexandrinus adds the Christian gloss 
viir^p r\^(iv. 

2 To o-apKi two secondary uncials prefix the preposition ev. 

* For afiaprCais most manuscripts have ajiaprias. 

^ After yap the secondary uncials supply ■qp.iv, and the first hand of Codex Sinai- 
ticus with many cursives vfiiv. 

® The secondary uncials add tow piov to xp<>*'05 and substitute 6cX.T]p.a for PovX- 

spirits which prompted them and appeals 
to God for strength to carry out this re- 
nunciation in his daily life. — S i* a v a o- t. 
with o-«?£t ; compare i Cor. xv. 13-17. 

Ver. 22. Christ went into Heaven — 
rind now is on God's right hand (Ps. ex. 
i) — when angels and authorities and 
powers had subjected themselves to Him 
in accordance with prophecy (Ps. viii. 7 ; 
if. Heb. ii. 8; 1 Cor. xv. 24 ff.). For 
the orders of angels see also Rom. viii. 
38; Eph. i. 21. Clearly they include 
the rebels of ver. 19 f. whom Jubilees 
calls the angels of the Lord (Jub. iv. 15) 
and Onkelos the sons of the mighty and 
their children (?) the giants. 

Chapter IV. — Ver. i. Christ having 
died to flesh, arm yourselves with the 
same thought that (or because) he that 
died hath ceased to sins. — ir a 6 «5 v t o ^ 
o- a p K {. Peter goes back to the start- 
ing point of iii. 18 in order to emphasise 
the import of the first step taken by 
Christ and His followers, apart now from 
the consequences. The new life implies 
death to the old. — t t| v a v t tj v Ivvoiov. 
e. only occurs once elsewhere in N.T., 
Heb. iv. 12, Twv lv9v|iT]orewv Kai evvoiwv 
KapSias, but is common in LXX of Pro- 
\ erbs ; compare {e.g.) Prov. ii. 11, evvoia 

oo-ia (nill^n' discernment) shall keep 
thee. Here it is the noun-equivalent of 
jjjpoveire 8 Kal Iv Xpierry (Phil. ii. i). 
Christ's thought [or purpose) which He 
had in dying is shared by the Christian : 
and it is defined by on, k.t.X. — 6 ir X £- 
<ra(r0c, sc. for the fight with sin and 

sinners whom you have deserted. — o t i 
. . . ap,apTiais. This axiom is 
better taken as explaining the same 
thought than as motive for otrX. St. 
Paul states it in other words, 6 yap a-n-o- 
davuv 8ESiKai(i)Tai diro tyjs ap-apxtas ; 
compare the death-bed confession of th: 
Jew, " O may my death be an atonement 
ior all the sins . . . of which I have been 
guilty against thee ". One dead — literally 
or spiritually — hath rest in respect of 
sins assumed or committed ; so Heb. ix. 
28 insists that after His death Christ is 
\(i>pi9 ap,apTias. iziitavTo.x. echoes irav- 
croTO) of iii. 10. In the Greek Bible the 
perfect passive occurs only once (Exod. 
ix. 34) outside Isa. i.-xxxix., where it is 

used three times to render jH^^i^ {cf- 
o-aPPanapds, Heb. iv. 9). The dative 
ap. is analogous to that following £tjv 
diroOaveiv (TraOtiv) ; the v.l. dpapTias 
is due to the common construction of 

Ver. 2. Christians who were baptised 
into Christ's death and resurrection (Rom, 
vi. 2-11) are not taken out of the world at 
once (John xvii. 15) ; they have to live 
in the flesh but not to the flesh, because 
they have been born not of the will of the 
flesh nor of man but of God (John i. 13). 
Their duty is to their new Father. — e i s 
T 6 . . . gives the result of on k.t.X. 
which must be achieved by, and is there- 
fore also the object of, the required orna- 

Ver. 3. The use of the rare apK6Tos 
indicates the saying which St. Peter here 




i6vC>v KaTcipyao'Oai • irciropcupi^i'ous iv dacXyeiais ^iriOujii 
ais oico4)XuYtais ko5 jaois ttotois Kal dOc julitois eiSuXoXaTpei 

TTjs aawTias dv'd)(uo-i" j3Xa(r4>ilp.u»'Tais ot ciTroSoSo-outri Xoyof 5 

applies, sufficient unto the day [that is 
past] iis evil. Compare Ezek, xliv. 6, 
iKavov(rd<i> ti|xiv dir& irao-uv rCtv avofxiwv 
v|j.«f. The detailed description of the 
evil follows the traditional redaction of 
the simple picture of absorption in the 
.ordinary concerns of life which Jesus is 
content to repeat (Matt. xxiv. 37, etc.). 
Eating, drinking, marrying were inter- 
preted in the worst sense to account for 
the visitation and become gluttony, 
drunkenness and all conceivable perver- 
sions of marriage ; see Sap. xiv. 21-27, 
followed by Rom. i. 29, etc. — t h . . . 
^T€^ropiv^l4vovs, from 2 Kings xvii. 
8,1 lirop€'u9T)crav tois SiKatuixaa'iv twv 
eQvotv. The construction is broken (for 
the will . . . to have been accomplished 
. . . for you walking) unless Kar. be taken 
as if middle to ireirop. as subject. — 
a<r e\y €ia\.%, acts of licentiousness 
(as in Polybius) ; so Sap. xiv. 26. Earlier 
of wanton violence arising out of drunk- 
enness (Demosthenes). — o Ivo4)Xvy£- 
a I s, wine-bibbtngs, Deut. xxi. 20, olvo<|>- 

\vyti = J»^^D- Noun occurs in Philo 
coupled with a7rXi]p(dT0i liriOvfjiiai. — 
K <o n o I s, revellings associated with 
alien rites, Sap. xiv. 26. For irdrois cf. 
iroTiipiov 8aip.(iv(ov, i Cor. x. 14 ff. — 
dOcp-Crois c tSuXoXarp ta IS, a 
Jew's description of current Pagan cults, 
which were often illicit according to 
Roman law. For a. cf. Acts x. 28, it is un- 
lawful for a yew to associate with a 
foreigner, and 2 Mace. vi. 5, vii. i (of swine 

Ver. 4. ^ V cj>, whereat, i.e. (i.) at 
your change of life (2 f.) explained below 
by p.'}) <rvvTp£x« • • -or (ii.) on 
which ground, because you lived as they 
did. — 1 6v(£ovTai, are surprised, as in 
ver. 12, where this use of ?• (elsewhere in 
N.T. entertain, except Acts xvii. 20, 
^evi(ovTa) is explained by is fcvov . .. 
I, <rv|xPaivovTos. Polybius has it in the 
same sense followed by dative, ace, Sia 
with ace. and kid with dative. So in Jose- 
phus Adam was surprised {^iv\.%6^ivov) 
that the animals had mates and he none. 
Ant, i. I, 2) and the making of garments 
surprised God (»6. 4). — or •ovTpex*^''' 
TWV, from Ps. 1. 18, LXX, if thou sawest 
a thief, <ruv€Tp€X€S avry, and with adul- 
terers thou didst set thy portion ; where 

V"^|^ consent has been rendered as if 
from W'^ run. It thus corresponds to 

St. Paul's <rvv£v8oKeiv (Rom. i. 32). — 
d o* (I) T t a s, profligacy. According to 
Aristotle d. is the excess of liberality, 
but is applied in complex sense to tovs 
dKpaT£is Kal els dKoXacrfav 8a7ravr]povs« 
Prodigality is in fact a destruction of one- 
self as well as one's property {Eth. Nic, 
iv. 13). — d a* c X Y c C a I s • • • itiJtois. 
Violence and lust are classed with 
drunkenness, which breeds and fosters 
them. d. is wanton violence as well as 
licentiousness. So the classic Christian 
example of the word is exactly justified ; 
see Luke xv. 13, the Prodigal Son squan- 
dered his substance, living dccoTus. — 
dvaxvo-iv, excess, overflow, properly 
of water (Philo ii. 508 f., description of 
evolution of air from fire, water from 
air, land from water). In Strabo (iii. i, 4, 
etc.) = estuary. St. Peter is still thinking 
of the narrative of the Deluge, which was 
the fit punishment of an inundation of 
prodigality. — ^ Xa<r<j)T)p.ovvT£s, put 
last for emphasis and to pave the way 
for ver. 5 in accordance with the saying, 
for every idle word {cf. Rom. iii. 8). The 
abuse is directed against the apostate 
heathens and implies blasphemy in its 
technical sense as opposed to the giving 
glory to God (ii. 12). 

Ver. 5. diroSwcrovaiv X<Syov, 
will render account — if of their 
blasphemy, cf. Matt. xii. 36, if of their 
do-(i>T(a (see note) cf. the steward of 
Luke xvi. 2. — t 4> «toC|x<i>s KpCvo- 
vTi, i.e., to Christ rather than to God 
(as i. 17). The Christians took over the 
Jewish doctrine that every man must 
give an account of his life (Rom. xiv. 10). 
As already Enoch (Ixix. 27 = John v. 22, 
27) taught that this judgment was dele- 
gated to Messiah. So St. Peter said at 
Caesarea this is he that hath been ap- 
pointed by God judge of living and dead 
(Acts X. 43). Compare Matt. xxv. 31 ff. 
for a more primitive and pictorial state- 
ment. The use of cTo(>s pro- 
bably represents T^jnj^ (see i. 5) i.e.. 
the future judge ; Greek readers would 
understand the imminent judge {cf. 
use of cToip.<i>s = ready, sure to come, 
Homer, //., xviii. 96, etc.). The v. I. 




6 Tw Itoi)ji(i)9 Kpcikomri ^ ^wcras Kal fCKpous cis toGto yap 
Kal y€ KpoLS €UT]yYeXiCT0T) i va KpiQSxri \l€v Kara dvQptL- 

7 TTOus (TapKt j^w o-i Se Kara 0^ TTi'eufiaTi. Trdv'Twi' 8e to te'Xos 

riYfiKev ' a(i)(|>po»'i^(7-a re ouv Kal vq^are eis irpocreuxas ' 
Sirpo iravToT ttji' eis eauroi^s ay'^'^'n' cktci'T] Ixoj'Tes on 

9 dydirif) KaXuTrret ttXtj 0os dfjiapTioij' • 4)iX6|€ voi els dXXri- 

' Codex Sinaiticus with the bulk of the manuscripts has exovTi Kpivai for Kpivovri. 

1. exovTi Kpivai softens the rugged 

Ver. 6. The judgment is imminent 
because all necessary preliminaries have 
been accomplished. There is no ground 
for the objection "perhaps the culprits 
have not heard the Gospel ". As regards 
the living, there is a brotherhood in the 
world witnessing for Christ in their lives 
and the missionaries have done their 
part. As regards the dead Christ de- 
scended into Hades to preach there and 
so was followed by His Apostles. And 
the object of this was that though the 
dead have been judged as all men are in 
respect of the flesh they might yet live as 
God lives in respect of the spirit. — e i s 
T o V T o, with a view to the final judg- 
ment or = IVO, K.T.X.. — V c K p o I s, to 
dead men generally, but probably as dis- 
tinct from the rebel spirits who were 
presumably immortal and could only be 
imprisoned. Oecumenius rightly con- 
demns the view, which adds in trespasses 
and sins or takes dead in a figurative 
sense, despite the authority of tf.g'., Augus- 
tine (Ep., 164, §§ i.i8). — €inyye- 
X£<r6Tj, the Gospel was preached, the 
impersonal passive leaves the way open 
for the development of this belief accord- 
ing to which not Christ only but also the 
Apostles preached to the dead. Hernias, 
Sim., ix. 165-167 ; CI. Al. Strom., vi. 
645 f. So was provision made for those 
who died between the descent of Christ 
and the evangelisation of their own 
countries. — tvo, k. t. \., that though 
ihey had been judged in respect of flesh as 
men are judged they might live in respect 
of spit it as God lives. The parallel be- 
tween the dead and Christ is exact (see 
iii. 20). Death is the judgment or sen- 
tence passed on all men (Ecclus. xiv. 17 
= Gen. ii. 17, iii. 19). Even Christians, 
who have died spiritually and ethically 
(Rom, viii. 10), can only hope wistfully to 
escape it (2 Cor. v. 2 ff.). But it is pre- 
liminary to the Last Judgment (Heb. ix. 
27), at which believers, who are quick- 
ened spiritually, cannot be condemned to 
the second death (Apoc. xx. 6). 

Ver. 7. But the end of all things and 
men has drawn nigh ; Christians also 
must be ready, watch and pray, as Jesus 
taught in the parable of Mark xiii. 34-37 
(c/". xiv. 38). — o- CO (j) p o V •»] <r ax e paral- 
lels do-eXy. €TriOvp.iais (ver. 3) cf 4 Mace, 
i. 31, temperance is restraint of lust. In 
Rom. xii. 3 St. Paul plays on the mean- 
ing of the component parts of <rft)-<j)pov€iv, 
cf. €ls o-wTTjpiav \|/vx«v above. — v r\ \jf- 
a T e, corresponds to oivo<|)Xvyiais kw|aois 
iroTois (ver. 3) ; cf. i. 13, v. 8. St. Paul 
also depends on parable of Luke xii. 42- 
46 in I Thess. v. 6 ff. — e Is nr p o<r ev- 
xds, the paramount duty of Christians 
is prayer especially for the coming of the 
Lord (Apoc. xxii. 20 ; Luke xi. 2 ; cf. 
iii. 7). 

Ver. 8, IT p o IT a V T 0) V, St. Peter em- 
phasises the pre-eminent importance of 
love of man as much as St. John ; cf i. 22. 
— lavTovs put for aXXi^Xovs in accord- 
ance with the saying thou shall love thy 
neighbour as thyself as much as with the 
contemporary practice. — o t i . . . o p. a- 
pTiwv, quotation of Prov. x. 12, love 
hides all transgressions which was ad- 
duced by Jesus (Luke vii. 47). The plain 
sense of the aphorism has been evaded 
by the LXX (iravTas xoiis prj <^i\ov€i- 
Kovvras KaXviTTti ({>i,\ia) and Syriac 
translators substitutes shame for love. 
The currency of the true version is at- 
tested by J as. V. 20, he that converted a 
sinner . . . KaXvilrei irX-i|9os dpapriuiv. 

Ver. 9. Hospitality is the practical 
proof of this love ; its practice was neces- 
sary to the cohesion of the scattered 
brotherhood as to the welfare of those 
whose duties called them to travel. 
The inns were little better than brothels 
and Christians were commonly poor. 
Chrysostom cites the examples of Abra- 
ham and Lot {cf Heb. xiii. 2). The 
united advocacy of this virtue was suc- 
cessful — so much so that the Didache has 
to provide against abuses such as Lucian 
depicts in the biography of Peregrinus 
" a Christian traveller shall not remain 
more than two or three days . . . if he 
wishes to settle ... is unskilled and 

6 — 12. 



Xous aceu yoYYUCTfiou • eitaaTos KaOus eXaPef y6i[ii(T\ka lo 

CIS eauTous aiiro 8ia Koi'oui'Tes <«»s KaXol oiKOkofioi ttoikiXtjs 

XaptTog 0u" ei Tis XaXei ws Xoyia 0u ' ei Tis SiaKo ii 

vci (lis e| laxuos ^s X° PTY^"- ^ ®5' '■•''''' ^^ iraaii' Soldl^TjTai 

6 ©I 8td Id X8 (S ecTTii' T) 86|a Kal to Kpdros cis tous ai 

wi'as Toil' aXuivtav d\L-r\v. dYainjToi, fit) lecij^eerSe tt] ek 12 

ofii" 7rupoj(7£(, irpos irctpa a\i,ov ujxif Teii'op.e i'T) ws ^ei'oC 

will not work he is a XpiaT^fiiropos, 
makes his Christian profession his mer- 
chandise." — a X X 17 X o V s, used despite 
cavTovs above and below, perhaps because 
the recipients of hospitality belong neces- 
sarily to other Churches. — a v € v 707- 
7 V o- (A o V, St. Peter guards against the 
imperfection of even Christian human 
nature. Ecclus. xxix. 25-28 describes 
how a stranger who outstays his welcome 
is first set to menial tasks and then driven 

Vv. 10 f. supplement the foregoing 
directions for the inner life of the Church 
and rest partly on Rom. xii. 6 (with 
simpler classification of gifts), partly on 
the conception of disciples as stewards 
{Luke xii. 42) serving out rations in God's 
house. — 8 laKovovvTES, in the widest 
sense (as SiaKovia in Acts vi. 1,4;! Cor. 
xii. 5) in accordance with the saying, 
the Son of Man came . , . to minister 
(Mark x. 45), which is interpreted here, 
as part of the pattern, by the addition of 
an object (only here and i. 12) ; cf. 2 
Cor. viii. ig, rfj x^piTi . . , xn SiaKOv- 
ovfjievji •£»<()* '^p.wv. — o Ikov^|jioi. The 
title is applied to all and not only to the 
governors as by St. Paul (1 Cor. iv. i ; 
Tit. i. 7) ; compare the question of St. 
Peter which precedes the source (Luke 
xii. 41 f.). 

Ver. II follows the primitive division 
of ministry into that of the word and 
that of tables (Acts vi. 2-4) ; compare 
prophecy and ministry (in narrower sense 
like SiaKovci here) of Rom. xii. 6. — 
X a X e X covers all the speaking described 
in I Cor. xii. 8, 10, to one by means of tlie 
spirit hath been given a word of wisdom, 
etc. . . . xiv. 6, 26. — (L s XcSyia Oiov 
(perhaps echoes Kara ttjv dvaXoYiav of 
Rom. xii. 6) as being God's oracles or as 
speaking God's oracles. The Seer is the 
model for the Christian preacher: Num. 
xxiv. 4, <^T)criv dKovwv Xdyt'O' 6«ov. His 
message is the particular grace of God 
which he has to administer like the pro- 
phets and evangelists, i. 10-12. — 
SiaKovcX includes all forms of the 

ministration of God's gifts other than 
those of speech — prim^ily almsgiving, 
hospitality and the like. — i v a, k. t. X. A 
liturgical formula such as this is neces- 
sarily capable of many special meanings. 
— €vira<riv may refer particularly to 
the gifts or their possessors — hardly to the 
Gentiles as Oec. suggests (Matt. v. i6) — 
but so to limit it would be a gratuitious in- 
justice to the author. The saying ev tovtw 
eSo^do-OT) 6 iraTi]p \>.ov Xva Kapir6v iroXvv 
<|>^ptiTe Ktti Yevqcreo-Oe lp.01 iiLadi\ral is 
sufficient to justify this appendix to the 
exhortation love one another in deed 
— 8 id Mtjotov XpicTov, through 
Jesus Christ through whom the spirit 
descended on each of you, Acts ii. 33, 
through whom you offer a sacrifice of 
praise (Heb. xiii. 15) ; cf. 8o^a|eTb) tov 
Oeov ev dv6|iaTt tovtw. — w . . . The in- 
sertion of lo-Tiv changes the doxology to 
a statement of fact and thus supports the 
interpretation of w as referring of the 
immediate antecedent Jesus Christ. Al- 
ready He possesses the glory and the 
victory ; realising this His followers en- 
dure joyfully their present suffering and 

Ver. 12. ^•yaiTTjToC marks the be- 
ginning of the third division of the 
Epistle in which Peter having cleared 
the ground faces at last the pressing 
problem. — 5 eviJeaOe, be surprised, as 
in ver. 4. — t y\ iv iiiaiv irvpuo'et, 
the ordeal which is in your midst or 
rather in your hearts. — e v vi |i t v, cf. 
TO Iv tip.iv iroffjLviov (v. i) but the test 
is internal — in what frame of mind will 
they meet it ? Will they regard it as a 
strange thing or as a share in Christ's 
sufferings, part of the pattern ? — it v p- 
to or € I. This conception of suffering as 
a trial not vindictive is stated in Jud. 
viii. 25, 27, IkcCvovs iTrvpoxrcv els Ito- 
<T\Lhv Kap8(as avTwv ; compare Zach. 
xiii. ig, TTvpucro) aiiTOVS us irvpoviTOi 
dpYvpiov, Prov. xxvii. 21, XRVO"^ iriJpwtrts 
parallels but a man is tried . . . ir. also 
occurs in the sense of blasting, Amos iv. 
g ; Apoc. xviii. 9, 18. 




13 ufiii' (TUfi Paii'orros * dXXd Ka0o KOicumrc T019 tou Xu 
■n-a0r]fia(TiK X^^^P^ ^^ ^^°^ ''**'• ^^ ^t ^'"'0'^* Xuvj/ei ttjs SoC^S 

14 auTou )(apT)T€ dyaXXioSiiE^oi ' 6i 6>'ciSii^e<T0e iv 6v6 (xari 
Xu fxaKdpioi oTi TO TT]s 86|tjs ^ ical to tou Qt -irceOfia c<})' ufias 

15 dcoTraoeTai ■ ^ jat) Y<ip Tis ujjiwi' iraorx^Tw ws <t>o»'€us t] kX^ttttjs 

''■ After Sd^Tjs the first hand of Codex Sinaiticus with the consent of many manu- 
scripts adds Kal Tfjs Svvapicus avirov. 

^ At the end of the verse the secondary uncials add Kara (ttv avTOvs p\a(r<|)T]( 
xai Kara 8c vfjias So^a^cTai. 

Ver. 13. K ad 6, so far as, i.e., so far 
as your suffering is undeserved and for 
Christ's name. — icoivcovetTe . . . 
ira0ij|Aoo-iv, ye share the sufferings 
of the Messiah. The dative after k. 
usually denotes the partner ; here the 
thing shared as in Rom, xv. 27 ; i Tini. 
V. 22 ; 2 John n ; and in LXX ; Sap. vi. 
23 ; 3 Mace. iv. 11. This idea is ex- 
pressed even more strongly by St. Paul 
avTavairXiipu ra -uarTcpTJixara rwv 6X1- 
ij/£o>v Tov Xpio-Tov (Col. i. 24). It is 
derived from such sayings as the disciple 
is as his Master (Matt. x. 24 f.) — the sons 
of Zebedee must drink his cup, be bap- 
tised with his baptism (Mark x. 38 f.). 
To suffer in Christ's name is to suffer as 
representing Christ and so to share His 
sufferings. — i va k. t. X., from Matt, v, 12, 
XaipcTC Kai aYaXXiacrOe. But St. Peter 
postpones the exultation. St. James (v. 
10) follows Jesus in appealing to the 
pattern of the prophets. diroKaXv- 
i(» e t, the final revelation represents an 

original wordplay ^73 ^" *^^ quoted 

d7aX\ia>ft,evoi = 7^3' 

Ver. 14. The Beautitude, (xaKapioi 
. . . oTav ovciSicruo'iv evcKev k\Lov 

is supported by prophecy which referred 
originally to the root of Jesse. Both are 
partially paraphrased for sake of clear- 
ness. For Iv 6vo|xaTi ; cf. Mark ix. 41, 
ev 6v(5p.aTt on Xpicrrov £«TTe. For the re- 
proach cf. Heb. xiii. 13, let us come out 
to him bearing His reproach, with Ps. 
Ixxxix., 50 remember Lord the reproaches 
(6vet.Siarft.(i>v LXX) of thy servants. — oxi 
. . . dvairaverai, quoted from a 
current Targum of Isa. xi. i f., a branch 

(l!Ji • LXX, avOos : Targ. Messiah) 
from his roots shall grow aud there shall 
rest upon him the spirit of fehovah. An 
elaborate description of this spirit fol- 
lows, which Peter summarises by to tt]? 
S(i|T]9. The Glory is a name of God in 
the Targums (so John xii. 41 = Isa. vi. 

.«> ; Onkelos has 1^ t^^p'^ ^o' '') ^"'^ 

its use here is probably due to the juxta- 
position of Isa. xi. 10, his rest shall be 
glorious. It is not impossible that Kal 
tov fleov is an insertion by first or later 
scribes for the benefit of Greek readers. 
Ver. 15. Y"^P- ^ assume that you 
suffer in Christ's name as representmg 
Him and bearing only the reproach which 
attaches to it per se. The crimes of 
which slanderers had accused Christians 
are given in the order of probability and 
are selected as belonging to the pattern. 
Christ Himself was implicitly accused 
thereof by His persecutors and acquitted 
of each by independent witnesses, as the 
Gospels are at pains to show. He suf- 
fered the fate from which the murderer 
was preserved (Acts iii. 14) by the peti- 
tion of the Jews ; shared it with thieves 
or brigands, being delivered up to the 
secular arm as a malefactor (John xviii. 
30). Such slanders the Christian must 
rebut for the credit of his Lord ; that he 
must not be guilty of such crimes goes 
without saying. — d XXoTptcirtcrKO- 
ir o s is distinguished from the preceding 
accusations by the insertion of is ; it is 
also an addition to the pattern of Christ, 
unless stress be laid on the sneer, He 
saved others. The word was apparently 
coined to express the idea of the itinerant 
philosopher of whatever sect current 
among the unphilosophical. Epictetus 
defends the true Cynic against this very 
calumny ; he is a messenger sent from 
Zeus to men to show them concerning 
good and evil (Arrian, iii. 22, 23) . . . 
a spy of what is helpful and harmful to 
men ... he approaches all men, cares 
for all {ib. 81) . . . neither meddler — 
ircpUpYos — nor busybody is such an one; 
for he is not busy about alien things — 
to. aXXcSxpia iroXvirpayfJiovei — when he 
inspects the actions and relations of 
mankind — orav xa dvdpcdiriva lirio-KOTr'n 
{ib. 97). This zeal for the welfare of 
others was certainly the most obvious 
charge to bring against Christians, who 
indeed were not always content to 

13 — 19- V. I. 



T) KaKOTTOio; fi (OS dX XoTpteiriaKoiros • ci 8e (I»s Xpeioriacos 1 6 
fiT] ai<T\uviarQ<ii So|a^£ tu 8e TOf Of iv tw ©I'd jJiaTi ^ tcmJtw 
OTi 6 Kai pos ToO ap^avQai to Kptfia airo tou olkou tou 1 7 

QQ 61 8e irpwTOi' d iro i^fxui' ti to t^os Tuir dirciQouvT(t}v 

TW TOU 0u euayycXLa) • Kal 6i 6 SiKaio^ jxoXis CTWi^CTai 6 Se l8 

do-ePTjS Ktti d|xapTa)Xos ivou <j)ai'6iTat • wo-re ical oi irdcr- 1 9 

XOi'Tcs KaTa TO 6e'\'r]fji,a too Qd tticttw ktio-ttj irapariQeaQw 

aai' rds vj/uxds iv d YaOoiroua. irpeaPu rcpoug ouv iv ujiii' V. 

1 The secondary uncials have |x^pci for dvofiaTi. 

testify 6y good behaviour without word. 
St. Paul heard of some at Thessalonica, 
^T]S^v cpYa^ofi£vovs dXXci irEpiEpya^o- 
filvovs (2 Thess. iii. ii). Women gener- 
ally if unattached were prone to be not 
merely idle but meddlers speaking- what 
they should not {i Tim. v. 13). So St. Pt;ter 
(cf. I Cor. X. 27) has emphasised the duty 
of all Christians — even of the wives of 
heathen husbands — to preach Christianity 
only by example and now deprecates 
their acquiescence in what some might 
reckon a title of honour. The fate of 
Socrates is the classical example of the 
suffering of such ; and later one phil- 
osopher was scourged and another be- 
headed for denunciation of the alliance 
of Titus with Berenice (Dio Cassius, 
Ixvi. 15). Punishment of this offence 
would depend on the power of the other 
man concerned who, if not in authority, 
would naturally utilise mob-law like De- 
metrius (Acts xix.). 

Ver. 16. ci hk ws xP''*'"''''*''^^' 
if one suffers as a follower of Christ, in 
the name of Christ (14). See on Acts ix. 
26 and Introduction. — p, tj a l <r x ■" >" «'- 
<r 9 w echoes the saying, Whosoever shall 
be ashamed of me and my 'mords of him 
also the Son of Man shall be ashamed 
zuhen He cometh in the glory : so St. 
Paul says / suffer thus but am not 
ashamed (2 Tim. i. 12 ; cf. 8). — 8 o | o- 
£«T<i) Tov 9 i6v, by martyrdom if 
necessary, for this sense the phrase has 
acquired already in John xxi. 19. — iv t <a 
ivofxari r o v t a = Mark ix. 41. 

Ver. 17. That Judgment begins at the 
House of God is a deduction from the 
vision of Ezek. ix. (cf. vii. 4, the Kaip<is 
has come); the slaughter of Israelites 
who are not marked with Tau, is or- 
dained by the Glory of the God of Israel ; 
the Lord said, airb tojv ayltitv p,ov 
aplaoOe and the men began at (diro) the 
elders who were within in the house. 
The new Israel has precedence like the 
old even in condemnation ; cf. Rom. ii. 

8 f., Tols . . . dir€i6ovo-i t-q dXT|6eiai 
. . . opyT] eirl . . . v|'vx''l*' • • • ''ovSaiov 
t£ irpciTov. — T ^ . . . € -u a Y Y e X I a>, cf. 

Mark i. 14. The Gospel or Word, which 
God spake in a SoJi, succeeds to the law 
as the expression of the will against 
which all but the remnant (Ez. I.e.) rebel. 

Ver. 18. To the summary excerpt 
from Ezekiel Peter appends the Septu- 
agint version of Prov. xi. 31, which is 
followed by the Syriac and partially by 
the Targum : The original — according 
to the Masoretic text — is Behold or tf 
the righteous will be punished on the 
earth : how much more the wicked and the 
sinner. The Greek, which probably re- 
presents a 'different Hebrew text, is more 
apt to his purpose and to the teaching of 
Jesus, whiih provoked the question, Who 
then can be saved (Mark x. 24-26). 

Ver. 19. So let even those who suffer 
in accordance with the will of God with 
a faithful Creator deposit their souls in 
well- doing. The Christian must still fol- 
low the pattern. It is God's will that he 
share Christ's sufferings in whatever 
degree ; let him in this also copy Christ, 
who said. Father into thy hands I com- 
mit my spirit (Luke xxiii. 46 = Ps. xxxi. 
6) and bade Plis disciples lose their souls 
that they might find them unto life 
eternal. With this teachint^' Peter com- 
bines that of the Psalmist which is as- 
sumed by Jesus ( 25 ff.), Jehovah 
knows His creature. He the God of 

faithfulness (jl^t^ 7t^' ^^- ^-c-) •» 
the faithful Creator to whom the soul 
He gave and redeemed (Ps. I.e.) may , 
confidently return. 

Chapter V. — Ver, i. o v v, therefore 
— since your suffering is according to 
God's will and calls only for the normal 
self-devotion, which Christ required of 
His disciples — go on with the duties of 
the station of life in which you are called. 
— IT peo-pvTt'povs, not merely older 
men as contrasted with younger (ver. 5), 




TrapaKaXu 6 aufXTrpe a^uTcpos Kal fidprus rCtv toG Xu 

ira9T)fid T«f 6 Kal ttjs |xeXXou otjs airoKaXBirreaGai 

2 8o|t)s Koii'ui'os iroi jid^aTE tS ck ujalk iroifi»'io>' tou ©6 p.Ti 

av'ttyKaCTTois dXXol c koucio); ptrj 8e alaxpo KcpScis dXXd 

but elders, such as had been appointed by 
Paul and Barnabas in the Churches of 
Southern Asia (Acts xiv. 23). The col- 
lective Twv kX^ipcov (ver. 3) and the tx- 
hortation, shepherd the flock (ver. 2) prove 
that they are the official heads of the 
communities addressed. Similarly St. 
Paul bade the elders of the Church (Acts 
XX. 17) at Ephesus take heed to them- 
selves and to all the flock in which the 
Holy Spirit appointed yon overseers. The 
use of the term in direct address here 
carries with it a suggestion of the natural 
meaning of the word and perhaps also of 
the early technical sense, one of the first 
generation of Christians Both Jews and 
Gentiles were familiar with the title 
which was naturally conferred upon 
those who were qualified in point of 
years ; the youthful Timothy was a 
marked exception to the general rule 
(i Tim. iv. 12). — I v i |i i v. Peter does 
not address them as mere officials, jomj- 
elders, but prefers a vaguer form of ex- 
pression, elders who are among you y-ff^^ 
TO ev {((jiiv TToifjiviov, which also evades' 
any impairing of the principle, ye are 
Christ's. — 6 o-vnTrpeo-p-urcpos.. . 
Koivwvdg. This self-designation justi- 
fies Peter's right to exhort them. He is 
elder like them, in all senses of the word. 
If their sufferings occupy their mind, he 
was witness of the sufferings of Christ ; 
of his own, if any, he does not speak. 
He has invited them to dwell rather on 
the thought of the future glory and this 
he is confident of sharing. — p. d p t v s 
. . . irad'r)(x.dTci>v. Such experience 
was the essential qualification 01 an 
Apostle in the strict sense ; only those 
who were companions of the Twelve in 
all the time from John's baptism to the 
Assumption or at least witnesses of the 
Resurrection (Acts i. 22) were eligible ; as 
Jesus said, the Paraclete shall testify and 
do you testify because ye are with Me 
from the beginning (John xv. 27). That 
he speaks of the sufferings and not of the 
resurrection which made the sufferer 
Messiah, is due partly to the circum- 
stances of his readers, partly to his own 
experience. For him these sufferings had 
once overshadowed the glory ; he could 
sympathise with those oppressed by per- 
secution and reproach, who understood 
now, as little as he then, that it was all part 

of the sufferings of the Messiah. He had 
witnessed but at the last test refused to 
share them. — 6 ...koivuvos. Peter 
will share the future glory which Christ 
already enjoys for it was said to him, 
Thou shall follow afterward (John xiii. 
36). St. Paul has the same idea in a 
gnomic form, etirep o-uvirdirxoji.ev iva koi 
crvvSo|a(r6o>|X6v (Rom. viii. 17 ; cf. 2. Cor. 
iv, 10) which presupposes familiarity with 
the teaching of the risen Jesus that the 
Christ must suffer and so enter into His 
glory, Luke xxiv. 46 ; cf. i. 5, 13, iv. 13. 
Ver. 2. The command laid upon St. 
Peter, shepherd my sheep (John xxi. 19) 
became the charge delivered to succeed- 
ing elders {v. Acts xx. 28) and a familiar 
description of the Christian pastor (e.g., 
I Cor. ix. 7) who must copy the gooii 
Shepherd who obeyed where His prede- 
cessors fell short (Ez. xxxiv.). — t 6 e v 
■ujAiv iroifjiviov TOW 6cov. Chris- 
tendom is God's flock among you — not 
yours but God's. — d va-y k a o"t ws. As 
a matter of constraint contrasted with 
cKOvcricos, willingly — not as pressed men 
but as volunteers. In times of persecu- 
tion lukewarm elders might well regret 
their prominence ; hence the need for 
the aphorism if any aspire to oversight 
he desireth a noble work (i Tim. iii. i). 
So of gifts of money St. Paul requires 
that they be jjit) €| dvd7KT]S (2 Cor. ix. 7). 
It is possible that St. Paul's words, 
avdyKi] |jLoi ciriKciTai, (i Cor. ix. 16) had 
been wrested. — a lo-xpoKcpSus. If 
the work be voluntarily undertaken, the 
worker has a reward according to St. 
Paul (i Cor. ix. 16 f.). Base gainers arc 
those who wish to make gain whence the}" 
ought not (Aristotle, Nic. Eth., v. i, 43). — 
Tpo6vp.(»s. The adverb occurs in 2 
Chron. xxix. 34, LXX, where the Levites 
eagerly purified themselves ; Heb. the 
Levites upright of heart to . . . The verb 
irpoOvp-civ is used in Chron. to render 

llli offer freewill offerings. 

Ver 3. Application of the saying, the 
reputed rulers of the nations lord it (Karo- 
KvpievoTJO-iv) over them . . . not so among 
you ; but whosoever would he great among 
you he shall be your servant . . .for the 
Son of Man came . . . to serve (Mark x. 
42 f.). — t civ KXi]pa)v, the lots, i.e., 
the portions of the new Israel who fall to 




irpoOu fiws ^ Kal (|>af€p(o6€V to? toG dpxnroificj'os KOfjucTaOe 4 
Tov dfjiapa" Tiv'ov tt)9 86|t]S o^tc <|)avo>' • ofiioius veoJ Tcpoi 5 

utroTayTjTe irpe apurcpots • irdKres 8e dXXi]Xois TT]f Tairei 

fo<|)poaun(ji' eyKop, PwcraffGe '^ on 0f uire pT]<j>d»'Ois di'Ti- 
rda CT€Tai xaTrcn'Ois 8e SiSwaii' X^^P'''' ' TaTrei »'w0t)tc 6 

^ Codex Vaticanus is alone in omitting verse 3, (iT)8' us KaraKvpievovTcs riSv 
xXiipwv dXXa Tviroi Yiv<Jp.£voi tov iroip.viov. 

■^ For the unfamiliar E-yKop^bio-acrde two cursives read eYKoXirto-acrOe, whence 
insinuate of the Vulgate. 

jour care as Israel fell to that of Jehovah 
(Deut. ix. 29, ovToi Xaos tov Kal kXtjpo; 
<roij). The meaning is determined by 
the corresponding tot) iroi^viov and sup- 
ported by the use of irpoo-eKXiipcoOTjaav 
were made an additional portion in Acts 
xvii. 4. So it is said of God's servant that 
He KXtipovop.ijo'ei iroXXovs (Isa. liii. 12). 
The Vulgate has dominantes in cleris, 
and Oecumenius following the usage of 
his time explains the phrase likewise as 
equivalent to to itpov <n5<rTTj|xo, i.e., 
the inferior clergy. — t viroi yeivdp.- 
e V o I, i.e., as servants according to Mark 
l.c. ; cf. I Thess. i. 7 ; i Tim. iv. 12. 

Ver. 4. (j>avcp<i)6evTOS tov 
dpxi'Totp.evos, at the manifestation 
of the chief Shepherd, i.e., Christ, dpxt- 
iroifjfrjv is the equivalent of 6 iroi|iTiv 6 
p-eyas of Heb. xiii. 20, being formed on the 

analogy of dpxiepetJS = Sf^H JHD ) 
else it occurs only as Symmachus' render- 
ing of "IpJ (LXX, VWICT18) in 2 Kings 

iii. 4 and in a papyrus. Cf. appeal to 
Jehovah, 6 iroip-aivuv t^v 'la-paT)X . . . 
ejx<f)dvTi6t of Ps. Ixxx. I. — T o V . . . 
trT£'<|>avov = the crown of life which 
He promised (Jas. i. 12). The metaphor 
is probably derived from the wreath of 
fading flowers presented to the victor in 
the games (cf. dpapavTivov) ; but it may 
also be due to the conception of the 
iuture age as a banquet, at which the 
f,'uests were crowned with garlands (Sap. 
ii. 8, aTcxj/bifxcOa pdSuv KdXv|iv irplv {j 
p,apavdT)vai). See on i. 4. 

Ver. 5. vewTcpoi, the younger 
members of each Church were perhaps 
more or less formally banded together on 
the model of the «ruvo8oi tojv vcuv, which 
are mentioned in inscriptions as existing 
distinct from the Ephebi in Greek cities, 
especially in Asia Minor (Ziebarth Die 
Griechische Vereine, 111-115). Compare 
the modern Guilds and Associations of 
Young Men. In i Tim. iv. i, these 
matural divisions of elders and youngers 

are also recognised. — iravTcs 8^ . . . 
Elders must serve ; youngers sub- 
mit. May all be lowly-mindtd towards 
one another — there is no need to add 
detailed commands. — eyKotLpato-a- 
(T 6 e is explained by Oecumenius as 
EvciXT]o-a(r6e -TrEpi^dXeo'dc (wrap your- 
selves in, put round you), so the com- 
mand corresponds to IvSvcao-Oe . . . 
TOTr£ivo<{)poo-ovT]v of Col. iii. 12. But the 
choice of this unique word must have 
some justification in associations which 
can only be reconstructed by conjecture. 
The lexicographers (Hesychius, Sindas, 
etc.) give K(ip.pos Koo-vp^os and eyKop,- 
podpa as synonyms. Pollux explains 
eyKop-P. as the apron worn by slaves to 
protect their tunic ; so Longus, Pasto- 
ralia, ii. 35 f., in "casting his apron, 
naked he started to run like a fawn ". 
Photius (Epistle 156) takes George Metro- 
politan of Nicomedia to task for his sug- 
gestion that it was a barbarous word : 
" You ought to have remembered Epi- 
charmus and Apollodorus . . . the 
former uses it frequently and the latter 
in the * Runaway ' (a comedy) says tt)v 
lirupiav irTvlaiTO 8i'7rXfjv av<i>0ev dvcKop- 
P«<rdpir|v." But the LXX of Isa. iii. 18 
has Tovs KO<rvp(3ovs = front-bands and 
Symmachus to c7KopPup.aTa in ver. 20 
for bands or sashes. Peter is therefore 
probably indebted again to this passage 
and says gird yourselves with the humility 
which is the proper ornament of women. 
If the word be taken in this sense a 
reference to John xiii. 4 ff., Taking a 
napkin He girded Himself, may be reason- 
ably assumed — Oeos • • . x°- P '■^ — 
Prov. iii. 34, LXX (Beds being put for 
Kvpios, which to a Christian reader meant 
Christ) ; the Hebrew text t;ives scoffers 
he scoffs at but to the humble he shows 
favour. The same quotation is em- 
ployed in similar context by St. James 
(iv. 6) ; the devil (see below) is the 
typical scoff^er. 

Ver. 6. T air t LV il>6 xfTf ovv echoes 
the exhortation and its accompanied 




ouv uTTo TT)~ Kparaicif X^^P** '''**" ®® "''''' "H'Ois oil/wCTif] Ij* 

7 Kaipw • Trdcrac tt)»' fie pijAfaK up.wi' cTTipEi \|/ai'Tes ctt' auToi' 

8 OTi auTw jxeXei irepl 6|ioi~ i'T)v|/aTe yp'HY"?'!*'* """^ ° drri- 
SiKOS Sid^oXos us \iu)f (u puop.e^'os ircpiiraTel 

9 ^TfjTwi' KaxaTrieii' w d^TioTTjTC orepeol ttj Trtorei elSores to. 

aurd Twi' Tra0T)fjLaTu rfj iv tw K6a|i.u> ufiw d8eX4>OTT]Tt 

lo eiriTC Xei<T0e • 6 8e ©I irdar]? )('^P'''''05 ° KaXeaas u fidS 

scripture in ver, 5 — obey in order that the 
promise (Luke xiv. 11) may be fulfilled 
for you, he that humbleth himself shall 
be exalted {sc. by God). So too St. James, 
subject yourselves therefore to God (iv. 7). 
— T Tiv Kparaiav x<^P*>~ God's 
mighty hand is a common O.T. expres- 
sion ; see Exod. iii. 19, etc. for con- 
nexion with deliverance and especially 
Ez. XX. 33 f., cv X'*'P*' Kparaiqi Kai . . . 
iv Ovfxu Kiyiy^iva ^acriXcvo-w £({*' '"H-^^> 
Ver. 7. TTiv iie'pifxvav . . . aii- 
t6v comes from Ps. Iv. 12, liripi\j/ov eiri 
Kijpiov TTjv |icpip.vdv <TOv, which is the 
source of part of the Sermon on the 
Mount (Matt. vi. 25 ff.). — on . . • 
tr p. u V substituted for Kal avT09 <re Sia- 
dp£i{;Ei of Ps. I.e. in accordance with 
Jesus' amplification and application of 
the metaphor. God cares for His flock 
as the hireling shepherd does not (ov 
(xeXei avT^ iTEpl Tuv irpo^aTuv, John 
X. 13). 

Ver. 8. vi]ij»aT€YpTj-yopi]<raT€, 
cf, i. 13, iv. 7. So St. Paul, YPlYop^f***' 
Kal vi](|>(i)|ACV . . . iqp,epas ovtes vij4>u)*ev 
(i Thess. V. 6, 8) drawing upon the com- 
mon source in the Parables of the House- 
holder and Burglar, etc. (Matt. xxiv. 
42 ff.) which set forth the sudden com- 
ing of the Kingdom. — 6 dvT(8i.Kos 
vp.uv Sid^oXos, your adversary , 
Satan — d. (piopevly adversary in law suit) 
is used in the general sense of enemy in 
LXX. Of the description of Satan, as a 
roaring lion comes from Ps. xxii. 14, ws 
Xcuv 6 dpird^uv Kal wpvop,Evos ; walketh 
from Job i, 7, where Satan (6 SidpoXos 
LXX, Sardv, Aq.) irepicXOuv ttjv yr\v Kal 
ejAirEpi'ira'niO'as tt|V vtt* ovipavbv irdp- 
€ip,t ; seeking to devour identifies him with 
Hades the lord of death; cf. Prov. i. t2, 
where the wicked say of the righteous 
man, Karairiuitcv avrov u<rir€p ^8t)9 
JwvTa. The present sufferings of the 
Christians are his handiwork as much as 
the sufferings of Jesus (i Cor. ii. 6, 8) and 
of Job. 

Ver. g. u avTiorri\Tt. St. James 
adds the same exhortation to his quota- 
tion of Prov. The connexion is not 

obvious but is perhaps due to the tradi- 
tional exposition of V^ = viircpTicfxivots 

as referring to the Devil and his children. 
As God ranges Himself against scoffers, 
so must Christians resist the Devil who 
is working with their slanderous tempers. 
Oecumenius and Cramer's Catena both 
appeal to an extract from Justin's book 
against Marcion (?) which is preserved 
in Irenasus and quoted by Eusebius. 
The main point of the passage is that 
before Christ came the devil did not dare 
to blaspheme against God, for the pro- 
phecies of his punishment were enig- 
matic ; but Christ proclaimed it plainly 
and so he lost all hope and goes about 
eager to drag down all to his ov/n des- 
truction. OTTCpeol TTJ TTlO-TEl, TOck 

like in your faith, abbreviation of etti- 
p.eveT€ T-jj irtffTei TeOefieXiuijAevoi Kal 
cSpaioi, Col. i. 23 ; cf. TO <7Tep€up.a tt]s 
els XpitTTov irio-Teo)?, Col. ii. 5 and Acts 
xvi. 5, at . . . eKKXTicriai lo-repeovvTO t'jj 
irio-Tei. The metaphorical use of ctt. in 
a good sense is not common. Peter 
perhaps thinks of the o-reped -jrerpa 

(■^•^^j) of Isa. Ii. I and warns them against 
his own failing. — e IStires . . . eiri- 
TeXei<r6ai. The rendering (first sug- 
gested by Hoffmann) knowing how to 
pay (that you are paying) the same tax of 
sufferings as the brotherhood in the world 
is paying seems preferable to the com- 
mon knowing that the same kinds of 
sufferings are being accomplished for (by) 
... it assumes the proper idiomatic force 
of eTTiTeXeiaOai and accounts for rd avrd 
(sc. Te'Xrj) followed by the genitive. 
Xenophon who is a good authority for 
Common Greek uses I. thus twice: — 
Mem. iv. 8. 8, " but if I shall live longer 
perhaps it will be necessary to pay the 
penalties of old age (rd tov Y'>ip<'9 t'Tt- 
TcXeio-Oai) and to see and hear worse 
..." Apol, 33 nor did he turn effeminate 
at death but cheerfully welcomed it and 
paid the penalty (lireTtXecraTo). For the 
dative with to avTo same as, cf. \ Cor. xi. 
5, Iv Kal TO aiiTO Tf) e|vpT)p.£VTg. 
Ver. 10. Your adversary assails you. 

7 — 12. 



CIS T^f aicji'ioi' auToO StJ^a*' ei* t^ Xw oXiyoi' Tra9<5>'Tas au 

Tos KarapTicrei ar»]pi ^et CT0€k'o5tr6t • auTU to Kpdros €19 1 1 

Tous ai wi'tts dfiT^f. 8ia CiX ^afoG ufjiii' too iriaToi" 12 

d8cX<{>ou (1)$ Xoyi^o juiat. 81 oXiyoJ^ lypaij/a irapaKaXut' Kal 

^TTl {XapTUpUP TaUTT]!' ctt'oi dXTjGrj X'^P'*' '''O'' ®® ^^5 T)f 

but God has called you to His eternal 
glory ; first for a little you must suffer, 
His grace will supply all your needs. 
Ver. 9 is practically a parenthesis ; 6 
6t6^ stands over against 6 dvriSiKos (ver. 
8) as 8^ shows. — 6 k a\ia-as, for the 
promise of sustenance implied in the call- 
ing ; cf. I Thess. v. 23 f. ; i Cor. i. 8 f. — 
^v XpKTTw goes with 6 . . . 8<5|av ; 
God called them in Christ and only as 
they are in Christ can they enter the 
glory; cf. 2 Cor. v. 17-19, et ns tv 

XpKTT^i KaiVT) KTl<riS • . . 0€OS tJv £V 

XpioTW KocTfiov KaraWdo'O'uv kavrio. — 
6\iy ov iraOovras, after you have 
suffered for a little while. The same 
contrast between temporary affliction and 
the eternal glory is drawn by St. Paul in 
2 Coi. iv. 17, rh irapavTiKa eXatfip^v t'^s 
0Xit|/e(i)S . . . aluviov ^dpos Sd^T]s Karcp- 
Yd^eTai, where in addition to the anti- 
thesis between eternal glory and tempor- 
ary suffering the weight of glory (play on 

meanings of root *^p"i) is opposed to 
the lightness of tribulation. — avrds has 
the force of irio-ris 6 KaXwv (i Thess. 
V. 24). — K aTapT^o-ei, shall perfect. 
When Simon and Andrew were called to 
leave their fishing and become fishers of 
men James and John were themselves 
also in a boat mending — KarapTitovra; — 
their nets (Mark i. 16-19). The process 
was equally necessary in their new fish- 
ing and the word was naturally applied 
to the mending of the Churches or indi- 
vidual Christians who by their good be- 
haviour must catch men (see e.g., i Cor. 
i. 10). Only God can fully achieve this 
mending of all shortcomings ; cf. Heb. 
xiii. 21. — (rTT)pt|ci, shall confirm; cf. 
2 Thess. ii. 17, etc.; when the Kingdom 
of Heaven was stormed the stormers 
needed confirmation (Acts xviii. 23). 
This was the peculiar work assigned to 
St. Peter — thou having converted con- 
firm — oTTijpio-ov — the brethren (Luke xxii. 
32). — o'dcvwo'ci is only apparently 
unique, being equivalent to Ivurxvaci or 
8vvap,u(r€i (Hesychius) cf. Col. i. 11, kv 
TrdcTT) Suydfici 8vvap.wp,€voi Kara, to Kpd- 
ros Ttjs Sd^T)? aviTOv and Heb. xi. 34, 
^8vvap.w6i)(rav diro daOcvcias (parallel to 
AXi-yov iraS. above). 

Ver. II. Liturgical formula, adapted 

in iv. II (^o-Tiv), which occurs in i Tim. 
vi. 16 ; John 25 ; Apoc. i. 6 ; v. 13. 

Vv, 12-14. Postscript in St. Peter's 
own handv^aiting, like Gal. vi. 11-18 
(i8£TC iri]XiKois vp,iv Ypd|jip,a(riv eypavj/a 
"ni *l*'n X^i-pO; ^ Thess. iii. 17 f. (6 
d<nra(rp.o9 Tfj Ififj X*''P^ Fla-uXov). — 8 t d 
ZiXovavov, by the hand of my scribe 
S. ; so Ignatius writes 8id Bvppov to the 
Philadelphians (xi. 2) and the Smyrnaeans 
(xii. i), but wishes to keep him with himself 
(Eph. ii. i). That S. was also the bearer 
of the Epistle is indicated by the recom- 
mendation which follows. There does 
not seem to be any good reason for re- 
fusing to identify this S. with the com- 
panion of St. Paul and Timothy who 
wrote with them to the Church of Thessa- 
lonica and preached with them at Corinth 
(2 Cor. i. 19). — Tov iricToO d86X- 
i^ov us XoY^ One main 
object of the postscript is to supply S. 
with a brief commendation. He is pre- 
sumably the appointed messenger who 
will supplement the letter with detailed 
application of its general teaching and 
information about the affairs of the viTiter. 
So St. Paul's Encyclical ends with that 
ye may know my circumstances how I 
fare Tychicus the beloved brother and 
faithful minister in the Lord shall make 
known all things to you (Eph. vi. 21 f.). 
S. was known probably to some of the 
Churches as St. Paul's companion : in case 
he was unknown to any, St. Peter adds 
his own certificate. For this use of 
XoY(^ compare i Cor. iv. i, ovtws 
T|p,d9 \oyi,Xl(T9(ii dvOpuiros ; 2 Cor. xi. 5, 
Xo'Y^^ Y^P (*'n8Jv v<rT€pT)K£vai rCtv 
VTTcpX^av diroo-rdXwv. — ir apaKaXwv 
. . , 6 c o V, motive and subject of the 
Epistle. St. Peter wrote exhorting as he 
said / exhort you (ii. 11, v. i) and the 
general content of his exhortation may 
be given by the subordinate clause which 
follows : " That you stand in the grace, 
which I bear witness is truly God's 
grace ". The acquired sense of the verb 

comfort (LXX for QPO) '^ "O^ directly 
contemplated. The Epistle is a \6yo<i 
irapaKXrjacb)^ in the sense of 6 irapa- 
KaXuv kv T^ irapaKXTJo-ei, Rom. xii. 8. — 
J'Trip.apTvpuv, testifying to . . . not 
. . . in addition. The verb does not 



V. 13—14. 

l3oT'f)T€' doTTaj^cTai ufids t] €~ BajSuXufi aufEK\€ ktt) Kai 

14 MdpKOs 6 ulos jxou • dairdCTaaflc d\\r\ Xous iv <j)i.XififioTi a 

Ydirqs * elpr\vr\ ufxiv irdai toIs £•' XS. 

occur elsewhere in O.T. (LXX has iiri- 
fiapTvpofJiai) or N.T.; but Heb. ii, 4 has 
the compound o-uveirifiapTvpovvTOS tov 
Qeov. — TovTTjv . . . deov, that this is 
true grace of God, i.e., the grace— in the 
widest sense of the word which is theirs 
(i. 10) which God gives to the humble 
(v. 5). St. Peter was witness of the 
sufferings of Christ which they now share ; 
he witnesses from his experience that the 
grace which they possess is truly God's 
grace, though sufferings are a passing 
incident of their sojourn nere. — els y\v 
o-tt) T€, paraenetic summary of tt)v -Trpo- 
o-a7ft)7T]v €<rxiiKa|A€v els ttjv X'^P*'*' tovttjv 
Iv -fl eo-TiJKa|X£v (Rom. v. 2), from which 
the easier reading IcrTrJKttTC is derived. — 
T| . . . <rvveK\€ KTt). As the co-elder 
exhorts the elders so the co-elect (woman) 
greets the elect sojourners (i. i). The 
early addition of Church represents the 
natural interpretation of the word, which 
indeed expresses the latent significance of 
eK-KXi)<ria, the called out, compare St. 
Paul's use of t| IkXoyti in Rom. xi. 7, In 
V. I ff. Peter addresses bodies rather than 
individuals and in v. 9 he uses a collec- 
tive term embracing the whole of Chris- 
tendom. Accordingly the woman in ques- 
tion is naturally taken to mean the 
Church — and not any individual (see on 
MdpKOs). Compare the woman of Apoc. 
xii. I f. who is Israel — a fragment which 
presupposes the mystical interpretation of 
Canticles (see Cant. vi. 10) and generally 
the conception of Israel as the bride of 
Jehovah, which St. Paul appropriated, as 
complement of the Parables of the Mar- 
riage Feast, etc., and applied to the 
Church in Corinth (2 Cor. xi. 2). So in 
Hermas' Visions the Church appears as a 
woman. Iv BapvXwvt, »» i?ow«, ac- 
cording to the Apocalyptic Code, the use 
of which was not merely a safeguard but 
also a password. Compare Apoc. xvii. 5, 
on the forehead of the woman was written 
a mystery, "Babylon the great," xiv. 8, 
xvi. 19, xviii. 2 ; Apoc. Baruch, xi, i. So 
Papias reports a tradition (" they say ") 
that Peter composed his first Epistle in 
Rome itself and signifies this by calling 
the city allegorically Babylon. The 
point of the allegory is that Rome was 
becoming the oppressor of the new (and 

old) Israel, not that it was the centre 
of the world (Oec). Literal interpreta- 
tions (i.) Babylon, (ii.) Babylon in Egypt 
are modern. — MdpKos 6 vi(i9 |xov. 
Oecumenius interprets son of spiritual 
relationship and adds noting that some 
have dared to say that M. was the fleshly 
son of St. Peter on the strength of the 
narrative of Acts xii. where P. is repre- 
sented as rushing to the house of the 
mother of John M. as if he were return- 
ing to his own house and lawful spouse. 
So Bengel, " Coelecta sic coniugem suam 
appellare videtur ; cf. iii. 7, Erat enim 
soror ; i Cor. ix. 5, Et congruit mentio 
filii Marci ". But granting that Petro- 
nilla (?) was missionary and martyr and 
that Peter may well have had a son — 
though Christian tradition is silent with 
regard to him — what have ihey to do 
sending greetings to the Churches of 
Asia Minor in this Encyclical ? 

Ver. 14. ^iXrJixaTi o7airtjs. 
So St. Paul concludes i Thess. with 
greet all the brethren with an holy kiss 
(v. 26 ; cf. I Cor. xvi. 20 ; 2 Cor. xiii. 12 ; 
Rom. xvi. 16). " Hence," says Origen, 
" the custom was handed down to the 
Churches that after prayers (so Justin 
Apol., i. 65) the brethren should welcome 
one another with a kiss." Chrysostom 
(on Rom. I.e.) calls it "the peace by 
which the Apostle expels all disturbing 
thought and beginning of smallminded- 
ness . . . this kiss softens and levels". 
But the practice was obviously liable to 
abuse as Clement of Alexandria shows, 
" love IS judged not in a kiss but in 
good will. Some do nothing but fill the 
the Churches with noise of kissing. . . . 
There is another — an impure — kiss full of 
venom pretending to holiness " (Paed., 
iii. 301 P.). Therefore it was regulated 
(Apost. Const., ii. 57, 12, men kiss men 
only) and gradually dwindled. — « \py\vr\. 
The simple Hebrew salutation is proper 
to Peter's autograph postscript and links 
it with the beginning. — t o i s e v 
Xpio-Tu, cf. iii. 16, V. 10, and the 
saying. Thus have I spoken to you that 
in me ye might have peace : in the world 
ye have tribulation but be of good cheer 
I have conquered the world (John xvi. 







External Evidence. 

Fourth Century. — In considering the external evidence for the 
authenticity of 2 Peter, it will be found most convenient to proceed 
from the earliest date when its place was fixed in the Canon of the 
New Testament. This date must be found in the fourth century a.d. 
Even then, the Epistle was rejected by the Syrian Church, where it 
was not accepted till early in the sixth century, and only by the 
Monophysites. The view of the Church of Rome is represented 
chiefly by Jerome, whose influence was paramount in the formation 
of the Vulgate Canon. He mentions the doubts raised by the differ- 
ences in style and character between 1 and 2 Peter {QucBst. ad Hedib. 
Migne, Pal. Lat., xxii. 1002). Jerome, however, is clearly expressing 
only the objections of scholars. He says : " Scripsit duas epistulas, 
quae Catholicae nominantur ; quarum secunda a plerisque eius esse 
negatur, propter stili cum priore dissonantiam," where "a plerisque," 
and the nature of the difficulty expressed, both point to the opinion of 
the learned class, which he does not himself share. The Epistle is 
quoted in the last quarter of the fourth century by " Ambrosiaster " ^ 
and by Ambrose of Milan (de Fide, iii. 12). In an African list. Canon 
MoMMSENiANUS, belonging to the middle of the fourth century, 2 Peter 
is found inserted, but with a protest, which indicates rejection in the 
mind of the scribe. Didvmus, who wrote a commentary on 2 Peter, 
towards the end of the fourth century, uses the following words, which 
are a fragment come down to us in a Latin translation, " non igitur 
ignorziidum praesentem epistolam esse falsatatn, quae licet publicetur, 
non tamen in canone est". How are we to explain the words in italics, 
in view of the fact that in the De Trinitnte, a later treatise, Didymus 
quotes repeatedly from 2 Peter ? Chase suggests that the phrase 
represents the Greek words ws »'o0eo€Tai aurt] i^ emcrroXri, which would 

C/. Souter, Study of Ambrosiaster, p. 196 f., Pseudo- Augustine Quaestiones, 
etc. (Vindob. 1908), p. 499. 


mean that the writer was only stating the opinion of others, more 
or less contemporary. Zahn (Gesch. Kan., I. i. p. 312) urges that 
Didymus is here recording a judgment of the second or third century, 
but there appears to be no conclusive reason to doubt that he is 
recording a contemporary opinion. Eusebius {H. E., iii. 3) dis- 
cusses the canonicity of 2 Peter, and makes the following important 
statement : t^i' 8e 4>€po|x^i'r]i' auroC ^^vripav ouK cfSidOi^KOi' fi.kv elvai 
TrapeiXri4)afi6»', ojxus Sc ttoWois xP'n°'''H'*'5 <^aveiija fiera T(ay aXXwc ccr- 
■7rou8dcr9T) Ypa4)(iiK- " The opinion has been handed down to us that the 
so-called Second Epistle (of Peter) is not canonical, but it has 
been studied along with the other Scriptures, as it appears profit- 
able to many ". In the H. E., iii. 25, 2 Peter is placed among the 
drriXcyofieva, although " accepted by the majority " {yvupiiiuv 8' ow 
ofjLws Tois TToXXois). Eusebius had a second class of dcTiXeyop.ei'a which 
he regarded also as spurious (>'60a), and 2 Peter is classed with 
James, Jude, 2 and 3 John as disputed books which were also 
yfcjpijjLa. The evidence of Eusebius is specially valuable (1) because 
he records the opinion that in his day 2 Peter was regarded as un- 
canonical ; (2) because he records a judgment of the past against it ; 
(3) he failed to find any recognition of the book as Petrine in the 
earlier literature known to him, and his knowledge was wide. There 
can be little doubt that Eusebius himself rejected the idea of Petrine 
authorship, but he was also one of those to whom it was a " pro- 
fitable" bock. Constantine entrusted Eusebius with the prepar- 
ation, for use in the new Capital, of fifty copies of the Scriptures, 
which contained 2 Peter. This quasi-official standard practically did 
away with the distinction between ' acknowledged ' and ' disputed ' 
books (Chase, H. D. B., iii. 806 a). 

Another indication of fourth century opinion is the inclusion of 
2 Peter in the catalogues of Gregory Nazianzen (d. 391), Cyril of 
Jerusalem (d. 386), and Athanasius (d. 373). One catalogue which 
is contained in the Codex Claromontanus (sixth century), and re- 
garded by Tischendorf and Westcott as earlier than the fourth cen- 
tury, recognises seven Catholic Epistles, together with the Shepherd 
of Hermas, Acts of Paul, and Apocalypse of Peter. On the other 
hand, in the list of Amphilochius, Bishop of Iconium (c. 380), only 
one Epistle of Peter is recognised. We have already seen that the 
Syriac-speaking churches unanimously rejected 2 Peter, and con- 
siderable importance is to be attached to the fact that Chrysostom 
acknowledges only the Catholic Epistles, and that Theodore of 
Mopsuestia describes five Epistles, among which is 2 Peter, as 
•'mediae auctoritatis ". "Since Chrysostom's expositions, at any 


rate, were addressed to popular audiences, the rejection of the Epistle 
by the great teachers in question must have reflected the usage of 
the Antiochene Church in general." (Chase, op. cit., iii. 805.) 

If we pass in review the evidence afforded by the usage of the 
fourth century in regard to this Epistle, we find that there was a 
considerable prevailing feeling of doubt as to the Petrine authorship, 
along with instances of definite rejection. It is, however, specially 
significant, in view of the modern tendency to depreciate the Epistle, 
that it seems to have gained a place in the Canon by virtue of its 
contents and its useful opposition to the doctrines of false teachers. 

Third Century. — Methodius, a bishop of Lycia at the end of the 
third century, who suffered in the Diocletian persecution, explicitly 
quotes 2 Peter iii. 8 in the fragment De Resurrectione. Zahn 
(Gesch. Kan., I. i. p. 313) has collected some passages in the same 
treatise which seem to echo 2 Peter iii. 10-13, and while in these the 
thought, rather than the language, recalls 2 Peter, there seems no 
reason to doubt the reference. Methodius regards the Apocalypse 
of Peter also as inspired (Comm.; Virg., ii. b). A further pre- 
sumption in favour of the use by Methodius of 2 Peter is found in 
the Dialogue of Adamantius, written probably in the later years of 
Constantine, which makes large use of the works of Methodius. In 
this work 2 Peter is quoted. Firmilian, bishop of Caesarea in Cappa- 
docia, evidently refers to 2 Peter in a letter to Cyprian (No. 75), 
His words are : " Stephanus adhuc etiam infamans Petrum et 
Paulum beatos apostolos . . . qui in epistolis suis haereticos exse- 
crati sunt, et ut eos evitemus monuerunt ". The allusion to heretics 
applies only to 2 Peter. 

We come now to the evidence of Origen. In his extant Greek 
works there is a reference to 2 Peter of a somewhat ambiguous kind. 
" Peter left one recognised Epistle, and perhaps a second; for it is 
disputed " (nerpos 8e . . . fiiav ciriaToXTji' 6p,o\oYoufi^ct]i' KaraXeXonreK • eorw 
8e Ktti ScoWpai'- dfi4)iPdXXeTai ydp) ; (quoted Eusebius, H. E., VI. xxv. 
8). In the Latin translation of his works by Rufinus there are some 
passages expressly quoting 2 Peter, e.g., 2 Peter, i. 4, " ad participa- 
tionem capiendam divinae naturae sicut Petrus Apostolus edocuit " 
{Ep. ad Rom. iv. 9. Ed. Lomm., vi. 302), 2 Peter, i. 2, " Petrus in 
epistola sua dicit. Gratia uobis et pax multiplicatur in recognitione 
Dei " {ib., viii. 6. Ed. Lomm., vii. 234), 2 Peter, ii. 19, " Scio 
enim scriptum esse, quia unusquisque a quo vincitur huic et servus 
addicitur" {in Exod. xii. 4, Ed. Lomm., ix, p. 149). Also in a 
passage which contains an allegorical use of the trumpet blasts 
before Jericho, it is written, " Petrus etiam duabus epistolarum 
VOL. V. 6 


suarum personat tubis " {Horn, in jfos., xii. 1. Ed. Lomm., xi. 62). 
These passages have had grave doubt cast on their genuineness 
by Dr, Chase {op. cit., p. 8036). There can, at least, be no 
doubt, judging from the one undisputed reference, that Origen 
reflects a serious division of opinion in his time, and that his own 
opinion tends towards rejection (lorw 8e Kal SeuTcpac) of tlie Petrine 

As regards Clement of Alexandria, the main question to be 
settled is whether in the Hypotyposeis he comments on 2 Peter. 
If we are to take the statements of Eusebius {H. E., VI. xiv. 1) 
and Photius {Bibliothec, 109), he commented "on all the Catholic 
Epistles". On the other hand, Cassiodorus, who wrote some 300 
years afterwards, gives most conflicting evidence. At one time he 
says that Clement expounded the Scriptures of the Old and New 
Testaments " from beginning to end," and in another passage, where 
he is giving a list of the canonical Epistles expounded by Clement, 
he omits 2 Peter. Moreover, in Cassiodorus' translation of Clement's 
Expositions, none are given of 2 Peter. The difficulty may be 
solved by supposing that in Clement's work, 2 Peter had a place 
beside the Apocalypse of Peter, which was included in the Hypoty- 
poseis. (So Chase, op. cit., 802 a, and Zahn. Forsch. iii. p. 154.) 
Clement distinctly quotes the Apocalypse of Peter as the work of 
Peter, and as Scripture [Eclogce ex Script. Proph., xli., xlviii., xlix). 
Accepting the statements of Eusebius and Photius quoted above, and 
supposing that for purposes of exposition 2 Peter was merged in the 
Apocalypse of Peter, we may find confirmation of the first statement 
of Cassiodorus in certain passages of Clement's writing which have 
been collected by Mayor {The Epistle of St. ^ude and the Second 
Epistle of St. Peter, Introd., cxix.) and Bigg {Commentary on 
First and Second Peter, p. 202). In these the word-parallels are 
striking, but they would not necessarily constitute valid evidence in 

In the writings of Cvprian we find no trace of 2 Peter, but it 
must not be forgotten that Firmilian's letter to him, quoted above, 
contains a clear allusion. In Hippolytus there are found passages 
that point to acquaintance with 2 Peter (Chase, 804 b, Bigg, p. 203). 
A portion of evidence that must not be omitted here is afforded by 
the division of sections in Codex B. In this manuscript there are 
two divisions ot sections, and one is older than the other. The 
double division is preserved in all the Catholic Epistles except 
2 Peter, where the older division is wanting. The conclusion is 
inevitable that in the older form of Codex B, 2 Peter was wanting. 


To sum up the evidence of the third century, we find that 2 Peter 
was in use so far as to influence the thought of Hippolytus in Rome, 
to be commented on by Clement of Alexandria, and to be expressly 
quoted by Pirmilian and Methodius in Asia Minor. Although no 
reference is found in the writings of Cyprian of Carthage, yet 
Firmilian's letter with the quotation is addressed to him. This is 
scarcely evidence, but it certainly implies Cyprian's knowledge of 
the Epistle, and also that he would concur in its use as a source 
of quotation. Again, the two great Egyptian versions of this cen- 
tury, the Sahidic and Bohairic, both contain 2 Peter. If we accept 
a conjectural emendation of Zahn's in the language of the Mura- 
TORiAN Canon, there is contained in it a reference to the division of 
opinion in the Church with regard to this Epistle {Gesch. Kan. i., 
p. 110 n.).i Origen's statement that "it is disputed," represents a 
widespread doubt as to its genuineness. This attitude, combined 
with a general willingness to respect its contents, must be regarded 
as the mind of the church about 2 Peter in the third century. 

Second Century. — In a document which is preserved in a seventh 
century MS. entitled Actus Petri cum Simone (xx., ed. Lips., p. 67) 
there occurs a passage which contains several striking parallels with 
2 Peter. The following phrases may be noted (1) " majestatem 
suam videre in monte sancto," (2) " vocem eius audivi talem qualem 
referre non possum ". In (2) there is a parallel to the rather remark- 
able phrase, (^ucfis roiaaSe, of 2 Peter i. 17. It is true that the extant 
MS. only represents a Latin translation of the original Greek, and 
that editors and translators may interpolate. At the same time, it is 
difficult not to regard Chase as over-sceptical in seeking to discredit 
the parallel by regarding the whole passage as an interpolation {op. 
cit., 802 b). There seems no reason why we should not accept the 
passage as an important second century attestation of 2 Peter, and 
as an indication that the Epistle had already some position in the 
Church. Turning next to the Clementine Literature, we have in 
the Recognitions (v. 12) what appears to be a reference to 2 Peter 
ii. 19 : " Unusquisquis illius fit servus cui se ipse subjecerit". Rufinus 

^ The passage in question reads, as amended by Zahn, " Apocalypses etiam 
Johannis et Petri (unam) tantum recipimus (epistulam; fertur etiam altera), quam* 
quidam ex nostris legi in ecclesia nolunt". The emendations are apt, but is it possible, 
if we have regard to the loose grammatical construction everywhere in the document, 
that no change is needed? The Apocalypse of Peter may be referred to as the 
document " quam quidam, etc.," and we have seen reason to believe {e.g., in case of 
Clement of Alexandria), that 2 Peter and the Apoc. Petri were sometimes regarded as 
one whole 


is again the translator of the Recognitions, and we are reminded of 
his translation of Origen {In Exod. Ham., 12), " Unusquisque a quo 
vincitur huic et servus addicitur". The translations are both of the 
same passage in 2 Peter, and the variety in the language, so far 
from countenancing a theory of interpolation on the part of Rufinus 
may well indicate that he is translating at different times separate 
references to the same passage. In the Homilies (xvi. 20) there occurs 
a reference, pointed out by Salmon {Introduction, p. 488 n.) to 2 Peter 
iii. 9, Toui'ai'Tioi' fjiaKpo0u|jieT, €is fjterdi'oiai' KaXei. The context also is con- 
firmatory. Peter is speaking of the blasphemies of Simon Magus, 
which appear to have been similar in character to the false teaching 
that is denounced in 2 Peter. All things have been as they were 
from the foundation of the world. The earth has not opened ; fire 
has not come down from heaven ; rain is not poured out ; beasts are 
not sent forth from the thicket to avenge their spiritual adultery. 
Then come the words quoted, " But, on the contrary, he is long- 
suffering, and calls to repentance". Yet Chase says, " It is difficult 
to see what there is in the context which specially recalls 2 Peter." 
The coincidences mentioned by Salmon {op. cit., p. 488) in the writ- 
ing of Theophilus of Antioch are inconclusive, although the words 
in ii. 9, ot 8e toG 0eoO awOpuTroi iri'eufi,aTO(|)opoi TTKCUfiaTog dyiou Kal Trpo<j)TJTat 
yerojjiek'oi recall 2 Peter i. 21. In ii. 13, 6 Xoyos auroG, ^alviav wairep 
\ux»'os iv oiKYiixaTi o-urexofieVw, may be compared with 2 Peter i. 19. 
Similarly, in Tatian, Or. ad Graecos, 15 (Otto vi., p. 70), (rKT)i/w|xa 
( = body) is reminiscent of its similar use in 2 Peter i. 13. To found 
an argument, however, for the use of 2 Peter by these writers on 
such single words and expressions is precarious. They might well be 
part of the current vocabulary. In the Apology of Aristides (129- 
130) a passage occurs that naturally suggests 2 Peter i. 11 and ii. 2. 
1^ 686s T^S dXtjOeias tjtis Toiis oSeuovTas aoTrjc eis T(]v alui'iov y^e.ipa.yii»fii 
PaCTiXeiac {Apolog., xvi.). IREN.EUS introduces a quotation from 1 
Peter with the words, " Petrus ait in epistola sua" (iv. 9, 2), but this 
does not necessarily imply that he knew only one Petrine letter. He 
knew 2 John, and yet quotes 1 John in the same phrase. The phrase 
in 2 Peter lii. 8 occurs in Irenasus v. 23, 2, " Dies Domini sicut mille 
anni," and in v. 28, 3, i^ ydp i^p,epa Kupiou ws \iKi.a ctt). In both pas- 
sages, however, the words are connected with Chiliasm, which is 
absent from the thought of 2 Peter. In The Epistle of the 
Churches of Lyons and Vienne, with which Irenaeus was closely 
connected (date 177-179) we find the words 6 8e 8ioi (icVou Kaipos ouk 
dpyos auTois ou8e aKapiros iylvero {cf. 2 Peter 1. 8). 

The most important question in the external evidence of the second 


century arises in connexion with the Apocalypse of Peter, to which 
Harnack assigns the date 110-160, or probably 120-140. The work 
is used by the Viennese Church, and therefore the earjier date is 
more likely. Only a fragment of the Apocalypse is preserved to us, 
in which there are some striking coincidences with 2 Peter (c/. 
M. R. James, A Lecture on the Revelation of Peter). Some of these 
may be quoted here : (1) iroXXol ii ainCtv 'itjovrai v|/eu8oirpo«^TiTai, xal oSous 
Kal SoyfAara iroiKtXa rris diruXetas 8t8d|ou(rii' • ^keIcoi 8e uiol ttjs diruXeias 
yei'TJcrofTai. Kal Tore eXeuaerai. 6 Ocos • • • Kal Kpivei tous ulous tt]S dt'Ojxias 
(Apoc. § 1 ; c/. 2 Peter ii. 1, iii. 7, 12.) (2) 6 Ku'pios e4)T|, "' els 
TO opos . . . d-irepxopicfoi 8€ fier* aurou iqficrs oi 8(ij8£Ka ^aOirjTai (Apoc. 
§ 2 ; cf.2 Peter i. 18). The passage goes on to say that the Apostles 
desired "that He would show them one of our righteous brethren 
who have departed," im iStufiei' TroTairoi (2 Peter iii. 11) elcri tt)v \i.op^-f\v, 
Kal Qa.p(T-t\(Tavre.<i irapaSapaui'wfAec Kal tous dKouorras r[\i.Civ dfOpuTrous (c/. 
cyv'topto-ajiei' up.ti', 2 Peter i. 16) ; Ixojxef PePaioTepof (i. 19). (3) tottoi' 
. . . auxfATjpoi' -navu ; . . . (rKOTeii/of eixoi' au-rdv to ek'8ufia KaTa toi' dt'pa 
ToO Toirou (§ 6; cf. i. 19). (4) A frequent use of KoXd^eic, or the noun 
{cf. ^§ 6, 7, 10, 11, 2 Peter ii. 9). (5) ol pXaa4)Tifioui'Tes Ti\v b%hv t^s 
SiKatoCTu'infis (§ Q; cf. % 13 and 2 Peter ii. 2, 21). (6) (a) Xtfinr) tis . . . 
TreirXY]pwp,e'n(] ^opPopou (§ 8. Pop^opos occurs in § 9 twice, and in 
§ 16); {h) cKuXioin-o (§15; cf. ii. 22). (7) dfieXiiaavTcs rfjs erroXrjs 
Tou 6eoG (§ 15 ; cf. ii. 21, iii. 2). (8) (a) i^ y^ irapaCTTi^aei irdcTas 
Til) Gew iv r]ii.ipa. Kplaeuts koI auTT) |i.eXXoucra KpivecrQai auK Kal tw irepie'xom 
oupakw (quoted by Macarius Magnes, Apocritica iv. 6). (6) TaKT^o-eTai 
■n-dcra SuVafjits oupafou, Kal eXixO^o'CTai 6 oupa^^os a»s PiPXior, Kal irdk'Ta 
Td dcTTpa ireCTCLTai Mac. Magn. op. cit. iv. 1 ; cf. 1 Peter iii. 10-13; 
see Mayor, ed. pp. cxxx. ff.). 

All scholars are agreed that these and other coincidences are 
more than accidental {cf. Salmon, op. cit., p. 591). Various hypo- 
theses to account for them are suggested. 

(1) Did 2 Peter borrow from the Apocalypse ? (Harnack, Chrono- 
logic, p. 471). A comparison, however, of the language of the two 
documents suggests that 2 Peter is simpler and shorter in the ex- 
pression of the same ideas ; and in some cases, ideas and phrases, 
separated in 2 Peter, are gathered together in one passage in the 
Apocalypse {cf. (1), (2), (8) above). Bigg {op. cit., p. 207) also cort- 
tends against this hypothesis on the ground that the description of 
hell is suggested by Plato, Aristophanes, Homer, and especially 
Virgil, and points to a later date than the Epistle. The rare word 
TapTapcSaas is indeed used by 2 Peter of the punishment of the wicked 
after death, and the conception is undoubtedly derived from heathen 


mythology. The word, however, is found in Jewish writings, which 
2 Peter may have read (see note on ii. 4). 

(2) Are 2 Peter and the Apocalypse by the same author ? 
(Sanday, Inspiration, p. 347). This view is opposed by Chase 
{op. cit., 815) on the ground of the difference in style. "The Apo- 
calypse," he says, " is simple and natural in its style. There is 
nothing remarkable in its vocabulary." The argument would seem 
to be conclusive, as the style of 2 Peter is unmistakable, and would 
be easily recognised. At the same time, the undoubted similarity 
between the two writings " not only in words or indefinitely marked 
ideas, but also in general conceptions — e.g., in both there is the picture 
drawn of Christ on the mountain with His Apostles, the latter being 
admitted to a secret revelation which they should afterwards use for 
the confirmation of their disciples — seems to be an argument of some 
strength in favour of the view that the two documents are the product 
of the same school " (Chase). 

(3) Does the Apocalypse borrow from 2 Peter? Some of the 
arguments already adduced against the contrary hypothesis (i.) are 
really in favour of this supposition. The "naturalness of the words 
and phrases as they stand in their several contexts in the Apocalypse," 
which is brought forward by Chase as an argument against this 
third hypothesis (op. cit., p. 815 b) is really only a compliment to 
the style of the writing, and an indication that the writer has no 
intention of slavishly imitating 2 Peter, or of forming a kind of 
mosaic of his own and another's diction. As regards the absence 
in the Apocalypse of the strange and remarkable phrases of 2 Peter 
that they were strange and remarkable might be precisely the reason 
why they were avoided or modified, i^aadvilev in 2 Peter ii. 8 is 
rendered by SoKifxdl^u in Apocalypse, § 1 ; the reference to the Trans- 
figuration in the Apocalypse is fuller than in 2 Peter, and would seem 
to indicate reflection on the Petrine narrative {e.g., cf. addition of ol 
SwScKa fiaOTjTai to simple ^jjicis in 2 Peter i. 18; and expression to 
opos for Tw dyiu) opei). Such a phrase as iv tottw orKoreiKw, might 
well be a paraphrase of iv auxurjpw Toirw, a much rarer word, and 
it is extremely unlikely that auxfx. would be substituted for aKOTcikos. 
It is therefore most probable that the Apocalypse is indebted to 
2 Peter, which would suggest a date for the Epistle earlier than 
120-140 {cf. p. 181). 

In the so-called Second Epistle of Clement (130-170) there is a 
passage deserving of notice. yiccScrKeTe 8c on Ipxerai tjSt] -q i^fxcpa ttjs 
Kpiaeus (OS KXiParos Kaiofievos koX TttKi^o-oiTai ai Sui'd/xcis twi* oupat'wi' ical 
iraaa r\ yfj ws fioXupSos ciri irupl TT|K6fi,e>'os itai totc <(>ania€Tai tci Kpu<)>ia 


Kal (Ijai/epd Ipya twv dkOptuiruf (xvi. 3). One or two interesting points 
are raised by this passage. 

(1) Where does the writer derive the conception of the day of 
judgment as meaning the destruction of the universe by fire ? He 
clearly quotes Mai. iv. 1, Isa. xxxiv. 4, but these passages are not 
sufficient to suggest the idea unless to one already familiar with the 
doctrine. Bigg {Comm. pp. 214-15) argues at some length that 
this doctrine is ultimately to be traced to 2 Peter. Justin (Apol., i. 
20) traces the belief in the world-fire to the Sybil (Book iv.) and 
Hystaspes. Bigg holds that both these belong to the same family as 
the pseudo-Petrine literature. The destruction of the world by fire 
was not an article of faith among the Jews, and Philo argues strongly 
against it {On the Incorruptibility of the World). The office of fire 
in the O.T. is to purify, and not to destroy (Isa. xxxiv. 4, li. 6, Ixvi. 
15, 16, 22; Mal. iv. 1). In the N.T. {e.g., Heb. xii. 26-29; 1 Cor. iii. 
13 ; 2 Thess. i. 8 ; Apoc. xxi. 1) the conception of fire is distinctly that 
of a purifying agency. It is to be noted, however, against Bigg's 
view, that the conception of 2 Peter is not altogether at variance with 
the doctrine of the N.T. about the office of fire. The destruction of 
the present universe is vividly described in Chapter III., but the 
writer evidently has the idea of purification in his mind, and not of 
annihilation. " Nevertheless we, according to His promise, look 
for new heavens and a new earth wherein dwelleth righteousness " 
(iii. 13). Accordingly, if the passage quoted from 2 Clement is to be 
taken in the sense of annihilation by fire, it cannot be regarded as 
founded exclusively on 2 Peter. 

(2) Is there anything in the language to connect the two ? r\\t.lpa 
Kpiaews is found in N.T. only in St. Matthew's Gospel (x. 15, xi. 22, 
24), in 1 John (iv. 17), and in 2 Peter (ii. 9, iii. 7). In 2 Peter iii. 10, 
however, the expression is r\\i.ipa Kupt'ou. T^KOfAtw is also a word 
common to 2 Peter (iii. 12) and the passage in 2 Clem. An import- 
ant coincidence is <f)ai'TiCTeTai . . . ^pya. which may be an attempt to 
make sense of the very doubtful reading in 2 Peter iii. 10 (epya 
eupcOi^ccTai). On the whole, the similarity of language and the 
affinity of thought in the two passages must be regarded as estab- 
lishing a connexion. (For other coincidences, see Spitta, Der zweitc 
Brief des Petrus und der Brief des Judas, p. 534 n.) 

In the Epistlb of Barnabas (130-31, Harnack), in a Chiliastic 
passage, the words occur, i^ yAp V||ji,^pa irap' aurw x^^'** ^""l- o"t6s 8^ 
fioi fiapTupel X^ywK, i8oi> i^p-^pa Kup(ou €OTav ws X^^^*'^ ^""^ ^^' ^)* ^^ ^^^ 
been pointed out that irap' auxw is very close to 2 Peter's irapa Kopiw, 
and the repetition of the words points to the quotation of some 


recognised utterance of Scripture. Barnabas, also, is in the habit of 
using Xeyet to introduce his quotations from Scripture. The question 
is whether he is quoting 2 Peter iii. 8 or some other source. The 
context in Barnabas is different from that in 2 Peter. He is deal- 
ing with the mystical interpretation of the passage Gen. ii. 16. 
Also, in 2 Peter no Chiliastic meaning is attached, as in Barnabas. 
In all probability, 2 Peter iii, 8 is regarded by Barnabas as an 
authority for Chiliasm, along with Rev. xx. 4 ff., which he 
quotes. In The Shepherd of Hermas (110-140, Harnack) there 
are certain words and phrases that are found only in 2 Peter, 
fiia<r|xos (Sim. v. 1, 2); pXe>|xa (in different sense = appearance ; Sim. 
vi. 2, 5) ; 8uo-v6t)tos (Sim. ix. 14, 4); auedSets, applied to false teachers 
(Sim. ix. 22, 1.) ^ In Clement of Rome (93-95, Harnack) we find 
several phrases which, in N.T., are peculiar to 2 Peter : tous Se 
erepoKXiveis uTvdpxovras els KoXawii' ical atKiCT|xo»' Tu0T]ai>' (xi. 1) ; cTroirnjs 
(used, however, of God) (lix. 3); aoOdSt] (i. 1); fjioifios (Ixiii. 1); 
lievciXoirpeTrel 8o|i[] auTou (ix. 2), but fiCYaXoirpeirel PouXi^crei occurs 
previously in same paragraph ; Nue cKi^pulei' iiijdvoiav (vii. 6). The 
passage in Clem, xxxiv. may also be noted : eis to fieroxous iifAas 
yevicrQai twv ficydXcuk' k. e^Solov eiraYYcXiwi' auTou {cf. 2 Peter i. 4).^ These 
coincidences in Barnabas, in Clement, and in the Didache are 
scarcely conclusive as quotations, but they suggest a milieu of 
thought corresponding to 2 Peter. 

To what conclusion does the evidence of the second century lead ? 
Chase says, " If we put aside the passage from the Clementine Recog- 
nitions and that from the Acts of Peter, as open to the suspicion of 
not accurately representing the original texts, there does not remain, 
it is believed, a single passage in which the coincidence with 2 Peter 
can, with anything approaching confidence, be said to imply literary 
obligation to that Epistle " {cf. Bacon, Introd., 173). It ought, how- 
ever, to be noted that the passage in the Clementine Recognitions 
can only be set aside on the ground that Rufinus can fairly be 
accused of interpolation ; and the evident coincidences in the Actus 
Petri cum Simone can be dismissed only on account of distrust of 
the Latin translator of the work. We have also the evidence of 

1 Of the passages collected by Zahn {der Hirt der Hermas, p. 431) as having 
affinity with 2 Peter, the most striking is Sim. vi. 4, 4 : ttjs rptx^TJ? Kal onrdTTjs 6 
Xpovos upa co-Ti p.ia. ttjs Se ^atravov r[ Spa TpidicovTa T|p,cp(i>v Svva^iv txt-i. lav 
ovv p.iav T|p.€pav Tpv^r^trQ Tis Koi airaTtiO'n k.t.X. (cf. 2 Peter ii. 13). 

"Spitta, p. 534 n., points out a passage in the Didache (iii. 6-8) having a remark- 
able affinity with Jude and 2 Peter. ■Yoyyvo-os, a rare word (Jude i6) is used- 
pXa74>ii(iia, av6d8T]S and rpcftuv are twice repeated {cf. 2 Peter ii. 10). 


dependence in the Apocalypse of Peter. It is doubtful whether 
any of the Apostolic Fathers make use of the Epistle, but the 
coincidences in word and thought in 2 Clement, Barnabas, Hermas, 
Didache, and Clement of Rome cannot be ignored. They at least 
suggest a possible atmosphere of thought for 2 Peter. On the 
whole, the evidence of the second century would suggest a date 
for the Epistle not much later than the first decade. There is 
.an entire absence of evidence lor the Petrine authorship. 



1. The obvious first step to be taken is to examine the References to 
the Gospel History in the Epistle, and to consider what light they 
may throw on the authorship of the Epistle. 

(1) Chap. i. 3. Tou KaX^CTttcTos ^fxas- The reference of the parti- 
ciple is to MT]aou TOU Kupiou i^fjioji' {cf. note). Does i^iias refer to the 
Apostles, and in particular to the call of St. Peter ? This interpre- 
tation involves that ^|jiiv in i. 1 likewise refers to the Apostles. Other 
indications, however, in the "Epistle point to a group of scattered 
Christian communities in Asia Minor as the recipients of the letter, 
and the sense in i. 1 seems to be that the readers of the letter, who 
are isolated and harassed by false teachers, are set on equal terms 
with "us," who occupy a less difficult position, and enjoy greater 
outward privileges. Again, in i. 4 the best attested reading is r\\i.iv 
(not \s\, and clearly there the reference is to the writer and 
readers together. So ■i\\i.(i)v ought to be taken in i. 2. i^jxas must 
therefore consistently be referred to the body of readers with whom 
2 Peter identifies himself in thought, as united in their common 
faith, and not to the Apostles alone. Spitta {op. cit., pp. 37 ff.), 
arguing for the reference to the Gospel History, takes i^fjia? as 
referring to the calling of the immediate Apostles, in contrast to 
those who believed in response to their preaching. Such a sense 
would by no means suit r\ in i. 4. Also, in i. 10 KXTio-if clearly 
refers to writer and readers taken together. Moreover, KaXcii' in 
N.T. is by no means confined to the call of the first disciples (cf. 
Matt. ix. 13). In Rom. ix. 24 the thought is almost exactly parallel 
to this passage, "even us, whom he hath called, not of the Jews 
only, but also of the Gentiles ". 

(2) Chap. i. 16 ff. — The Transfiguration. — If we compare the 
reference here with the Synoptic accounts, there emerge some in- 
teresting points of difference. All three Synoptics speak as though 
the glory had its source from within. Such can only be the signifi- 
cance of )ji€T€fAop<|)oj0T) (Matt, and Mark) : and the eyeVero . . . erepov of 


Luke is an indication that he interpreted the phenomenon as an 
inward change. He also tells us that it was iv tw irpocreuxeaOai, " as 
he was praying," that the change took place (Luke ix. 29). 2 Peter, 
on the other hand, seems to think of the glory as having an outward 
source, like what happened in the case of Moses (Exod. xxxiv. 29 ff, ; 
2 Cor. iii. 7 ff.), as a reflexion of the glory of God, an outward attesta- 
tion in addition to the voice (Xapwc yo^P iropa 0eou irarpos Tt/jiT)i/ Kal 
%6iav, i. 17). Spitta argues that this is a more natural and primitive 
account, and therefore independent of the account in the Synoptics, 
which shows traces of later thought playing upon the incident. There 
can be no doubt that the conception of the glory as external is found 
in 2 Peter, but it is not regarded as an attestation previous to the 
voice, as in the Synoptics. On the contrary, the two aorist participles 
imply coincident action, the first really taking the place of a finite verb 
(c/. the common phrase, diroKpieels el-iref). " He received honour and 
glory when there came to Him," etc. Moreover, rifii] can only refer 
to the attestation of the voice (see note on passage). To this extent 
2 Peter differs from the Synoptic gospels. Are we then justified in 
regarding the disparity as a mark of the eye-witness ? There are, 
however, other characteristics of the passage in 2 Peter which 
rather point to literary dependence on the Synoptic account, (a) 
The reading of ^ACKL, adopted in the text, is ootos ^crrw 6 olos fioo 6 
dYainrjTos, €is ov iyu) 6u8oKT]aa, which differs from Matt. xvii. 5 only in 
respect that (a) €ts 6v is substituted for iv u (see note on passage), 
0) eyw is inserted, and (y) dKou'ere auxoG is omitted. Again, o-KTjkwfiaTi 
(ii. 12) (TKii]vu>ii.aTos (ii. 14) and €^0801' (v. 15) occurring together, seem 
to indicate that the vocabulary of the Synoptic account was lingering 
in the mind of the writer. aKrii'wfia, a rare and unusual word in this 
sense, is used characteristically in the sense of the ordinary aKTJvos, 
and may have been suggested by the (TKr]vt] of the Gospel narrative. 
€|o8os belongs to Luke's own vocabulary in reporting the conversation 
of the three men, and its employment indicates acquaintance with 
his Gospel. " Omission of details of the history {e.g., the presence 
of Moses and Elias) in an allusion contained in a letter cannot 
reasonably be taken to show that a writer is giving an account 
independent of, or more primitive than, that of the Synoptists '\ 
(Chase, op. cit. iii. 809 6, but cf. Zahn, hitrod. II., pp. 217 f.). 
Moreover, iv tw dyiw Spei indicates a later stage of thought than 
the simple cis opos {i^-(]\ov (Mark, ix. 2 ; Matt. i. 7), or els t6 opos (Luke 
ix. 26). It implies not only the assignment of a definite locality, but 
also the ascription of a " sacred " site, " a known mountain which had 
now become consecrated as the scene of the vision " (Mayor, op. cit., 


cxliv.). It is, of course, also possible to take iv tw dytu Spci in sense 
of Isa. xi. 9, Ixii. 25 where it is used of the Messiah's kingdom. " Per- 
haps 2 Peter means that in the Transfiguration the three Apostles were 
admitted to behold the glories of that kingdom, without alluding to 
any particular Jewish mountain" (Mayor, iv., note 1). The passage 
betrays reflexion on the original incident, and is written from the 
standpoint of one who is concerned chiefly to interpret the " glory " 
of Jesus on the Mount of Transfiguration as prophetic of His 
Sumfiii' Kai irapoucriai', which is the theme of the Epistle (eTroirrai 
y€vriQivT€s ttjs eKctVou juteyaXeioTriTos), and as establishing the truthful- 
ness of the Apostles who preached the irapoucria. 

(3) Chap. i. 14 : Prophecy of the death of St. Peter. — rayjivt] cortc Vj 
aTr606(ris • . • Ka6a)s Kal 6 Kupio; ^\kCiV I. X. eSi^Xwo-ei' |ioi. Clearly there is 
here a reference to the incident in John xxi. 18. In the notes, Taxi>'Y) 
is taken to mean "imminent" and not in the sense of sudden death 
Spitta, amongst others, has argued strongly (pp. 88 f., 491 f.) that 
there is here no reference to the Gospel history, and is supported by 
Mayor. It is contended that the words orav yTjpdo-Tis, in John xxi. 15, 
imply that death was not imminent, and that in old age a man does 
not require a prophecy to tell him that death is near. Moreover, in 
the Johannine passage, the emphasis is not on the time but on the 
jnanner of St. Peter's death. It is further suggested that some special 
revelation by Jesus to St. Peter of the near approach of death, not 
recorded in Scripture, must be meant, and that a reference may be 
intended to the story contained in the legend, " Domine quo vadis? " 
found in the Clementine Homilies, and in the Apocalypse of Peter. 
The foregoing argument is founded on the supposition that KaOws 
necessarily refers to the whole preceding clause, on . . . jxou. It need 
not be so. The writer speaks as an old man, and the reference would 
then be to the prophesied death in old age. The objection that old 
age in itself is a warning of approaching death seems trivial. That 
fact would not prevent the mention of a prophecy regarding it. Again, 
it is not necessary to suppose that 2 Peter actually has the passage 
John xxi. 18 in his mind. He may be referring independently to the 
incident. It is suggestive to compare the use of Ka0u9 Kal here with 
iii. 15. There the KaBhs Kal is added as a kind of afterthought, 
and is not really dependent on the principal verb i^yelaOe. It has 
really the significance of another principal clause. The syntax 
would seem to be similar in i. 14. The matter of knowledge (clSws) 
is that death is near at hand, however that knowledge is suggested 
to him, and the clause KaOws Kal is added by way of further illus- 
tration. It is unreasonable to demand that the thought in 2 Peter 



must be an exact replica of the passage in John, if the reference is 
to be the same. 

(4) Chap. ii. 20 (yiyovev auTois to, ecrxara x^^poi'ci tui' TrpwTCjf) is 
clearly a reminiscence of the words of Jesus recorded in Matt. xii. 45, 
Luke xi. 29. 

These four references to the Gospel history have now been 
examined. The first may be set aside, and the other three may be 
regarded as indicating no more than a knowledge of the Gospels, and 
especially of two incidents in the life of St. Peter. They do not 
nearly amount to evidence that the writer is the Apostle himself. 

The paucity of references to the Gospel history, in an Epistle pur- 
porting to be written by the Apostle Peter, is remarkable. It contains 
only one reference to the actual words of Jesus (ii. 20), but indirectly 
these may be referred to in ii. 1 = Matt. x. 33 ; i. 8 = Luke xiii. 7-8 ; 
iii. 4 = Matt. xxiv. 37-42. We would expect that the mind of an in- 
timate disciple would have been saturated with reminiscences of our 
Lord's teaching, and would have dwelt easily on the great events of 
His Life. In this respect we may compare 2 Peter most unfavourably 
with the genuine first Epistle. In the former there is no mention of 
the Passion or Resurrection, and there is a strange absence of that 
vivid sense of the Risen Lord as living and reigning in grace, which 
is so characteristic of the writings of the Apostles, who " had been 
begotten again unto a living hope ". It is also a matter for serious 
consideration as against the genuineness of the Epistle, that the 
references to the Gospel history are introduced apparently to support 
the character of one writing as St. Peter, and to distinguish his state- 
ments from (T€aro^i(T\i.{voi fiCGoi (i. 16). (But cf. Bigg. p. 231.) 

2 The Personality of St. Peter in the Epistle. — (1) Chap. i. 1 
Zufieuc n^Tpos SouXos Kal aTrooroXos 'Itjctou XpicrToG. The significance of 
the form lojiewi' is very obscure. The point to be emphasised at 
present is that St. Peter is here represented as the writer of the 
Epistle. If, however, the Petrine authorship is untenable, how is 
the expression to be justified ? In this connexion, one or two 
questions call for consideration. 

(a) Does the form of the words afi'ord any indication that the name 
of St. Peter is being used by a later writer ? His own description of 
himself in 1 Peter i. 1 is n^rpos aTroorroXos '\r\<Tou Xpioroo. The form 
lufAcwi' is used only in one other passage, viz.. Acts xv, 14, in the 
address of St. James at the Council of Jerusalem. SoGXos is found 
in Jude 1, and in view of the evident dependence of 2 Peter on Jude, 
this fact may be regarded as significant. Again, if Spitta is right in 
supposing that by the use of the pre-Christian name, lujicwi', the writer 


puts himself on a level with those whom he addresses, and prepares 
the way for the epithet lo-oTi/jiof ("equally privileged," as between 
Jew and Gentile), it is evident that the whole title given to St. Peter 
is carefully chosen by a process of reflection. There is, therefore, 
a presumption that another mind is at work here, which has also 
borrowed largely from Jude in chap. ii. 

(b) If the name of St. Peter has been thus used, the Epistle is pseu- 
donymous. What is the distinction between pseudonymity in early 
Christian writings and forgery ? Does pseudonymity imply ethical 
fault, and does it affect the authority of a writing ? A most uncom- 
promising position in this regard is characteristic of the older criti- 
cism. Westcott {Canon, pp. 352 f.) in speaking of the disputed 
books of the Canon, says : " The Second Epistle of St. Peter is 
either an authentic work of the Apostle, or a forgery ; for in this 
case there can be no mean. ... It involves a manifest confusion of 
ideas to compensate for a deficiency of historical proof by a lower 
standard of canonicity. The extent of the Divine authority of a book 
cannot be made to vary with the completeness of the proof of its 
genuineness. The genuineness must be admitted before the authority 
can have any positive value, which from its nature cannot admit 
of degrees ; and till the genuineness be established, the authority 
remains in abeyance." In a note, Westcott adds, " These books (2 
Peter, James, Jude, Hebrews) have received the recognition of the 
Church in such a manner that, if genuine, they must be canonical ". 

The use of the term " forgery " in such a connexion ought to be 
avoided.! In the first place, the expression is an entire misunder- 
standing of the origin of much of the pseudepigraphic literature of the 
time, and on other grounds the term is equally objectionable. It is, 
in effect, an attempt to browbeat the judgment into the acceptance of 
such books as genuine, on account of the difficulty of believing that 
the Church could accept into the Canon what is supposed to be the 
product of fraud and deceit. The question of pseudonymity cannot 
be settled " by a profession of moral indignation ". The idea that 
literary property is guarded by ethical considerations is essentially 
modern. " Believers frequently borrowed from the books of other 
believers or of unbelievers, without mentioning any source, and with- 
out considering themselves in any way as thieves." "With the best 
intentions and with the clearest consciences they put such words 
into the mouth of a revered Apostle as they wished to hear enun- 
ciated with Apostolic authority to their contemporaries, while yet 
they did not regard themselves in the smallest degree as liars and 

^ Zahn, who himself upholds the Petrine authorship, says " The mere occurrence 
of Peter's name in an ancient writing is no proof of authorship " {Introd.,sn., p. 270). 


■deceivers" (Julicher, Introd., E. Tr, p. 52). The standard of 
genuineness applied to the early Christian writings, and especially 
in the formation of the Canon, was their conformity to the teaching 
of the Church. Were they orthodox or heretical ? A case in point 
is the story related by Tertullian {De Baptismo, xvii.) of the writer 
of the Acts of Paul and Thecla, who was compelled to give up his 
office " on the ground that he imputed to Paul an invention of his 
own " (quasi titulo Pauli de suo cumulans). He defended himself 
by saying that he wrote out of regard for Paul, and that therefore 
he had not an evil conscience. The plea was evidently accepted, 
and he was convicted, not of literary fraud as such, but because he 
dared to advocate the heretical view that women had a right to 
preach and to baptise. We must also take into account in our 
estimate of pseudepigraphy what Julicher calls "the boundless credu- 
lity of ecclesiastical circles to which so many of the N.T. Apocrypha 
have owed their lasting influence ". Eusebius (H. E., i. 13) quotes as 
genuine an Epistle purporting to be written by Christ to Agbarus. 
-" It is evident,'' says Mayor (p. xxv., note 1), "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 popularise their doctrines." 

The practice of pseudepigraphical writing is exemplified in the O.T. 
in Ecclesiastes, and in the apocryphal books of Wisdom, Esdras, 
Baruch, Enoch, and the Sibylline Oracles. The second century 
produced many pseudonymous books, such as the Gospel of Peter, 
which, after being read in the churches of Cilicia for some time, was 
at length forbidden by Serapion, bishop of Antioch, about the end of 
the century, on account of its docetic teaching. The unknown writer 
of 2 Peter made use of the name of St. Peter, both in order to mark 
his views as important, and because he believed them to be in 
accordance with what would have been St. Peter's teaching under 
similar circumstances. 

(c) The foregoing may enable us to rid our minds of prejudice 
when we come to consider the question as to whether any genuine 
teaching of St. Peter is contained in this Epistle. Are there con- 
tained in the Epistle any actual reminiscences of St. Peter's teaching, 
and is the work written by a disciple of St. Peter ? ^ No attempt, 
of course, can be made to disentangle from the rest of the writing 

'■ Cf. Ramsay, Church in Roman Empire, pp. 492-3 ; Mofifatt, Historical New 
Testament, p. 598. 


what might be regarded as the utterances of the Apostle, but a 
presumption in lavour of the hypothesis of actual reminiscence 
may be obtained from a comparison of 1 and 2 Peter (see chap. iv.). 
Weiss has said that " no document in the N.T. is so like 2 Peter 
as 1 Peter". Moreover, there is probably a reference in the second 
Epistle itself (i. 15), which is corroborated by tradition, to the 
fact that St. Peter's teaching was subsequently embodied in the 
Gospel of St. Mark (so Jiilicher, Introd., E. Tr., p. 240). Mayor (p. 
cxliii. ff.) also favours this view, and successfully defends it against 
the objections of Zahn {Introd., ii,, pp. 200-9).^ Bigg considers that the 
statement in i. 15 gave rise to the whole body of pseudo-Petrine litera- 
ture {op. cit. p. 265). It is to be noted also that in two passages in 
the Epistle the pseudonymous writer betrays the consciousness that 
he is faithfully and honestly setting forth nothing inconsistent with 
the teaching of the Apostle. In iii. 1 he is not afraid to set the con- 
tents of his Epistle alongside those of 1 Peter without fear of contra- 
diction .^ and again in iii. 15, his concern is evidently to show that 
there is no inconsistency between the Petrine and the Pauline teach- 
ing. These, and the other considerations adduced above ought to be 
a guarantee at least of the good faith of the writer of this Epistle. 

(2) Another instance where the personality of St. Peter is 
allowed to obtrude itself is found in i. 16, in the use of the word 
eiroTTTai. The word means eye-witness, with perhaps an added sense, 
derived from Gnostic sources, of spiritual vision. In the Apocalypse 
of Peter, there is an account of the Transfiguration which contains the 
words i^fieis 01 ScSScKa fj.a0T)Tal e86ii0T]/iei' oirws Seilirj rffJiii' iva twc a8eX<j>wK 
. . . T<av eleXGorrwv airo tou Koa^iou, IVa iScojaec TroTairot ciai ttjk iiop^-f\v 
{cf. Mayor, cxxv. note). Similarly in i. 18, of the Voice at the Trans- 
figuration, 2 Peter has ifjicis ^Kou<ra\i^v. Jiilicher, in commenting on 
the pseudepigraphic character of 2 Peter, says that "the author 
never loses consciousness of the part he is playing," and " constructs 
his fiction methodically ". Among other instances, he cites this 
passage describing the Transfiguration. He sees in the structure 
of the Epistle only "an artificial production of learned ingenuity" 
{Introd., E. Tr., pp. 240, 241). It may be granted that the choice 

' If the words (actoi tt|v k^y\v €|o8ov are taken as implying that the Apostle was 
not yet dead, we are immediately involved in all the insuperable difficulties connected 
with a date for the Epistle earlier than a.d. 64, the traditional date of Peter's martyr- 
dom. On the other hand, it is easy to see how this expression might be put into 
the mouth of Peter by a later disciple, who well knew his mind and the preparations 
he had made for preserving his teaching after his death. 

2 For consideration of the question whether the reference here is really to i Peter, 
see p. 113. 


of the Transfiguration as the only incident in the Synoptic account 
of St. Peter's life, to which reference is made, is an indication that 
the writer has made choice of this incident as suitable to his theme. 
At the same time, if it was legitimate for him to write under the 
honoured name at all, he could hardly have done so more naturally 
than he does in i. 16-18, especially as it is extremely probable that 
here he is making use of an actual reminiscence of the teaching 
of St. Peter himself {cf. notes on the passage). 

(3) Chap. iii. 15. — 6 dyainiTos r\\iuiv d8€\<|>os riauXos. The exami- 
nation of the whole passage in the Commentary leads to the conclu- 
sion that the Epistles of St. Paul are regarded as in the same rank 
with the O.T. Scriptures. The date thus implied makes it impossible 
that the actual writer is St. Peter. Why, then, the conjunction of 
the two names ? There can be little doubt that 2 Peter wishes to 
impress upon his readers the consistency of the teaching of St. Peter 
and St. Paul against the Antinomian interpretation of the Christian 
faith. The affectionate terms in which St. Paul is spoken of are 
exactly those that might have been used by St. Peter himself of his 
fellow-apostle, and if St. Peter were known to be already dead, how 
could there be any sane intention to deceive the readers ? The 
phrase 6 dyainfjTos r]^Qiv d8eX<|)6s is used by St. Paul of Tychicus 
(Eph. vi. 21 ; Col. iv. 7) and of Onesimus (Col. iv. 9; Philem. v. 16). 
No doubt the readers of this Epistle were acquainted with the dis- 
agreement between the two Apostles described in Galatians ii. 11-14. 
2 Peter only reiterates the fact that there was never any fundamental 
opposition between their teaching. St. Peter's full sympathy with 
the Pauline teaching is evident in the First Epistle, and this passage 
may easily be true to his mind. It is indeed significant that the 
attitude taken up towards the Pauline teaching is not without 
reserve (iii. 16, tv ats ivrXv %v(jv6i\t6. nva), but the warm-hearted 
reference may be a real reminiscence. 

VOL. V. 



We have next to examine any hints that may be given in the 
Epistle itself as to the Date of its composition. 

(1) Chap. i. 15.' — Here reference is made to the death of St. Peter 
as imminent. Other considerations render it impossible to hold that 
this Epistle was published during the lifetime of the Apostle who died 
c. 64 A.D. (see pp. 97 f.). The context shows that if the words fierd 
TTi;' e/xTji' €|o8oj' are put into the mouth of St. Peter by a later writer, 
the period of writing must have been some time after his decease. 
eicdto-TOTe (as occasion arises) in v. 15 implies that occasion has arisen 
more than once to refer to the posthumous teaching. 1\<e.iv ufias, 
K.T.X., implies a document or documents already in the possession of 
the Church. Again, if we are to see in this verse a reference to the 
tradition connecting St. Peter with the Gospel of Mark, we know that 
this tradition is at least much earlier than the time of Papias (140- 
160), who is quoted by Eusebius {H. E., iii. 39) as saying, Kal touto 
6 Trp€o-(3uTepos eXcye, MdpKo; y.€v ep|JLif]veuTTjs rierpoo y^^'OH'^^'os oo'ti 
efAi'T]|Ji6i'eua€>' aKpiPws eypaij/ei', oo y^ivTOi rdlei, to. utto tou Xpiorou r\ 
XeX^e'i'Ta 'q irpaxQe'i'Ta. Papias himself is reporting the testimony 
which he had received orally from the Presbyter. From the perfectly 
natural way in which the reference is introduced, we would conclude 
that 2 Peter has not in view a tradition which he found in such a 
writer as Papias, but betrays either a personal knowledge of the 
intentions of St. Peter himself, or an acquaintance with those who 
did know his mind. Hence a date not very much later than the 
end of the first century is probable. 

(2) In chap. iii. 4 the words occur, d<}>' tjs yap ol iraWpes iKoiii.r\6r\<Tav, 
TrdKxa ouTws 8iap,^fei dir' dpxtjs KTicreus. Here oi iraWpes refers to the 
immediately preceding generation of Christians. The whole sentence 
reflects the disappointment and disillusionment experienced by those 
who saw men and women believing in the coming of the Lord in 
their life -time, and dying without having realised their expecta- 
tion, and who felt that all signs of an immediate coming in their 


own day were absent. Such an atmosphere of thought would be 
most intense in the second generation of Christians, and much of the 
Epistle is meant for the encouragement of those who still expected 
the delayed Parousia of the Lord, and whose minds were likely to 
feel the element of truth in the words of the false teachers, d<^' rjs 
need not denote a long interval of time {cf. Luke vii. 45). It may 
therefore be possible that the Epistle is addressed to the second 
generation of Christians, Moreover, chap. i. 16-18 is most naturally 
regarded as addressed to those " who have not seen, and yet have 
believed," and the superior position of the eye-witnesses therein 
implied is an idea that would be most prominent in sub-Apostolic 

(3) Chap, iii, 8. — As an indication of an early date for the Epistle, 
the absence of any millennial significance in this passage has been 
adduced (Bigg, pp. 214, 295). Against this, Mayor {pp. cit. cxxvi, 
has pointed out that we learn from Justin Martyr {Dial., chap. 80) 

•that there were also many orthodox believers in his time who 
refused to accept the millenial teaching. It may, however, be noted 
that the passage in Justin hardly negatives Dr. Bigg's conclusion. 
There it is said that " many think otherwise," i.e., in opposition to a 
millenial doctrine. In 2 Peter, the context in which the words are 
used is entirely apart from any millenarian notion at all. The sig- 
nificant thing is that 2 Peter, unlike all subsequent writers does not 
employ Psalm xc. 4, in connection with the idea. He is dealing 
with the very verse out of which Chiliasm arose, and he could hardly 
have so completely ignored the opinion unless he had been writing at a 
date previous at least to its later widespread acceptance in the Church. 
At what time the view became common in the Early Church is 
uncertain. In Barnabas xv. 5 we meet with the conception, but 
there is no trace of the doctrine in either 1 Clem., Ignatius, Polycarp, 
the Epistle to Diognetus, or the Didache. Hermas is not uninflu- 
enced by the idea. In none of the apologists, except Justin, is there 
any trace of Chiliasm. 2 Peter iii. 8, therefore, with its peculiar 
use of Psalm xc. 4 would indicate a date certainly much earlier than 
Justin Martyr (140-161), who refers to the belief as a tenet of the 
orthodox faith, and probably earlier than Barnabas. If the absence, 
of reference to millenial doctrine in 1 Clem., Ignatius, and the Didache 
means the same as in 2 Peter, a date at the very end of the first 
century and the very beginning of the second is probable for our 

(4) Chap. iii. 2. — rutv aTrooroXuf ufxStv. The writer must be re- 
garded as including himself among the Apostles {cf. i. 1), and not as 


making any distinction between himself and them. The phrase need 
not necessarily mean "the Twelve," but rather missionaries from 
whom the knowledge of the Gospel was first received.^ Of these the 
writer is one (i. 16). air6<rro\o9 is so used Phil. ii. 25, 2 Cor. viii. 23 
{cf. discussion of term in Harnack, Expansion of Christianity, Bk. 
iii. ch, i.). The passage, therefore, does not exclude a date later 
than the Apostolic Age. 

(5) Chap. iii. 16. — Two considerations are suggested by this 
reference to St. Paul that have a beanng on the date of the Epistle. 
(a) Paul's Epistles are included in a body of writings called Ypa<l>ai, 
and we have reason to suppose that xas Xoiiras Ypa<|)ds probably 
refers to the O.T. Scriptures. (6) The " unlearned and unstable " 
distort these Epistles of Paul to their own destruction. Both these 
statements require that the date of the Epistle be postponed so 
as to leave room for them, (a) renders it quite impossible to fix 
a date in the life -time of Peter. The statement implies not neces- 
sarily a collection of Pauline letters such as we have in the Canon 
of the N.T., but the epithet Ypa<j>ri would be applied if certain letters 
of Paul were accustomed to be read in the churches. That in- 
terpretation would not require a date later than the end of the first 
century. At the same time (6) demands that time must be allowed 
to enable the Pauline Epistles to gain such a position of recognised 
authority in the Church as Scripture that they can be misinterpreted 
by " unlearned and unstable souls". All these circumstances would 
be met by a date quite early in the second century. 

(6) Chap. ii. — The resemblances in this chapter to the Epistle of 
Jude are undoubted. There are parallels in thought and language 
also in Jude 1, 2 = 2 Peter i. 1,2; Jude 3, 2 = Peter i. 12; Jude 17-19 
= 2 Peter iii. 1-3; Jude 20-25 = 2 Peter iii. 14-18. Spitta, Zahn, 
and Bigg are among the foremost defenders of the view that 2 Peter 
is prior to Jude. Irresistible arguments, however, may be adduced 
for the opinion that the relationship is the other way. For the 
discussion of the question the reader may be referred to the In- 
troduction to Jude. At the moment we are concerned with the 
question only in so far as it has a bearing on the date of 2 Peter. A 
date not later than a.d. 90 is assigned to Jude by Chase, Mayor, 
Salmon, Plummer, Spitta. The limits 100-180 are accepted by 

1 Two conceptions of the term " apostle " are found in the early church, 
a wider, based on the Jewish official use of the term, and a narrower, confined 
to the " Twelve ". The two conceptions existed side by side, and " the narrower 
was successful in making headway against its rival " (Harnack, Expansion of 
Christianity, i. p. 408). If the wider use is found here, it would amount to an 
argument for an early date to the epistle. 


Julicher and Harnack. The arguments for the second century date 
are examined by Chase {op. cit., pp. 803 f.), and found insufficient.^ 

If the date in the last decade of the first century be accepted for 
Jude, 2 Peter must be later; but there is not that evidence of 
advance in the Gnostic views opposed in 2 Peter upon those in Jude 
to warrant our assigning to 2 Peter a date much later than Jude. 

To sum up the internal evidence for the date of 2 Peter, the 
considerations adduced in (3) would fix the terminus ad quern at 
least previous to 140-160, the probable date of Justin, in whose day 
Chiliasm was an orthodox belief. On the other hand, (1), (2), (5) 
would render it possible to regard the Epistle as the product of a 
time not very much later than the apostolic, and perhaps (4) may 
also be regarded as confirmatory in this connexion. The relationship 
to Jude would suggest a date not earlier than a.d. 100. The external 
evidence, as we have seen, would render possible a date not later 
han the first decade of the second century. Perhaps a.d. 100-115, 
may be tentatively suggested as the extreme limits. 

1 A summary of the evidence may here be given : — 

1. iriaris, spoken of in Jude 3-20, as a formulated deposit, is used in practi- 
cally the same way in Gal. i. 23, iii. 23, vi, 10, etc. 

2. In ver. 17 the language need not imply that the apostolic period is long past. 
The mention of oral instruction (t\f.yov) would quite suit a date in early sub-apostolic 
times, when some of the Apostles were dead and some scattered. 

3. The argument from the use of apocryphal books is invalid. Of the two 
quoted by Jude, Enoch is assigned by most scholars to a date B.C., and the 
Assumption of Moses was probably written within the first thirty years a.d. 

4. The Gnostic views attacked in the Epistle are not necessarily of late date. 



It is a very generally accepted result of criticism that the two 
Epistles of Peter are not by the same hand. Jerome {Script. Eccles., 
1), in connexion with 2 Peter, remarked on the "stili cum priore 
dissonantiam " (see p. 175). So marked are these differences 
between the two Epistles, that even Spitta and Zahn, who defend 
the authenticity of 2 Peter, are therefore obliged to give up the real 
Petrine authorship of 1 Peter. They admit that 2 Peter is a letter 
from the Apostle's own hand, and attribute the First Epistle to 
Silvanus, under the direction of the Apostle, in accordance with their 
interpretation of 1 Peter v. 12 (Spitta, op. cit., pp. 530 ff.; Zahn 
Introd. II., pp. 149 ff.). 

Space does not permit of a full discussion of this question, and 
the reader is referred to the minute and elaborate treatment of 
the subject in Mayor's edition (pp. Ixviii. ff.). Reference may be 
made briefly to the following points : — 

1. Resejnblances in Vocabulary and Style. — (1) Vocabulary — [a) 
X<lpis ufitc Kttl cipTJi'ri t:\y\QuvQil-i\, 2 Peter i. 2, 1 Peter i. 2 ; use of KoKelv, 
2 Peter i. 3 and 1 Peter i. 15, ii. 9, 21, iii. 9, v. 10 ; with KKy\<jw Kal 
ckXovt);', 2 Peter i. 10, may be compared the foregoing references 
to use of KttXeii' in 1 Peter, and the use of ckXektos, 1 Peter i. 1, ii. 4, 9 ; 
eeXrifia 2 Peter i. 21, and 1 Peter ii. 15, iii. 17, iv. 2, 19; with iv 
ciriOuixiais aapKos do-cXyciais cf. ireTTopeo/icVous iv do-eXyeiais, eiriSufiiais 
1 Peter iv. 3 ; cTToirrai, 2 Peter i. 16, and eiroTTTcuoi'Tes, 1 Peter ii. 12, 
iii. 2; aamXoi Kal dfAw/iTjToi, 2 Peter iii. 14, and ajiujjios Kal ao-n-iXos, 
1 Peter i. 19 ; dKara-irauoTous dfiapxias, 2 Peter ii. 14, and ire'-rrauTai 
d/xaprias, 1 Peter iv. 1. 

The foregoing resemblances are remarkable as extending to the 
uses of the same words or ideas in similar connexions. The 
following single words may be noted as being largely confined, in 
their use in the N.T. to 1 and 2 Peter: — 


2 Peter. i Peter. Rest of N.T. 

2 5 5 
1 1 

3 1 (pi.) 1 
1 1 6 (3 in Jude.) 

3 1 6 (1 in Jude.) 

1 1 2 

1 1 3 


dcaorpofj)!] . 

&ae^r]S • 
aoTTiXos . 

(b) Including these already mentioned, Mayor, op. cit., pp. Ixix., 
Ixx. gives a list of 100 words common to both Epistles. He also 
gives a list of 369 words occurring in 1 Peter and not in 2 Peter, 
230 words occurring in 2 Peter and not in 1 Peter. 

(c) One remarkable difference is in the word used for the Second 
Advent. In 2 Peter -n-apouaia (i. 16, iii. 4, 12), in 1 Peter diroKdXu\|/is 
(i. 7, 13, iv. 13) is used. 

The facts contained in (a) are sufficient at least to suggest literary 
dependence between the two Epistles, but [b) and (c) entirely negative 
the possibility that they are by the same hand. 

(2) Style. "The style of 1 Peter is simple and natural, without 
a trace of self-conscious effort. The style of 2 Peter is rhetorical 
and laboured, marked by a love for striking and startling expressions " 
(Chase, D. B., iii. 812 a). As against this estimate, it may be ques- 
tioned whether the two Epistles are so far apart in style as it is 
usual to say they are. Mayor says, " There can be no doubt that / 
the style of 1 Peter is, on the whole, clearer and simpler than that 
of 2 Peter, but there is not that chasm between them which some/ 
would try to make out " (p. civ.). As regards grammatical similarity, 
he sums up the results of a most learned discussion (chap, iv.) as 
follows : " 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 correctly. There is no great difference in their use 
of the cases or of the verbs, except that 1 Peter freely employs the 
articular infinitive, which is not found in 2 Peter. 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 Peter 
than in 2 Peter. In final clauses 2 Peter conforms to classical 
usage in attaching the subjunctive to Xva, while 1 Peter, in one place, 
has the future indicative. 2 Peter is also more idiomatic in the use 
of such elliptical forms as ews oiS, ^4>' oaof, d4>' ^9. On the other hand, 
1 Peter shows special elegance in his use of is in comparisons, and 
emphasises the contrast between the aorist and the present impera- 
tive by coupling xi/iriaaTc with Tifidre in ii. 7 " (pp. civ., cv.). It is 


incumbent on scholars to give every weight to these utterances, 
especially in view of such extreme criticism of the style of 2 Peter 
as that of Dr. E. A. Abbott {Exp., ii., vol. iii. ; From Letter to 
Spirit, §§ 1123-1129). 

2. Attitude to the Old Testament. — It has been reckoned by Hort 
(Appendix, Notes on 1 Peter, p. 179) that there are thirty-one 
quotations from the O.T. in 1 Peter as against five in 2 Peter. 
Also, an examination of the quotations in 2 Peter (ii. 2, 22, iii. 8, 
12, 13), and of the references to O.T. history (Noah, ii. 5; Lot, 
ii. 6-9; Balaam, ii. 15-16) show that they are not only much fewer in 
number, but that 2 Peter never formally quotes the O.T., and that 
the actual allusions are of a much less intimate and spiritual char- 
acter than in 1 Peter. Incidentally it may be pointed out {cf. Chase, 
op. cit., p. 813 a) that this is the opposite of what we would expect if 
St. Peter wrote the Epistle to Jewish Christians (so Spitta and Zahn). 

3. Relation to the Pauline Epistles. — 1 Peter displays a close 
connexion of thought with Romans and Ephesians in particular. 
"The connexion though very close, does not lie on the surface. It is 
shown more by identities of thought and similarity in the structure 
of the two Epistles as wholes than by identities of phrase" (Hort, 
/ Peter, p. 5). 2 Peter, on the other hand, is extremely non- Pauline 
in thought. The idea of the /xaKpo0up.ia of God in chap. iii. might 
easily be the common property of the Christian consciousness. 
Even granting that there were special circumstances in the origin of 
1 Peter, that would largely account for the presence of Pauline 
thought in the mind of St. Peter as he wrote {cf. Chase, D. B., 788, 
789), it cannot be regarded as possible that the difference in the 
circumstances both of writer and readers which we find in 2 Peter 
would lead to such a complete freedom from Pauline influence. 

4. Devotional Expression. — There is a great contrast in devo- 
tional thought and feeling between the two Epistles. It has already 
been noted (pp. 186-9) that the references to the great events in the 
life of Christ are strangely few. The only allusion to His sufferings 
and death is contained in t6>' dyopdcrai'Ta auxous Seonrorr]!' (ii. 1). The 
only crisis in His life that is mentioned is the Transfiguration. No 
mention is made of the Holy Spirit except as the source of inspira- 
tion of the ancient prophets (i. 21). Prayer is not alluded to. The 
Apostles were essentially witnesses to the Resurrection, but on the 
Resurrection 2 Peter is silent. Instead, the writer guarantees the 
truth of the Apostolic teaching by an appeal to the Transfiguration 
{cf. 1 Peter i. 2, 3, 11, 19-21, ii. 24, iii. 18, 21, 22). 

There is also a striking difference between the two writers in 


•their personal attitude and relationship towards Jesus Christ. A 
warmth and intensity of feeling is apparent all through 1 Peter, 
which displays a much more vivid and tender sense of the reality of 
the grace and presence of the Risen Christ in the individual heart 
{cf. i. 8, 18, ii. 9, 21, iv. 12 f., v. 16) than the second epistle. 
"The flame of love," so bright in the first epistle, burns but dimly 
in the second. 2 Peter contains what Mayor calls " reverential 
periphrases," such as 6eia (jxjais, 9eta 8u»'ap,is, fieYaXeioTTjs, fxeyaXoTrpe-n-Tjs 
8o|a, Kupio-nis. emYKwais, emYicciaKu are the only words that are used 
of the deepest and most intimate religious experience, communion of 
heart with the Living Christ. It is true that the thoughts of God's 
long-suffering (iii. 9-15) and His care of the righteous (ii. 9) are full of 
tender meaning, but we do not find in 2 Peter that sense of personal 
relationship to Christ, founded on memories of past, and an actual 
sense of present discipleship, which transfuses the thought of the 
first epistle, and we miss the penitential sense of cleansing through 
the death of Christ so prominent in 1 Peter {cf. 1 Peter i. 18-19, ii. 
21-23). The references to the Risen Lord in 2 Peter are few, and are 
pervaded chiefly by a sense of His majesty {cf. i. 16, ii. 1, 3, 12, 17, 
20, 21, iii. 7, 10, 12). Even where the language is purely hortatory, 
as in 2 Peter, chap, i., the difference of tone and manner compared 
with 1 Peter is quite clearly marked. Thus the religious and devo- 
tional atmospheres in the two Epistles are far apart. Allowance 
must no doubt be made for the varying circumstances under which 
they were written. The one is written to a scattered body of 
Christians who are suffering persecution, and are in special need of 
spiritual comfort and stimulus ; the other is directed against the 
immoral influences of false teaching. At the same time external 
circumstances are quite insufficient to account for these fundamental 
differences in the religious attitude of the two writings. Such a 
change could not take place in the history of a single personality, 
unless through some crisis completely revolutionising thought and 



The extreme limit of depreciatory criticism of the style of 2 Peter 
is reached in the epithet applied by Dr. E. A. Abbott, {Expositor ii., 
vol. iii. ; From Letter to Spirit 1 121-1 135), who describes it as " Baboo 
Greek ". The most moderate treatment of the subject is found in 
the article, so often referred to, by Dr. Chase. We may briefly 
summarise the chief points of criticism. 

* 1. The large number of words found in 2 Peter, and nowhere else 
in the N.T. The full list may be given : aGeo-fjios,^ dKardiTauCTTos, aXw- 
ais/ ^ d]j.aQr\St^ a(xojfXT)Tos,^ ^ a-iro<}>£UYeiK,^ - apyeiv,^^"' acrTrjpiKTOs,^ auxfAT)p6s,- 
PXcfifia,^ popPopos,^"^ PpaSuTTjs,^ Siauydj^eic, 8oo->'6t]tos, eyKaToiKelv',^ cKcicr- 
TOTC,^^ cKiraXai,^ eXey^tS,^ cfXTvaiyiiovr\, ivrpu^dv,^ elaKoXouOeii',^ ^ c|e'pap,a, 
cTrdyycXfJia,"^ €7r6irTT|s>^^" laoTifAos, KaTaxXu^eif,^^ KauaoGcrGai, KuXiajJia, Xi^Ot),^ 
fieyaXoTrpeTTiis/^ fx^yiaros,^"^ jiiao-fjia/^ fjiiaap,6s,^ p.i'iljXT),^^ p.ucoird^eii', fiwjjios,^ 
6Xiyu)9, oixixXt),^ ^ -irapa<|>pof la, Ttrapeiadyeii', iTapeicr4>epei»',^ ^ TrXacToSj*' poi- 
i^rjSoi', o-eipos, o-TTjpiyjjLOs,^ ^ <rTotxeio»'i (in sense of physical elements), 
oTpe^Xouc,^ ^ TapTapoOc, raxii'os,^ Te4>pou>', Ti(]K€CT9ai, Toi6o-8e, ToXfjii]TiiS5 5s, ^ ^ 
<t)(i>a4>6po9, i|/cuSo8i8daKaXos. 

One or two remarks on the list may be offered. 

(1) Largelyon the ground of the use by 2 Peter of such a re- 
markably long list of airal Xeyoficka the vocabulary of 2 Peter has been 
characterised as an "ambitious" one (Chase). It has also been 
described as "bookish,"** with a strong inclination for striking and 
poetical words. 

It is undoubtedly true that many of the words marked ^ are 
found only in the Greek dramatists or historians, but it is rash to 
conclude that at the time 2 Peter was written all of them were still 
poetical words. Moreover, the use of poetical language is not in- 
compatible with the prophetic tone in 2 Peter. The words marked ^ 
are found in various Papyri, representing the vernacular of daily 
life, in which much of the N.T. was written. It will be noted that 

* Words marked ^ are found in LXX, " in classical writers, * in Papyri (for reff.. 
see Comm.). 

** E.g. Moulton, Proleg., pp. 97-8. But cf. note on IL 5 in Comm. 


in four cases the so-called aira? \ey6^j.iva of 2 Peter are found both in 
the classics and in the vernacular. This suggests that most ordinary 
of all occurrences in the history of words, the passing of a word 
from the language of literature into the language of common speech. 
Again, the case of words such as aficifiniTos, dpyelv, etc., taken along 
with the fact that the study of colloquial Greek is in its infancy, 
suggests that caution is required in peremptorily condemning the use 
of certain words in 2 Peter as barbarisms. No less than sixteen 
words in the above list are found in Papyri. 

(2) At the same time it is undoubtedly true that the style of 2 
Peter is often rhetorical, and contains some most successful attempts 
after sonorous effect, {e.g-, note the rhythm of ii. 4-9, and cf. the re- 
marks of Mayor, p. Iviii. and Bigg, pp. 227 ff.). The writer is himself 
impressed with the majesty of his theme, and it is of great interest 
to note that in some cases he may probably be making use of the 
liturgical language of his day. An inscription has been discovered in 
Stratonicea in Caria, dating from the early imperial period, contain- 
ing a decree of the inhabitants in honour of Zeus Panhemerios and of 
Hekate. Deissmann (Bible Studies, E. Tr., pp. 360 ff.) has pointed 
out one or two most suggestive parallels in the inscription with 2 
Peter i. 3 ff. The phrases ttjs Ocias Sumfieug apcrds, rdv Kvpiwv 
'Pu)|xai(>)v alwfiou apx^S, irdaai/ ottouStji' elcr^epecrQai, and the superlative 
lieyiCTTwi' (Oeui/) occur. In the case of 9eia SuVa/xts, where 2 Peter 
was usually supposed to be employing philosophical language, he 
appears really to be quoting a current religious term, well known 
perhaps to the very readers of his Epistle. With the phrase Geias 
Koicufol 4)U(7eus (i- 4) may be compared 4>ua£0ds KOifwcoCn-es d>'9pw[iri]i'T]s 
from a religious inscription of Antiochus I. of Kommagene (middle 
of first century B.C.). It is probable, also, that the use of words like 
(icYaXoirpeirT]?, Taprapouj' and euo-e'^cia (which also occurs in the Carian 
inscription, and is a common N.T. word) ; SupEop,ai, dpc'TT] (i. 3), eirixo- 
pTjYcif. ^nd phrases like Sieyeipeii' iv oirop.i'rio-ei may be traced to the 
same liturgical source. 

2. Solecisms. — Chase gives a list of certain expressions in the Epistle 
•'which, so far as our knowledge of the language goes, appear to be 
contrary to usage." These are pX€p,p.a (ii. 8j, KauaoCaSai (iii. 10-12), 
(ji€XXti<Ta» (i. 12), p.vr]ii.i]v iroieiaBai (i. 15), jiuwird^ct' (i. 9), irapeKT^epeiv 
(i. 5), o-€ip6s (ii. 4). For discussion as to the meaning of these see 
the Commentary in loc. That something may be said for their use 
is proved by the remarks of Mayor (pp. Ix. ff.). 

3. Reiteration of Words. — There is a well-marked reiteration of 
words in the vocabulary of 2 Peter, e.g., iT:iyopi\yElv (i. 5, 1 1) ; Pe'Paios 


(i. 10, 19); UTT0fiifH'r]<rK6i»', iv uirojxj'r^aci,^fjiT)!' -iroi^IaOai (i. 12, 13, 15; 
iii. 1); iyex'^ei(Tr]s, iyex'^eldav (i. 17, 18); aircSXcia (ii. 13, iii. 7-16); 
€4)€io'aTO (ii. 4, 5) ; TTipeii' (ii. 4, 9, 17 ; iii. 7) ; o-roixeia'a (iii. 
10, 12). 

Chase asserts that "the extraordinary list of repetitions " stamps 
the vocabulary as " poor and inadequate " (op. cit., 808). In reply, it 
may be urged, (1) This sweeping condemnation is scarcely consistent 
with the occasional use of very rare words on the part of the writer. 
(2) Reiteration may arise from other causes than a limited vocabu- 
lary. It may arise " either from a liking for resonant sounds, or from 
a desire to give emphasis by the use of line upon line, or from both " 
(Mayor, p. Ivii. f.). (3) A similar habit of repeating words is found in 

1 Peter {cf. Bigg, pp. 226 f.). 

The foregoing remarks on the vocabulary and style of 2 Peter are 
necessary and timely, in view of the current tendency to depreciate 
these. Many of the phrases in 2 Peter have found a permanent 
place in the religious language of the Christian Church. It would 
be rash to acquit the writer entirely of all faults of style that have 
been attributed to him, but his ordinary intelligence must at least 
be vindicated. Chap, iii., " On the Style of 2 Peter," of Mayor's 
edition is worthy of close study, as tending to restore the style of 

2 Peter to that respect which enabled it to be studied in the time 
of Aurelius, though not regarded as canonical, along with other 
Scriptures, "as it appears profitable to many". 


1. Readers. — To whom was the Epistle written? The crucial 
passage in this connexion is iii. 1, where the Epistle referred to is 
most naturally understood to be 1 Peter, The objection is urged by 
Spitta, Zahn, and more recently by Mayor, that the description of 
the contents in iii. 1, 2 is inapplicable to 1 Peter. Yet in 1 Peter i. 
10-12 we have almost an exact parallel to twi' Trpociptjfjiei'ui' pTjfj.dTwi' 
uiro Twi' dyicjv irpo(|>T]Ta>>', and 1 Peter is full of reminiscences of the 
teaching and example of Jesus (riis • . • ^rroXfjs toG Kopiou Kal awTTipos) 
{cf. 1 Peter i. 15, 16, ii. 13-17, 23, etc.; cf. also ii. 1, toCto 8e iajiv 
TO pTJfia TO cuayyeXiaGev' cis ujxas). The ethical difficulty caused by this 
interpretation of the reference, if the two Epistles are not by the 
same author, is no greater than that aroused by the use of the 
apostolic name in i. 1 (see Introd., pp. 97-99). Moreover, we have no 
reason to expect anything but a statement in iii. 1 of what the two 
Epistles have in common. The words do not exclude the supposition 
that their contents differ in many respects. The readers, then, 
are, in general, those mentioned in 1 Peter i. 1, viz., Christian 
communities of Asia Minor. 

Mayor [op. cit., pp. cxxxvii. ff.) has again defended the view that 
2 Peter is written to the Roman Church. ^ He founds his 
argument on 2 Peter iii. 15, KaOws ical 6 dyoTniTos ^liwf RauXos 
eypavj/ei' unic, holding that KaOcjs must be explained by the 
immediately preceding admonition, too Kupiou -qfiiav fiaKpoBufiiav 
aojTTjptaK fiyelaQe, which is more distinctly stated in Romans ii. 
4, iii. 25, 26, ix. 22, than elsewhere. Various objections may 
be urged against this view. (1) It is extremely doubtful whether 
the reference icaOcSs can be thus narrowed, so as to include only 
ver. 14. The introduction of the comparison with Paul seems 
to arise from a desire to show that in general there is no dis- 
crepancy between the Petrine and the Pauline teaching. (2) Even 
although the Epistle to the Romans is meant, it would be no proof 
that 2 Peter was written to the Roman Church, as it is evident from 

^ So Grotius, Dietlein, 


61/ -iracrais cirioToXais, and ras Xoiirds Ypa4>as (ver. 16), that the Epistles 
of Paul had reached the rank of Ypa<|>ai, and were known to the 
Church at large. (3) Even if the narrower reference of Ka0«s is 
adopted, the idea of |AaKpo0u/jiia is echoed also in 1 Corinthians and 
Thessalonians (1 Cor. xv. 2 ; 2 Thess. ii. 16). If the wider reference 
is taken, almost any of the PauHne Epistles may be meant, as the 
doctrine of God's free grace is reflected in many of them. It is also, 
of course, quite possible that the reference may be to a lost Epistle.^ 

That practically the same class of readers as in 1 Peter is meant, 
is confirmed by toIs laorifAOf ruilv Xaxouo-ii' ■n'Km.v (i. 1).^ The phrase 
may be regarded as referring in general to the isolated position of 
the readers, who are made to feel, as in 1 Peter i. 1, 2, that they 
too are recipients of the grace of God and objects of His special 
choice. The words in 2 Peter may well be a succinct expression of 
the idea in the opening verses of the First Epistle. In the one 
case the readers are suffering persecution ; in the other, they are 
being led astray and harassed by false teaching. In both cases 
the words carry a message of comfort. 

The question may be raised whether i. 16, iyyo)pi<Tafi€v Cfilv tt^i' too 
Kupi'ou . . . 8om|iii' Kal TTapouaiaf, implies that the Apostle himself had 
preached to these readers, and whether this is compatible with an 
Asiatic community as recipients of the letter. In 1 Peter the Apostle 
does not appear to have been personally acquainted with his readers 
or to have himself laboured among them, and there is no trace in the 
career of St. Peter of an Asiatic ministry. The words, however, do 
not necessarily imply that Peter had himself preached the Gospel to 
those who are addressed. The plural may be used of a single person 
{cf, Moulton, Proleg., p. 86), The mask would seem to be thrown off 
for the moment, and the actual personality of the unknown writer 
to obtrude itself in this pseudonymous Epistle. That he should 
have taken no special pains to prevent this, is itself an indication 
of good faith on the writer's part, and of his lack of any intention 
to deceive. He himself is the preacher. 

The general character of the address in 2 Peter is undoubted. 
The Epistle is written to a wide class of Christians readers 

^ Hofmann (vii. 2, 113 ff.) argues that the reference is to Ephesians. An im- 
portant discussion of whole question is found in Spitta (pp. 286-88). 

"^ In connexion with these words, it has been argued whether they indicate Jewish 
or Gentile Christians. The presumption is in favour of the latter (see Commentary 
in loc). The use of a word like TapTapwtras (ii. 4) indicates a Hellenic atmosphere 
of thought, and the phrase in ii. 20, a.Tro^vy6vT(% to (xiao-ftaTa row K<Sa-|*ov seems 
most applicable to Gentiles. 


who are not recent converts (i. 12), " ein fiir weite Kreise der 
Kirche bestimmtes pastorales Rundschau " (Spitta, op. cit., p. 483). 
1 Peter also is general in its destination. 2 Peter may well be 
addressed to the same localities as 1 Peter, although to a later 
generation of Christians, under different circumstances. This would 
also supply a motive for the use of the Apostle's name. 

2. False Teachers. — The description of the false teachers given in 
chap. ii. is taken in the main from the Epistle of Jude. It ought to 
be noted, however, that the object in view in the two Epistles is 
somewhat different. Jude is, above all, a polemic against the false 
teaching. 2 Peter is written with a view to confirming the faith of 
the Christian communities in the face of the delayed Parousia. 
^ The false teachers in 2 Peter " have brought a new idea into the 
field. . . . They cast doubt on the Christian eschatological expectation 
. . . appealing in support of their view to a deeper knowledge of 
Christ (i. 2, 3, iii. 18, cf. i. 16-18), a particular conception of the O.T. 
(i. 20, iii, 16), and certain Pauline positions (iii. 15 f., cf. ii. 19) " (Von 
Soden, op. cit., p. 194). They are " mockers " (ejAiraiKTai) who say, ttoO 
eoTii' T] eirayyeKia tt]s TrapouCTia5 auToG ; (iii. 4). In this fact, we may 
find a partial explanation of the use made by 2 Peter of Jude. He 
makes use of an authoritative description of their real character, 
making certain changes dictated by his own views as to the use of 
apocryphal books {e.g., omission of story of Michael), and by the 
special circumstances of those he addresses. 

A remarkable circumstance in the language employed is that the 
writer speaks at one time of the false teachers as about to come 
(ii. 1 f., iii. 3), at another as though they were already active (ii. 11, 
12, 17 f,, 20, iii. 5, iii. 16). All such explanations as that the writer 
projects himself into the future, and from that point of view vividly 
regards future events as actually happening ; or that he is at one 
time thinking of communities where the tj/cuSoSiSdo-KaXoi are actually 
at work, and at another of communities where their influence has 
not yet penetrated, may be set aside. The simplest explanation 
seems to be that again the writer, when he speaks of them in the 
present tense, throws off the prophetic mask, and depicts what he 
knew was actually happening.^ 

Do the characteristics mentioned in this Epistle point to a 
Gnostic sect ? It has been pointed out that there is one important 
difference between the libertines of Jude's Epistle and those of 

^ Henkel suggests that the False Teachers, who are active in other communities, 
are regarded as presenting only an imminent possible danger to the readers of 2 Peter 
{Der Zw. B. des Apostelfursten Petrus, p. 37 ff.). 


2 Peter (c/ Chase, op. cit., iii. 811). In the former, not so much- 
leaching as practice, was in question, while, in 2 Peter, they are called 
»|»eo8o8i8do-KaXoi, and seem to have been engaged in the active propa- 
gation of false doctrine. The use of •>fvii<j\.<i in i. 5 f. can scarcely be 
without reference to that intellectualism, with its hidden wisdom, 
and exclusive mysteries, so characteristic of Gnosticism {cf. Light- 
foot, Colossians, pp. 73-113). The word eTr6-n-n]s (i. 16) is a Gnostic 
term meaning one who has been initiated into the mystery. Jude, 
on the other hand, seems to feel that the movement, he combats is also 
doctrinal in its import ; for he urges his readers " to contend for the 
faith once delivered to the saints " (ver. 3), and the heresy he opposes 
must have had a certain materialistic basis (KoptoxTjTa Be aSeToGo-iv, 
86|as 8e 3Xao-4>T]fiouo-n', ver. 8). There is also implied a certain doctrinal 
process in the words, xapi-Ta fxeTaxiOei'Tes ets dcreXyeiai' Kal tok (x6voi> 
SecTiroTTji' Kal Kupiof tjjxwc 'lirjcrouc Xpiaroi' api'oufjiei'oi (ver. 4). Thus, in 
both cases, the readers are warned against what was really a matter 
both of life and of doctrine, and the situation in 2 Peter need not 
necessarily imply a stage at least much later in the development of 
the false teaching. In these Epistles it can scarcely be doubted that 
we are in the presence of an incipient Gnosticism, and the two 
directions in which the Gnostic tendency led, viz., Intellectualism 
and Antinomianism, are clearly marked. On this latter aspect, the 
emphasis is laid, not only in the Epistles, but in the N.T. generally. 
The new movement caused great anxiety to the leaders of the 
Church, owing chiefly to its immoral tendency. For long the 
heretics were in communion with the Christian Church, and it was 
not until the second century that the cleavage widened out to its 
true limits {cf. E. F. Scott, Apologetic of the N.T., pp. 146 ff.). These 
false teachers in Jude and 2 Peter were partakers in the rites of the 
Christian Church (Jude 12; 2 Peter ii. 13). Incidentally, it may be 
mentioned that their description in 2 Peter does not in itself warrant 
a date for its composition in the second century, and certainly not a 
date so much later than Jude, as is usually supposed. 

2 Peter, then, gives us in general a picture of the prevalence of 
Antinomian heresy, which has as its results the corruption of morals, 
and a certain materialistic tendency which led to disbelief in the 
Person of Christ (ii. 1), and a denial of the ethical nature of God 
(iii. 8, 9 ; cf. also Philipp. iii. 18 f ). 2 Peter is throughout eminently 
ethical in its tone. Religion and life are inseparably connected, ws 
Trdrra r]iuv ttjs Oeias Sumficws aurou to. irpos j^wTji' Kal eua^^ciaf BcBupTjp.cVirjs 
8id TTJs eiriyi'cio'cws too KaXeaacTOS ii|Jias (i- 3). The true yvC)<Tis must 
contain ethical qualities (i. 6). The Christian must take pains " to 


make his calling and election sure" by godliness of life (i. 10). 
We are not, however, left without traces of the doctrinal position 
of these false teachers. The Gnostic position which demanded 
Yi/cjo-is, or a hidden wisdom which leads to perfection, is tacitly 
opposed in the use of the word eiriyi'cjais, which is used by St. Paul 
to denote "complete knowledge " or "saving knowledge" {cf. 1 Cor. 
xiii. 12; Philem. 6). Mayor suggests [pp. cit., p. 171) that iTTiyv(a(Ti.<i 
came into use to distinguish the " living knowledge of the true believer 
from the spurious yv<o<ns which had then begun to ravage the Church". 
The true emvcwCTis carries with it " all that is needed for life and godli- 
ness " (i. 3). These Gnostics evidently held that Revelation in itself 
was incomplete. Those, however, who possess l-n-iyi'wats are made 
Geias Koiv'wcol 4>uo-€a)s, a phrase which originates in a philosophic at- 
mosphere, and no doubt reflects a sense of opposition to the pure 
intellectualism of these false teachers, who would claim to be koii'wi'oi 
0eias <j)ua6ws by means of wisdom or y''<«'<^<'S alone. to<})\6s ianv 
/xuwirdl^wi' (i. 9) is a reference to the darkness which was mistaken 
for light, because the yi/wo-is that accompanied it was so unethical 
{cf. the whole passage, i. 5-9). cr€(To<})i(Tfi€Vois /xuGoi? (i. 16) refers to those 
fictions connected with the emanation of aeons, so characteristic of 
the Gnostic system {cf. 1 Tim. i. 4, iv. 7 ; 2 Tim. iv. 4 ; Tit. i. 14), by 
virtue of which the Person of Christ was regarded as the emanation 
of an aeon, in union with a human body. In contrast to this idea, 
the writer claims that the Apostles were eTroirrai . . . Tfjs ctteiVou 
fieyaXeioTTjTos. The Voice proclaims Him to be actually 6 ulos /xou 6 
dyainfjTos fiou (i. 17). What seems to be a denial of the Person and 
Work of Christ is referred to in i. 1 toi' dyopdaai'Ta aurous Seo-jro-nfji' 
dpfouficroi. TrXaoTois Xoyois (fictitious words) of i. 3 may be compared 
with o'EO'0({>iajiiEi/ois fiudois of i. 16. Kupi,6TT]T0S KaTa<{)poi'Ourras (ii- 10), 
86|as ou Tpe'fxouo-tK (ii. 11) evidently cannot refer to any denial of 
human authority, but rather to sceptical views regarding the in- 
fluence of spiritual powers, good or evil, upon the life of the indivi- 
dual. Such a belief was part of the orthodox Jewish thought of the 
time (see Commentary in loc). cXeoeepiai' . . . e-TrayyeXXop.ei'oi, (ii. 19) 
may be set alongside the passage dealing with the misuse and mis- 
interpretation of the Pauline doctrine of free grace (iii. 16), which 
. provided the theoretic basis for Antinomianism. These false teacher^ 
questioned the truth of the Parousia expectation (iii. 4) on the ground 
(1) of the uniformity of nature (irdKra outws Sia/xeVci dir' apxrjs ktiVcws) 
which is met by the argument that the heavens and the earth were 
created by the word of God, and that the earth has already been 
flooded by the same divine agency (iii. 5-7). (2) The indestructibility 
VOL. V 8 


of matter, against which it is asserted that in the day of the Lord 
01 oupacol poi^T]86i' irapcXeuCTOKTat, oroixeta Se Kauo-oujxei'a Xu6r]o-CTai (iii. 
10). Finally, we are told that the false teachers use the Scriptures 
of the O.T. as a basis for their heretical teaching (iii. 16). 

It is thus apparent that in 2 Peter, far more than in Jude, the 
doctrine as well as the life of the false teachers is in question. 
Their ethical character is described in words largely borrowed from 
Jude, and in no measured terms. They speak evil of the way of 
truth (ii. 2) ; make merchandise of their followers (ii. 3) ; are fleshly 
and lustful (ii. 10-12) ; practise a vulgar hedonism (ii. 13) ; defile the 
love- feasts by their presence (13) ; deceive the hopes of their followers, 
like waterless fountains (16). They are Christians in name, steal 
into the Church without disclosing their impious views (ii. 1, 20, 21), 
and are boastful and irreverent (ii. 10, 18). 

The question arises whether these false teachers can be identified 
with any known heretical sect. Some critics have sought to dis- 
tinguish between the libertines of chap. ii. and the mockers of 
chap, iii,, but there is really no difficulty in identifying the two.^ 
The denial of the Parousia by the mockers is really the outcome of 
a materialistic philosophy, and the denial of a future judgment would 
have the tendency to emancipate from all moral restraint. " There 
may have been shades of difference between them ; some, perhaps, 
had a philosophy, and some had not ; but in the eyes of a Christian 
Preacher, judging the party as a whole by its practical results, they 
would all seem to wear the same livery " (Bigg, op. cit., p. 239, cf. 
Henkel, op. cit., p. 37). 

Harnack, who holds that Jude was written 100-130, suggests that 
the attack in that Epistle is aimed at some of the older forms of 
Gnosticism, among which he mentions the Nicolaitans. This sect is 
known to have had considerable influence in Asia Minor, and is 
mentioned by name in Rev. ii. 6, 15, in the Epistles to Ephesus and 
to Pergamum. In the case of the latter Church they are represented 
as existing side by side, and probably as identical with a sect of 
*' Balaamites" (ii. 14). No doubt the same sect is accused of immo- 
rality in the Epistle of Thyatira (ii. 20). In 2 Peter ii. 15, 16 the 
example of Balaam is adduced as a parallel to the conduct of the 
false teachers, and it would appear that the name of Balaamites was 
given as a nickname to the Nicolaitans. Irenaeus (iii., c. 1) tells us 
that the Nicolaitans held the doctrine of two Gods — the God who 
created the world, and the Father of Jesus ; that an aeon descended 
upon Jesus, and again returned into the Pleroma before the Cruci- 

^Cf. Henkel, op. cit., pp. 21 ff., where the question is fully discussed. 


fixion. The language of 2 Peter iii. 5-9, relative to the creation and 
the present government of the world, through the long-suffering of 
the Creator, might well have in view some such doctrine as this. The 
accusation, also, of distorting the Scriptures of the O.T. (iii. 16) 
would also be explained, as also the statement in Jude 4 and 
2 Peter ii. 1 about the heretics' denial of Christ. It is probable that 
these views were common to the Nicolaitans along with other early 
Gnostic sects, such as the followers of Simon Magus {cf. Mayor, op. 
cit., pp. clxxviii. ff.). 

On the intellectual side, Gnosticism originated in a compromise 
with Greek thought, and an attempt to adapt the Christian teaching 
to the current philosophy. It is probable that, on the side of con- 
duct, the immoralities that are so vividly denounced in Jude and 2 
Peter were due to a similar compromise with the customs and ideas 
of the Graeco-Roman society of the day. The Nicolaitan teaching, 
as described in Rev. ii., was " evidently an attempt to effect a reason- 
able compromise with the established usages of Graeco - Roman 
society, and to retain as many as possible of those usages in the 
Christian system of life. It affected most of all the educated and 
cultured classes in the Church, those who had most temptation to 
retain as much as possible of the established social ideas and customs 
of the Graeco-Roman world, and who by their more elaborate educa- 
tion had been most fitted to take a somewhat artificial view of life, 
and to reconcile contradictory principles in practical conduct through 
subtle philosophical reasoning " (Ramsay, The Letters to the Seven 
Churches, pp. 337 ff.). 

It had evidently become the custom in the Early Church to use 
the most unsparing language in denouncing these Gnostic errors. 
Both in Revelation and in Jude, the language is violent, and 2 Peter 
deals with the false teachers in the same temper. This may render 
it difficult, at the present day, to understand the exact theoretic 
position of a sect like the Nicolaitans, and it is a well-known fact 
that certain philosophic positions in religion, adopted and advocated 
by men who are themselves of blameless life, may really lead in the 
case of weaker followers to great moral laxity. If we consider the 
picture of Graeco-Roman society drawn by St Paul in Romans i., it- 
is not to be wondered at that these heresies, which led to such 
moral compromises, should be vigorously denounced by the Christian 
teacher. Nothing else " could have saved the infant Church from 
melting away into one of those vague and ineffective schools of philo- 
sophic ethics. . . . An easy-going Christianity could never have 
survived ; it could not have conquered and trained the world ; only 


the most convinced, resolute, almost bigoted adherence to the most 
uncompromising interpretations of its own principles could have 
gained the Christians the courage and self-reliance that were needed " 
(Ramsay, op. cit., ibid.). 

3. Place of Writing. — On this topic, there is very little ground 
for judgment beyond vague conjecture. Chase favours the view that 
2 Peter is of Egyptian origin. He founds his opinion (1) on the 
supposition that the Apocalypse of Peter and 2 Peter belong to the 
same school, (2) that Clement of Alexandria appears to have placed 
the two documents side by side, and commented on them together 
in his Hypotyposeis, (3) certain resemblances in thought and word 
with Philo and Clement of Alexandria {op. cit., p. 816 f.). Jiilicher 
[Introd., E. Tr., p. 239) suggests that the Epistle originated either 
in Egypt or in Palestine. Palestine is selected on the ground that 
the Epistle is directed against one of the earlier and less known 
Gnostic sects which flourished in that country or in Syria. Deiss- 
mann, on the basis of the Stratonicean inscription already quoted 
(op. cit., pp. 367 f.) inclines to the view that the local colouring of 
the Epistle belongs to Asia Minor. He awaits the result of further 
inquiry " how far its peculiar vocabulary has points of contact with 
that of literary sources (of the imperial period) from Egypt, or Asia 
Minor, including those of the papyri and the inscriptions". There 
can be little doubt that the readers are in Asia Minor, but does not 
the form of address, tois i<T6Ti\Lov •nfiic XaxoCaif iricmv, point to a writer 
at some distance from his readers, though well acquainted with their 
circumstances? [cf. p. 114). 


Friederich Spitta. Der zweite Brief des Petrus undder Brief des fudas. 1885.. 

H. V. Soden. Hand-Commentar Zum N.T., vol. iii., 1892. 

F. H. Chase. Art. 2 Peter in Hastings' Dictionary of the Bible., vol. iii., 1900. 

Charles Bigg. " A Critical and Exegetical Commentary on the Epistles of St. 
Peter and St. Jnde {International Critical Commentary). 1901. 

J. B. Mayor. The Epistle of St. Jude and the Second Epistle of St. Peter. 1907. 

Amongst older commentaries of the present century referred to are those of 
Alford (ed. 1898), Hofmann (1875), Huther (in Meyer, 1852. E. Tr., 1881), A. 
Wiesinger (in Olshausen, Bibelwerk, 1862), Dietlein (1851). 

The general question of authenticity is discussed in the following : — 

Salmon's Introduction, pp. 481, ff. 1894. 

Jiilicher's Introduction, E. Tr., 1904, pp. 232 ff. 

Zahn's Introduction, E. Tr., 1909, vol. ii., pp. 134 ff. 

B. Weiss. Studien und Kritikcn, 1866, pp. 256 ff. 

Grosch. Die Echtheit des zweiten Briefes Petri, 1889. 


McGiffert. History of Christianity in the Apostolic Age, 1897, PP- 600 ff. 

Sanday. Inspiration, 1893, pp. 346 ff., 382 ff. 

E. A. Abbott. Expositor, Jan. -March, 1882. " From Letter to Spirit," §§ 1121- 


Karl Henkel. Der zwtite Brief des Apostelfursten Petnts, geprii/t auf seine 
Echtheit. (From R. C. Standpoint), 1904. 


P. Amh. The Amherst Papyri, edd. B. P. Grenfell and A. S. Hunt. (Lon- 
don, 1900-01.) 

P. Fay. Fayum Towns and their Papyri, edd. B. P. Grenfell, A. S. Hunt 
and D. G. Hogarth (Egyptian Exploration Fund. London, 1900.) 

P. Fior. Papiri Fiorentini, ed. G. Vitelli. (Milan, 1905-06.) 

P. Gen. Les Papyrus de Geneve, i. Papyrus Grecs, ed. J. Nicole. (Geneve, 
1896- 1900.) 

P. Grenf. I, An Alexandrian Erotic Fragment and other Greek Papyri, chiefly 
Ptolemaic, ed. B. P. Grenfell. (Oxford, 1896.) II. New Classical Fragments and 
other Greek and Latin Papyri, edd. B. P. Grenfell and A. S. Hunt. (Oxford, 1897.) 

P. Hib. The Hibeh Papyri I., edd. Grenfell and Hunt. (Egyptian Explora- 
tion Fund. London, 1906.) 

P. Lond. Greek Papyri in British Museum, 3 vols. (London, 1893, 1898, 1907.) 

P. Oxy. The Oxyrhynchus Papyri, edd. Grenfell and Hunt. (Egyptian Ex- 
ploration Fund. London, 1898, 1899, 1903, 1904.) 

P. Par. Paris Papyri in Notices et Extraits, xviii., ii., ed. Brunet de Presle. 
(Paris, 1865.) 

P. Petr. Flinders Petrie Papyri in Proceedings of the Royal Irish Academy, 
" Cunningham Memoirs " (Nos. viii., ix., xi.), 3 vols. (Dublin, 1891-1893.) 

P. Tebt. The Tebtunis Papyri, 2 vols. (University of California Publica- 
tions. London, 1902, 1907.) 

B.G.U. Griechische Urkunden, from the Berlin Museum. 

C.I. A. Corpus Inscriptionum Atticarum, Berlin, 1873- . 

O.G.I.S. Orientis Graeci Inscriptiones Selectae, ed. W. Dittenberger, 2 
vols. (Leipzig, 1903-05.) 

For the references to Papyri I am indebted to the " Lexical Notes from the 
Papyri," appearing in Expositor, 1908-9, by Rev. Professor J. H. Moulton, D.D., 
D.Lit., and the Rev. George Milligan, D.D., and to private communications from 
these scholars. 


ZNTW. Zeitschrift fur die neutestamentliche Wissenschaft, herausgegeben 
von Erwin Preuschen. 

MME. Notes from the Papyri in Expositor, 1908, by Professor Moulton and 
Dr. Milligan. 

Moulton Proleg. Grammar of New Testament Greek, vol. i. Prolegomena by 
Professor J. H. Moulton. 

Abbott, J. G. Johannine Grammar by Edwin A. Abbott. 

WM. Winer's Grammar of N.T. Greek, 3rd edition, by W. F. Moulton. 

H.D.B. Hastings' Dictionary of the Bible (5 vols.). 


I. I. lYMEilN^ rierpos 8ou\o$ Kai aTTooroXos 'irjaou Xpiorou rots 
KroTijAOc ruiiv XaxooCTii' Tricmi' e** SiKaioaui/T) toG 6eoG iqficii' Kal 
awTripos Irjaou XpiaroG ' 2. X^P^^' Kal eip-qvi] TrXT|6ui'0ciTj tv 

' Ivfi«wv ^AKLP syrr., Treg., Ti., WH™ ; Zi^wv B, vulg., sah., boh., WH. 

Chapter I. Vv. i-2. The Greeting. 
" Simeon Peter, slave and apostle of 
Jesus Christ, to those who ha v'e obtained 
a faith of equal honour with our own, 
through the justice of our God and 
Saviour Jesus Christ. Grace and peace 
be multiplied unto you in the saving 
knowledge of our Lord." 

Ver. I. The iorm 2v\iiu)v is only once 
used elsewhere of Peter in Acts xv. 14. 
Tois K.T.X. The question as to who are 
the actual recipients of the letter, is 
matter for discussion in the Introduction 
(chap. vi. i). The presumption is in 
favour of a body of non -Jewish Christians. 
T||xcv. probably means, in accordance 
with its use elsewhere in the chapter, 
the whole Christian community to which 
the writer belongs (see Introd, p. 49). 
io-6ti|j.ov. It is doubtful whether laor. 
means "like in honour" or "like in 
value". Both meanings are found (c/. 
Mayor, p. 80). We may compare the 
sense of Tifiii in v. 17 (see note), 
where the sense is clearly of an honour 
conferred (cf. i Peter i. 7), which would 
suggest the same meaning here. ev 
SiKaiocruvo . . . XpicTov. ev is instru- 
mental,. 81K. has the sense of "justice" 
or " impartiality," and is opposed to 
TTpoo-wiroXriiJLxl/ia. God is no respecter 
of persons. There is no distinction in 
His sight between the faith of an eye- 
witness, and the faith of those " who 
have not seen ". With this non-theologi- 
cal sense of 8ik. cf. aSiKos in Hebrew 
vi. 10 ; also i John i. 9. ©eov refers to 
Christ, cf. John xx. 28. o-cuTTJpos, a title 
used by the Emperor. " Familiarity with 
the everlasting apotheosis that flaunts 
itself in the papyri and inscriptions of 
Ptolemaic and Imperial times, lends 
strong support to >A^endIand's conten- 
tion (ZNTW, pp. 335 ff.) that Chris- 

tians from the latter part of i. a.d. 
onward, deliberately assumed for their 
Divine Master the phraseology that was 
impiously arrogated to themselves by 
some of the worst of men " (i.e., the 
Emperors). Moulton, Proleg. p. 84 (cf. 
Spitta, p. 523 ; Chase, D. B. iii, 796). 
iricTTiv ev 8tK. can hardly be taken to- 
gether (cf. Eph. i. 15, I Tim. iii. 13), as 
the relation of the believer to Christ in 
this epistle is rather that of -Yvuiaris or 
emYVucris (cf. v. 2). (Cf. Zahn. Introd. 
ii. pp. 218-9). 

Ver. 2. X'*P''5 • • • "irXTjOvvfleir]. : the 
same form of salutation as in i Pet. 
i. 2. €v eTTiYVwo-ei tov Kvpiov T|p.uv. 
(For history of liriYvwo-is see Mayor's 
note, pp. 171 ff. ; Robinson's Excuisiis in 
Ephesians.) eiriYvwo-is in this epistle 
corresponds to irio-Tts in the Pauline 
sense (Spitta, p. 522). In Rom. i. 21 
yvovTcs is used ot the imperfect know- 
ledge of God possessed by the heathen 
world, and in v. 28 he contrasts it with the 
Christian or perfect knowledge of God. 
iKaOus ovK eSoKip.a(rav tov Oebv txt^y 
£v liriYvwcrei.) Cf. I Cor. xiii. 12, Col. 
i. 9. " £iri7V(i)<ris, involving the complete 
appropriation of all truth and the unre- 
served acquiescence in God's will, is the 
goal and crown of the believer's course " 
(Lightfoot, note on Col. i. 9). Cf. Introd. 
p. 117 ; note v. 8 ; Paget, Spirit of Dis- 
cipline, pp. 112 ff. c-iriYVbxris implies a^ 
more intimate and personal relationship 
than Yvwo-is. It would be a useful word, 
seeing that yvCxri^ had become associated 
with Gnosticism, then incipient in the 
Church. Mayor quotes Clem. Alex. Strom. 
i. p. 372, and Str., vi., p. 759, where kot' 
liriYvuxriv is twice opposed to Kara 
'ircpi(|>ao-iv ( = on a broad general view, 
cf. Mayor's note, p. 213). Grace and peace 
are multiplied in and through this more 




a I Cor. iv. cTrivfuaEi Tou Kupiou T^fiCJi',^ 3. "ws ireiKTa ii]fiii' ttjs Ocias Sot'd- 

18, Xen. ^ \\\ cc> /c-5 

C>''-. 3. 3. wews auToG toL irpos l^a)T]i' Kai euffe'Petai' oeowprjiieVTis Otd t^s €irt- 

4. A/ewt. 
i>6, 5. 

' Tov Oeov Kat Itjo-ov tov Kvpiov T]p,(i>v MSS. generally, Ti., Treg., WH ; om. 
Tov 0eov Kai \r\aov P, vulg., Minusc, 69, 137, 163, Spitta, Zahn., Nestle. A 
strong argument in favour ot omission is the fact that consistently throughout the 
epistle Jesus alone appears as the object of iiriyvutri^ or -yvwcris. Additional 
confirmation is the use of avrov (sing.) in v. 3. 

intimate heart knowledge of Jesus Christ, 
in contrast to a mere barren yvS>fri<s. 

Vv. 3, 4. The Promises and their 
Source. " Inasmuch as His Divine Power 
has granted us all things that are needed 
for life and piety, by means of the per- 
sonal knowledge of One who called 
us by the impression of his own glory 
and excellency ; and through this glory 
and excellency have been granted pro- 
mises that are precious to us and 
glorious, in order that, by means of 
these, ye might be partakers of the 
Divine Nature, escaping the corruption 
that is in the world owing to lust." 

Throughout this passage, the contrast 
between TJfilv, in(xas, and 2 p. plur. in 
yivqa-de (ver. 4) must be preserved. t|aiv 
implies the apostolic circle, who, by 
virtue of their own experience of the 
S6|a and dpcri] of Christ, are able to 
transmit to these readers certain pro- 
mises " precious to us, and glorious." 
(So Spitta, Van Soden). 

Ver. 3. TTJs Oeias 8vvap.e<i)s is origin- 
ally a philosophic term (Plato, Ion. 
534 C, Arist. Pol. vii. 4) cf. to Ociov as 
used by St. Paul in speaking to philos- 
ophers at Athens (Acts xvii. 29). The sub- 
ject is Christ {cf. Bvva\ Kvpiov, Luke x. 
17 ; I Cor. V. 4 ; 2 Cor. xii. 9 ; and v. 16, 
of this chapter). The phrase Oeia 
Svvap.19 is contained in an inscription 
of Stratonicea in Caria in honour of 
Zeus Panhemerios and Hekate, belong- 
ing to the early Imperial period. 2 
Peter would thus be availing himself of 
one of " the familiar forms and formula; 
of religious emotion " (Deissmann, Bible 
Studies, p. 367). atiTov is taken as re- 
ferring to Kvpiov in ver. 2, which 
would confirm the reading adopted. 
Travra . . . tol irp^s t'^riv Kai evcc- 
petav. £wTJ is the new life that belongs 
to believers in Christ, eva-i^eia is also 
found in the inscription quoted above. 
This word and its cognates are found 
in N.T. only in Acts, this Epistle, and 
in the Pastoral Epistles. They are also 
common in inscriptions of Asia Minor, 
and were apparently familiar terms in the 

religious language of the Imperial period. 
In eviorePeia, the emphasis of meaning lies 
towards " godliness " in its practical , rather 
than its devotional aspect, i.e., what God 
requires of man " pious conduct ". In i 
Tim. iii. 16 Christ is spoken of as " the 
secret of piety " {rh ttjs evcrePeias fivfrrrf- 
piov). The conjunction of the two ideas 
twi] and eva-i^iia is significant. Religion 
does not narrow, but expand the pro- 
vince of life. The life in Christ is 
not " a little province of peculiar emo- 
tion .... If we fear that it may lose 
itself in the vast and often lawless uni- 
verse 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 " (Hort, 
The Way, the Truth, and the Life, 
p. 147). 8e8(i)pT]|j.6VT|9 ( = " gifted" or 
" granted "). This word and its cog- 
nates always carry a certain regal sense 
describing an act of large-handed 
generosity. Cf. Mark xv. 45 of the 
giving by Pilate of the body of Jesus to 
Joseph ; John iv, 10 ; James i. 17. The 
same sense is found in Gen. xxx. 20, 
Prov. iv. 2, Isa. Ixii. 3 ; and O.G.I. S. 
517'' (iii. A.D.) with reference to the gift 
by Marcus Aurelius of a new law-court, 
6iroT£ £8(i)rp]i](raTo ty)i irarpiSi T|p.&»v 
[t]t)v a70pav t<ov 8iK(i)V. tov KaXeV- 
avTos ^ Judging from usage else- 
where in N.T., the reference would 
here be to God, who is always the 
Caller. 2 Peter, however, shows great 
independence of thought in other direc- 
tions, and it is more likely that the 
reference is to Christ, especially as eiri- 
Yvtoo-is is used consistently in relation to 
Christ (i. 8, ii. 20). (So Spitta, Von 
Soden, Mayor). " Cognitionem dei prae-- 
supponit haec epistula, ver. 3. Cogni- 
tionem autem Domini nostri, nempe Jesu 
Christi urget proprie " (Bengel). Cf. 
2. Clem. ix. 5. xp''<'"'''°5 • • • ^YtveTo 
crapE, Kai ovtus i^jxas £KaXecr£V. i8ia 
Soix) Kai dperfj. Has I8i«j. an intensive 
force here, or has it an exhausted sense 




ycciacws toO KoX^aa^TOS i^jias i8ia 86^t] Kal dpexTJ, 4. 81' S)V to. 
Ttfiia y]\>-ly Kal fieYiora'^ eTraYYe'^jJ-aTa 8e8wpi]Tai, IVa 8id TouTwf 
YcVrjaSe Getas KOikucol (t>ua€(iis, d7ro4>uYO»'T6S tt^s c" tw K(i(r|ib> ci* 

^ Sia 8o|t^s Ktti op€Ttis BKL, 31, WH. 
to dittography, and correction to genitive 
mous in favour of the reading adopted. 

^ Tip.ia Kai ixcYKTra y\\i.iv B, syrP, spec. 
ACP, syrP (A, syrP v|xiv), 13, 31 + Treg. 

merely equivalent to a personal pronoun ? 
The emphasis conveyed in the former 
interpretation would better carry on the 
sense of Travra. Sd|a is used in sense of 
John i. 14. dpcTt] is an interesting word. 
There is considerable evidence to prove 
that it is not used here in the ordinary 
Greek philosophical sense oi " virtue," 
although the combination of 8<5ia 
and apcrrf is not infrequently found 
in philosophical writings (cf. Plat. Symp. 
208 D. Plut. A/or. 535). Deissmann, fol- 
lowing the Stratonicean inscription al- 
ready mentioned, renders " manifestation 
of power," i.e., in miracle {op. cit. pp. 
95-97). In I Pet. ii. 9 it is used in 
plural, in LXX sense = "praises" 

(n^nn). (c/. Thuc. i. 33.) in p. 

Hib. XV. 3 ff. (Hi. B.C.) the younger men 
are exhorted to employ their bodies 
ciTKaipus rr\v diro8€i|iv iroiT)(rap.evo'US 
TTJs aiPTuiv dp€TT)s, '■ in a timely display 
of their prowess" (G. and H.). In later 
papyri dperi] is used as title of courtesy, 
e.g., P. Oxy. 71, ii. i8 (iv. a.d.). ei crov 
S6|cicv Tfj dpexfj =" if it please your 
Excellency". Foucart defines dperi] as 
"vim divinam quae mirabilem in modum 
hominibus laborantibus salutem afferret " 
{cf. Hort's note, i Peter, p. 129 and 
MME, Sept. 1908). 

The phrase tov KaXeVavTos . . . dpern 
contains one of the finest ideas in the 
N.T. What could be a more effective 
answer to the intellectualism of the 
Gnostic teachers or its modern equiva- 
lent, than the impression produced on 
the lives of men, and especially the early 
disciples, by the Personality of Jesus ? 
They beheld His glory in the evidences of 
miraculous knowledge and power which 
Jesus showed at the time of their call (John 
i. 42, 47-51 ; Luke v. 4). Their sense of 
r His moral greatness overcame all resist- 
ance on their part (Luke v. 8 ; John i. 49). 
If 2 Pet. is lacking in devotional expres- 
sion, his apologetic for the person of 
Christ is cast on most effective lines. 
Reason can only compass the facts of 
Revelation, in terms of antinomies, and it 
is vain to meet inadequate theories of the 

Recurrence of Sia in w. 3, 4 would lead 
easily follows. The versions are unani- 

, WH, Mayor ; {xcYio'Ta Kai Tip.ia tiiiiv 

person of Christ by dogmatic subtlety. 
The Life and Death of our Lord, if its sig- 
nificance is to be fully understood, must 
be looked upon largely as an acted 
parable, and Christian experience — the 
impression of 8(i|a Kal dperi] — is an 
indispensable constituent of dogmatic 

Ver. 4. 81' wv. Reference is to Sd^^n 
Kttl dperfi (so Kiihl, Dietlein, Wiesinger, 
Briickner, Mayor) cirayY^XfiaTa = "pro- 
mised blessings ". No doubt what 2 
Peter has chiefly in view is the particular 
comprehensive eiroYYtXp-a of His Second 
Coming {cf. iii. 4, iirayyikia. and iii. 13). 
The Parousia will be the vindication of 
all moral and spiritual effort. Christ 
promised forgiveness to the sinful, rest 
to the weary, comfort to the sad, hope to 
the dying and life to the dead. It the 
reference adopted above of 81* wv is 
correct, the sense would be that in the 
character and deeds of the Incarnate 
One, we have a revelation that is itself 
a promise. The eTraYY^XnaTa are given, 
not only in word but also in deed. The 
very life of Christ among men, with its 
86^a and dpeTt] is itself the Promise of 
Life, and the Parousia expectation is also 
a faith that He lives and reigns in grace, 
having "received gifts for men ". 8e8a>- 
pT]Tau. Passive, see note on ver. 3. iva 8ia 
To-uTci)v . . . (j>vcrc(i)s. TovTwv refers to 
eiraYyeXnaTa. The hope and faith kin- 
dled in us by the promises are a source of 
moral power. "Thehistoryofthematerial 
progress of the race is the history of the 
growing power of man, arising from the 
gradual extension of his alliances with the 
forces which surround him. . . . He arms 
himself with the strength of the winds and 
the tides. He liberates the latent energy 
which has been condensed and treasured 
up in coal, transforms it into heat, 
generates steam, and sweeps across a 
continent without weariness, and with 
the swiftness of a bird. . . . Moving 
freely among the stupendous energies by 
which he is encompassed, he is strong in 
their strength, and they give to his voli- 
tions — powerless apart from them — a 
large and effective expression. The his- 




b Gen. 



6Tri9ofj,ia 4>0opas. 5* *^°-^^ auro " touto Be onrou8Y)i' Tratrav irapei- 
acveyKavTcs cTrixoprjYilO'aTe iy rfj iricrTei ufidJi/ rrfv dperpt', cf 8c rfj 

here only. apcTTj TTjK yfwait', 6. el* 8e TTJ vt'oio-ei ttji' evKpaTciac, iv 8e tt|' 

c Xen. ' 

..4«a6. I, 
9, 21, Plat- Protag. 3ioe. 

tory of man's triumphs in the province of 
his higher and spiritual life is also the 
history of the gradual extension of his 
alliance with a P'orce which is not his 
own. ... In Christ we are ' made par- 
takers of the divine nature'" (Dale, 
Atonement, pp. 416, 417). Oeia 4>vari.s is 
originally a philosophic term, cf. Plat. 
Symp. ii. 6, Philo (ed. Mangey), ii. pp. 51, 
647; ii. 22, 143, 329, 343. eetos is 
found in a papyrus of 232 a.d. = " im- 
perial " (Deissmann, op. cit. p. 218, note 
2). Probably 2 Peter is here again making 
use of a current religious expression [cf. 
note on 0€ia, ver. 3). onro«|>vY<5v- 
Tas . . . (|>dopas. The aorist participle 
is used of coincident action. Moral eman- 
cipation is part of the Koivuvia Seias 
(|>vo-e<os. The idea of participation in the 
Divine Nature is set between the two pic- 
tures, one of hope, to, Ttftia ■^|aiv Kal |A€'- 
yurra €Tro-yY€'\p.aTa, the other of despair, 
TTJs CI' Tu K6(r|ji(i> €V eiriOvfxia (f>0opa9. 
The way to God is through the Redemp- 
tion of Christ. The approach to God is 
an "escape," and not an act of intellectual 
effort. <|)9opa in philosophic writers is 
the counterpart of y^vcotis, cf. Plat. Rep. 
546A, Phaed. 95E. Aristot. Phys. 5, 5, 6. 
It expresses not sudden but gradual dis- 
solution and destruction. The scriptural 
meaning alternates between destruction 
in the moral, and in the physical sense. 
In the N.T. the significance is physical, 
in I Cor. xv. 42, 50, Col. ii. 22, Gal. vi. 
8, ii. Pet. ii. 12 ; moral here, as in 2 Pet. 
ii, 19, Rom. viii. 21. Man becomes either 
regenerate or degenerate. Either his 
spiritual and moral powers are subject 
to slow decay and death, the wages of 
sin (Iv eTri6vp.ia), or he rises to full par- 
ticipation in the Divine, kv £', a 
compact phrase. The corruption con- 
sists in eiriOtiftia, which may be inter- 
preted in the widest sense of inordinate 
affection for earthly things, ev tw Koo-fAo) ; 
cf. Rom. viii. 21. 4>®°P*^ becomes personi- 
fied as a world-wide power to which 
all creation including man is subject. In 
Mayor's edition there is a valuable study 
of (f>9opa and cognates (pp. 175 ff.). The 
idea contained in 4>9opd, moral decay, 
is illustrated in Tennyson's " Palace of 
Art," and" Vision of Sin " ; also in Byron, 
e.g., " Stanzas for Music". 

Vv. 5-7. Faith is not only illumination 

but character. " Nor is this all. On 
your part bring the utmost earnestness 
to bear, and in your faith supply moral 
energy, and in your moral energy under- 
standing, and in your understanding self- 
control, and in your self-control patient 
endurance, and in patient endurance 
piety, and in piety brotherly love, and in 
brotherly love love." 

Ver. 5. Kal avTo tovto Se, a phrase 
that emphasises the fact of the 8«jpTjp,a 
as having its logical outcome in character. 
" The soul of religion is the practick 
part" (Bunyan). On the other hand, 2 
Peter here teaches that so-called practical 
Christianity without the spiritual motive is- 
incomplete and unintelligent. o-itoi/Stjv 
irao-av 7rap6i(rcvcYKavT6s, an impressive 
phrase. C/. similar ideas in Rom. xii. 11, 
Heb. vi. ir. It is a warning against 
sluggishness and self-indulgence in the 
spiritual life. eirixopTiYTicraTe. The A.V. 
trans.," add to," is insufficient. x**PTy°? 
in Attic drama is one who defrays the 
cost of the chorus, at the bidding of the 
State, as an act of citizenship (Dem. 
496, 26). It was a duty that prompted 
to lavishness in execution. Hence x^'P'H" 
Y€to came to mean " supplying costs for 
any purpose," a public duty or X£iTovpYta> 
with a tendency, as here, towards the 
meaning, " providing more than is barely 
demanded ". In P. Oxy. 282^ ff. (30-35 
A.D.), a man complains that his wife had 
deserted him, although tirexopilYT''*'' 
avTTJ TO, €|t]s Kal v-ircp 8ijvap.iv (" I pro- 
vided for her suitably and beyond my 
resources "). Iiri- denotes a particular ap- 
plication of xopT)Y<w (cf. Moulton, Proleg. 
p. 113). €v " is used each time of that 
which is supposed to be theirs " (Alford). 
dpcTii : " strenuus anirnae tonus ac 
vigor " (Bengel) — a manifestation of 
moral power. yvStviv, understanding, 
implying insight, circumspection, discre- 
tion, discernment {cf. i Cor. xvi. 18). 
Cf. Didache, ix. 3 (in Eucharistic prayer), 
xi. 2, where yv. is conjoined with SiKaio- 


Ver. 6. EYKpareiav : " self-control " : 
accompanied by, and arising from, know- 
ledge, and not a mere product of iear 
or submission to authority. t)iTO|Aovijv : 
" steadfastness " — not turned aside from 
the faith by trial and suffering (cfi Luke 
viii. IS, Rom. v. 3 ff.). The desponding 




^YKpareia ttji' f)Tro\J.ovr]v, iv 8e Tt) uirofiot'fj tt]»' eiiai^eiav, 7. iv Se 

TTJ Euae^cia Tr]v (^iKahekt^iav, ec Se tt) <|)i\a8e\4)ia tt]1' &ydTTr\v. 8. 

TauTtt yap WM'i'' uirdpxotn-a Kal irXcoi'dl^oi'Ta ouk dpyous ouSc dKap- 

a' .X - /.-.,- V - . ' d Acta XV. 

irous Ka(7i(rTr]aiv eis ttji' too Kupiou ■fniQH' Irjaou XpicrTou eTriyKwatf. 29(D), i 

9. u yap ''P'T irdpeoTii' TaCra, tu<})X6s carii' p.uwn-di^wi', Xi^Orji/ Xa^wt' 3,'rit.i.i.. 

doctrine of the false teachers would itself 
call for vTrojiovi^ in the readers. Mayor 
compares the Aristotelian Kaprcpia (c/. 
Heb. xi. 27). evio-e'Pciav. In the Epistle 
the false teachers are do-e^eis (cf. note 
on V. 3). 

Ver. 7. <|>i,Xa8cX(|>iav: "affection to- 
wards the brethren," i.e., oi the same 
Christian community. dyairT)v : prob- 
ably love towards all, even enemies ; not 
directed by sense and emotion, but by 
deliberate choice {cf. Matt. v. 44). Mayor 
interprets : " Love to God manifesting 
itself in love to man and to the whole 
creation, animate and inanimate ". 

Vv. 8-11. Further emphasis on the 
connexion between faith and morality, 
and its reward. " If you have these vir- 
tues, and are not sparing in your use of 
them, you will not be ineffective and un- 
fruitful in the direction of deepening 
your Christian experience. Where these 
virtues are not present a man is blind, 
near-sighted as it were, and entirely for- 
getful of the great fact that he is purified 
from the sins of the past. With this 
danger in view, your earnest purpose 
ought to be to make sure your calling 
and election. Steadily practise these 
virtues and you will not stumble ; for 
thus there will be ministered unto you 
an abundant entrance into the eternal 

Ver. 8. irXeovd^ovTa : " abound ". In 
classical use = " exaggerate ". The word 
here again emphasises the display of a 
regal, uncalculating and unwearied spirit 
in the practice of the Christian graces. 
dpyoiis. Perhaps " ineffective " or " in- 
effectual," a meaning which is further 
emphasised in aKapirovs. In The Di- 
dache, 12, are given directions for dis- 
criminating genuine from false among 
the itinerant teachers. " If he wishes 
to settle with you and is a tradesman, 
let him work and let him eat. If he 
has no trade, according to your wisdom 
provide how he shall live as a Chris- 
tian among you, but not in idleness 
(pT) dpyos). If he will not do this, he is 
making merchandise of Christ. Beware 
of such men." Here is illustrated the 
passage from the ordinary sense of dpyds, 
which really signifies " idle " for want oi 
occupation, and not by choice, to the 

ethical significance. Cf. James ii. 20, 
" Faith without works is opyi] ". Matt. 
XX. 6, " Why stand ye here all the day, 
dpyoi ? " and the reply. Cf. also use of 
dpyei in ii. 3. In P. Par. II. 4(9)^ (iii. 
B.C.), certain quarrymen complain that 
they " are idle (ipyoiljxev) for want of 
slaves to clear away the sand ". Cf. 
P. Par. II. 20. oTTcos . . pT) apYHi to, 
irXoia. P. Lond. 2081" ^„ a.d.). Xoyos 
cpyaTwv dpyqtrdvToiv. In P. Lond. III. 
p. 27 (a census-return of 160 or 161 a.d.) a 
certain Apollonius is described as belong- 
ing to " the leisured class of Memphis". 
(twv diro M€p4>E(ds dpywv). P. Fior. i. 
P. Amh, 97 ? (both ii. a.d.) eXaLovpyiov 
dpyov = " an oil-press which is out of 
working order " els tt)v . . . tiriyvwo'iv. 
Here the writer returns to the idea, in- 
troduced by oTKO^vyovn^ . . . <{>9opd; 
in V. 4, that morality and religion are 
intimately connected. Some have sought 
to interpret the words as meaning "with 
reference to the knowledge of our Lord 
Jesus Christ," on the ground that eiri- 
yvcixris has already been postulated as 
the source of " all things needed for lite 
and godliness," and cannot now be re- 
garded as an end to be attained. Yet 
liriyvworis may be regarded as both the 
beginning and the end of morality (cf. iii. 
18, Col. i. 6 ff. Phil. i. 9). The transla- 
tion of A.V. is correct (els = in, expressive 
of result), e-iriyv. contrasted with yvwais 
marks " a higher degree of intensity, an 
energy of deeper penetration. It is not a 
quiescent state, the resting in an acquire- 
ment, but the advance of one to whom 
easy attainment is but the impulse of 
fresh effort ; one who is not content to 
know, but ever, in Hosea's words (vi. 3), 
follows on to know" (Paget, Spirit of 
Discipline, p. 112). Each advance in the 
Christian life deepens and widens our 
spiritual understanding. " Die liriyv. ist 
ihrer Natur nach etwas, was wachst " 
(Von Soden). 

Ver. 9. pvuird^iov : "short-sighted". 
Only once elsewhere in Greek literature 
in Ps. Dionys. Eccl. Hier. ii. 3. This 
is one of the words to which exception 
has been taken in 2 Peter. It is both 
rare, and it seems to contradict tv(|>Xos. 
Spitta and Von S. translate " wilfully 
blind ". Mayor (p. Ixi.) (fo lowing Beza 



e Heb. i. 3. TOO KaOapiafJiou T<av irdXai auTOu * djj,apTid)K. 10. 816 fiaXXof, 

d8e\<f)oi, OTTOuSdcraTe ^e^alav u^uf tt)I' KXritrif Kal eKXoyT]!' 

fMoulton, -iroieio-Oai ' rauTa y^P ■"■o'^o^^'T^S o" ' /itj irTaiaTjTe ttotc ' II. outws 

pp. i88£f. ydp ttXouo-iojs cinxopT]yT|0ii]a€Tai ufjiic i^ eiaoSos €is ttji' alcSi'ioi' 

g Matt. PaaiXeiaf tou Kupiou t^jawi' Kal o-WTfjpos 'lT|crou Xpiaxou. 

only. 12. Aio * )i,€A\i]<ra) ^ act ufjias uirofJUficTJcrKcii' ircpi toutwc, 

1 |A£\Xil<r&> ^ABCP, vg., Ti., Treg., WH ; ovk afieXrjo-w KL, syrr. The analogy 
of <nrov8a<rci) in ver. 15 favours reading adopted. Yet, in MSS., there is frequent con- 
fusion between pieWu and {xeXod, e.g., John xii. 6, i Peter v. 7, Matt. xxii. 16, where 
fteXXoD is incorrect. Field {Notes on Trans, of N.T. p. 240) suggests that true 
reading here is (mXtjo-co {cf. on oTrovSa^w ver. 15). 

Grotius, Huther, etc.) interprets the word 
as limiting tv4)X(5s. "He who is with- 
out the virtues mentioned in i. 5-7 is 
blind, or to put it more exactly is short- 
sighted ; he cannot see the things of 
heaven, though he may be quick enough 
in regard to worldly matters." Xij9t)v 
Xa^uv. A periphrastic form. Cf.]os.Ant. 
ii. 6, 9 ; also 2 Tim. i. 5, Heb. xi. 29. tov 
KaOapicTfiov tuv irdXai avTOV a]3.apriav. 
Is the reference to baptism ? This view 
is rendered very probable by the use of 
irdXai. For the idea of cleansing from 
pre-baptismal sin, cf. Barnabas, xi. 11, 
Hermas, Mand, iv, 3. Vis. ii. i. Spitta 
adheres to the general interpretation of 
Ka6. as the work of Christ on the moral 
life. Cf. ii. 20-22, I Jn. iii. 3. While 
KaOapifTfiiis is used of the ceremonial 
washings of the Jews, John iii. 25, it is 
also used of the work of Christ in Heb. 
i, 3 (cf. Zahn. Introd. ii. 232). 

Ver. 10. airouSatrare. An Imperative. 
"A sharp and urgent form" (Moulton, 
Proleg. i. 173). ^ePaiav. Cf. Deiss- 
mann, B. S. pp. 105 ff. The word has a 
legal sense. (SePaioxris is the legal guar- 
antee, obtained by a buyer from a seller, 
to be gone back upon should any third 
party claim the thing. Here the readers 
are exhorted to produce a guarantee of 
their calling and election. This may be 
done by the cultivation of the Christian 
graces, Cf. Eph. iv. i. " To walk worthily 
of the calling wherewith ye are called." 
KXtjertv Kal eKXoyTjv. What is the differ- 
ence between these two ? KaXcw used 
in Gospels = " bid to a feast ". kXtjto£ ' 
v'ould, therefore, imply those bidden ; | 
^kXcktoi = those who have become true \ 
partakers of God's salvation. Cf. Matt. 
xxii. 14. Not all who hear the Divine 
Voice (KX'fiaiv) progress in Christian con- 
duct, which is the token of eKXoyiiv. 
ov }AT| TrToiaT|T£, as a blind or short- 
sighted person might do. 

Ver. II. Note the accumulation in 
this verse of words suggesting splendour 

and fulness. 6irixopTjyT)0T^<reTai. Cf. 

note on v. 5. Mayor says that here the 
word " suggests the ordering of a trium- 
phal procession," and compares Plut. Vit. 
994, 6 STJfios cdearo tcis dea; d^eiSus 

irdw x°P'nY°'"K'*'*'*5- sto'oSos. C/. Heb. 
X. 19. In a theatre, ela. is the place of 
entrance for the chorus (Ar. Nub. 326 ; 
Av. 296), and in P. Par. ii. 41, we find 
eio-oSos Koivii=of the door of a house. 
The great description of the entrance of 
the pilgrims into the celestial city in 
Bunyan's Pilgrim's Progress, Pt. i., may 
be quoted in illustration, aluviov Pao-iX- 
£iav. does not occur elsewhere in N.T. 
or Apostolic Fathers (cf. Aristotle's Apol. 
xvi., and Clem. Horn. x. 25), but aluviov 
dpx'ns occurs in the Stratonicean inscrip- 
tions already quoted (Deissmann, op. cit. 
p. 361). 

Vv. 12-15. ^^^ atw of the writer, and 
the urgency of his message. ' ' You are 
already acquainted with and established 
in the truth, so far as revealed to you, 
but, in view of the great issues, I shall 
always be prepared to awaken you to a 
sense of these things. In my lifetime I 
feel bound to do so, especially as I know 
that death is imminent, as Jesus declared 
to me. I shall also do my best to enable 
you to refer to these things as oppor- 
tunity occurs, even after my decease." 

Ver. 12. p.eXX'qo'w. What is the exact 
significance of the future ? It can hardly 
be simply a periphrastic future. " The 
idea is rather that the writer will be 
prepared in the future, as well as in the 
past and in the present to remind them 
of the truths they know, whenever th^ 
necessity arises" (Zahn. Introd., ii., p. 
2x1 ; quoted with approval by Nestle. 
Text. Criticism of N.T. pp. 333-34). 
lo-rripiyp.e'vo'us. This word is used by 
Jesus in the warning given of Peter's 
fall, and its spiritual result. Kai crv irore 
eiriirTpcxI/as CTi^purov tovs dS€X(|>o'us 
o-ov (Lk. xxii. 32). Cf. i Pet. v. 10, 2 
Pet, iii. 17, where <rri]piyiL6i = " stead- 

lo — 15. 



*" Kai-iTcp elSoTtts Kal caTrjpiyiJieVous ck tt| irapouo-j) dX-qOcia. 
SiKaioi/ 8e r]YOU|xai, €<j)' ocroi' cijxt iv tou'tu tw aKr\v^!>^l.aT^., 8i€ 

Y ^ h Phil. iii. 
•J- 4. Heb. 
V. 8, vii. 
5. ^"- J7- 

vcipetr uiias iv uiroanio-ei, 14. ciSus on xavit^ Iotik -n diroOeo-is ' ^°f '=°"" 
J ' ' /x 1 I struction 

TOU aKTfJI'Cup.aTOS /AOU, KuGuS Kttl 6 KUpiOS TjpCJI' 'ItICTOUS XpiOTOS ofex"" 

€8T]Xu<reV jioi. 15. OTTOuSdcrw ^ 8e Kal CKCiOTOTe ' e)(ei»' ufids (xeTa intin. see 

xviii. 25, 
Eph. iv. 28 

' trirovSa^o) i<^ 31, arm., syrP, "an intentional alteration . . . copyists and trans- 
lators could not bring themselves to read here again a promise of Peter's, which he 
seemed not to have lulfilled " (Zahn, Introd. ii. p. 212). These remarks apply also 
to variants for p,€\XT](r<i> (ver. 12) (ibid. cf. Nestle, Textual Criticism of N.T. p. 324). 

KaOws Kal . . . e8i]Xoio-^v |xoi. There 
seems no reason to doubt the reference 
here to John xxi. 18, ig, as Spitta and 

fastness of mind ". ev TJj irapova-Q 
aX-rjeeicj.— " in the present truth," i.e. 
in so far as you yet have experience of 
it. Cf. note on v. 8. 

Ver. 13. SiKaiov 8^ TJYovp,ai. •' I 
consider it a duty." The language in 
w. 13, 14, is studiously solemn and im- 
pressive. <rKT)vu|AaTk, used in literal 
sense of " tent " in Deut. xxxiii. 18. In 
Acts vii. 46, it is used of the Tabernacle 
of God. Elsewhere in N.T. o-ktjvos is 
used in the metapliorical sense of human 
existence. Cf. 2 Cor. v. 4. A similar 
use of (rKi^vufJia is found in Ep. ad 
Diogn. 6. dSdvaros t| v^vxt) ev Ovt)t<p 
o-KTjvu^aTi KaT0iK€i. iTKi\vr[ is the word 
used by Peter in the transfiguration story 

(Matt. xvii. 4 : Mark ix. 5 ; Luke ix. 33). 
8i.€Y6ip€iv vp.a.9 ev viro|jivi]<rei,' 81.C7. 
is always used in N.T. = " awaken " or 
" rouse from sleep " (except in Jn. vi. 18 
of the sea) ; significant in view of the 
reference to the Transfiguration in w. 

16 ff. Cf. 8ia7pTjYopTio-avTes ("fully 
awake") in St. Luke's account; Introd. 

p. 95- ^ . 

Ver. 14. raxivTJ "imminent," cf. u. i. 
A poetical word peculiar to 2 Peter in 
N.T. The process described by aird6€<ris 
can hardly be " sudden," Plat. Rep. 
553D, but there is always an impression 
of suddenness to the onlooker, who lifts 
up his eyes some morning, and finds 
the tent or the encampment gone where 
he had seen it yesterday. An inscrip- 
tion in C.LA. III. 1344^, reads Ecotjs 
Kal Kap.dTov T£pp.a Spap.b>v 'Ta.\iv6v, 
where sense can only be " brief" (but 
see discussion in Zahn. Introd., ii., pp. 212 
f ). diro6€<riv tow o-ktjv. diroTiOcpai is 
used of " putting off a garment " (Acts 
vii. 58) ; and might here be connected 
with the idea of taking off a tent-cover 
(So Spitta). Probably " removal " is the 
proper translation. In B.G.U. 606' (iv. 
A.D.) [irpis a]ir<J6€<riv oxvpov (for re- 
moval of a chaff-heap) is found. Cf. i 
Pet. iii. 21, ov trapKos d-iroOeo'is ^vttov. 

others have done (see Introduction, pp. 
96 f ). 

Ver. 15. o-TTovSaacD. The form is 
used by Polybius and later writers for 
the classical ( cKao-TOTc 
goes with exciv = " on each occasion 
when you ha/e need". The word is 
found apparently in the same sense in 
P. Gen. 3iy. (ii. a.d.), cKaerTOTC o-oi 
Kax' €iri8T]p.iav irapevoxXwv (" causing 
you annoyance on each occasion when 
you are at home"), ttjv tovtwv p,vi]p,T)v 
■iroi€io-6ai. What is the reference in 
TovTwv ? It must have the same refer- 
ence as in verse 12, viz. to the practice 
of the Christian graces, and the larger 
reference must be to some systematic 
body of instruction. This might easily 
take the form of reminiscences of the 
example of Jesus Himself, and the allu- 
sion may be to the Petrme reminiscences 
contained in the Gospel of St. Mark 
{cf. p.£Ta Sc TT)v TovTuv (Pctcr and Paul) 
c^oSov MdpKOS rd viro FleTpov KTjpwor- 
crdpeva e^Ypd^xiis 'HP'^v trapaS^SaiKcv 
Iren. iii. i. i.j. " He has already referred 
to Christ (v. 3), as having called them i8ia 
8(J|il Kai dpcT'Q " ; surely nothing could be 
more appropriate, more helpful to a godly 
life, than that Peter should leave behind 
the picture of this 8d|a Kal dpeTt] drawn 
from his own recollection. And the 
following words, ov ydp <reo-o<|>io-p.€'vos 
K.T.X. (v. 16) seem to imply a statement 
of facts " (Mayor, cxliii., where see whole 
discussion against Zahn. Introd. II. pp. 
199 ff.). 6|o8ov. The same word is used 
in Luke ix. 31 of the death of Christ. It 
seems to include the thought of subse- 
quent glory {cf. Expositor, vi. ii. pp. 
73 f. Smith, Days of His Flesh, pp. 
274 f.) The meaning "death" is found 
in B.G.U. i68i'*A (ii.-iii. a.d.). «iri- 
yvovo'a ttjv (to)v EvSaipovos l|o8ov. 
TTj*' TOVTWV p,vi]fXT]v iTOLciaOai : " rekT 




TT)V' €fiT]»' l^oSov TT|»' TOUTWi' \t.vf\iir\v ITOlCiaOai. l6. OO Y^'P 

k Amos ii. (i'€ao<j>i(Tp,€Vois fiu6ois ^ claKoXouOi^aai'Tes iyv<t)piaafi.ev vfuv tt)!/ tou 

11, cf. 2 Kupioo i^jjiuf 'Itictoo XpioToC Sukafxif Kal Trapouaiac, dW eiroiTTai 

2,15. * yevr\QeyTe'S tt]s ckciv'ou fieyaXeioTTiTOS. 17. Xapuf ydp irapd 

©€ou Trarpos tijitji' koI So^ai', <j>ui'Tis iv€\B€i(rris auTw TOidaSe 

to " ; always in Greek writers, from Hero- 
dotus down = " mentionem facere, 
"make mention of " (cf. Grimm-Thayer 
under (ivti|atj). The sense here seems 
much the same. The document " referred 
to " would be an authentic source of in- 
formation. Cf. P. Fay, ig" (ii. a.d.) 
[dKpip]£<rTdTir)V (iviipTjv iroiovfjievos. 

Vv. 16-18. The fact of the Trans- 
figuration a guarantee of the writer's 
truthfulness. " For we are not without 
facts to rest upon. Our preaching of 
the power and coming of Jesus Christ 
was not based on sophistical myths. 
We were eye-witnesses of His Majesty. 
For He received from God the Father 
honour and glory, a voice coming to 
Him through the splendour of the glory, 
' This is my beloved Son in whom I am 
well pleased'. This voice we heard, as 
it was borne from heaven, when we were 
with Him in the Holy Mount." (For a 
comparison of this passage, with the 
Synoptic account, see Introduction, 
pp. 94 ff.). 

Ver. 16. cr€<ro^i(r\t,. |av9. Cf. «re<ro- 
<t)io-|xev»i [Lr\Tt\p.: " suppositious mother ". 
Greg. Nyss. i. 171 D. This is evidently the 
character attributed to the facts of the 
Christian Gospel by the False Teachers. 
They specially sought to discredit the 
outlook for the Second Advent. (nvOoi 
is often used in the Pastoral Epistles 01 
the fanciful Gnostic genealogies (i Tim. 
i. 4, iv. 7 ; Tit. i. 14). e7v«pi<rap,ev. 
Used in N.T. of preaching the Gospel 
{e.g. I Cor. XV, i). 8vvap,iv koi irap- 
oucrtav. For collocation of words, cf. 
Matt. xxiv. 30, Mark ix. i. For, 
see note on verse 3. irapovcriav. Chase 
(op. cit. 797a) regards the word here as 
denoting the first coming of Christ, be- 
cause (i) the context speaks of history 
and not of prophecy ; (2) the word itself 
naturally bears this meaning. He 
admits, however, that elsewhere in the 
N.T and in this Epistle it is used of the 
Second Coming (cf. Ignat. Philad. 9). 
Justin (Dialogue ■^2) distinguishes "two 
advents, — one in which He was pierced 
by you ; a second, when you shall know 
Him, Whom you have pierced ". There 
IB, however, no real difficulty here in 
taking irap. in the usual sense, which. 

indeed, is more in harmony with the 
context. The Transfiguration itself, as 
used by this writer, is regarded as a 
basis for belief in the Second Advent, 
against the False Teachers. 

Dr. Milligan, in his recent edition of 
Thessalonians, gives a valuable note on 
TTopovo-ia (p. 145). He mentions that it 
occurs frequently in the Papyri as a 
kind of terminus technicus with reference 
to the visit of the king, or some other 
official. (P. Petr. ii. 39 (e), 18 (iii. B.C.). 
P. Tebt. 48, 13 f. (ii. B.C.), 116 (ii. B.C.). 
P. Gren., ii. 14 (b), 2 (iii. B.C.)). Ditten- 
berger, Sylloge, 226, 84 ff. (iii. bc). twv 
iik dpxovToiv a~uvo.yay6vT<j>v eKXrjaiav 
KOI TT^VTC iropovaiav epc^ovKrdvTajvToii 
PacriXcus. "We fall back upon" these 
examples of the word " the more gladly 
because for this particular sense of the 
word the Jewish sacred writings give us 
little help " (ibid.). The word must, there- 
fore, have come into use, in this applica- 
tion to the Second Advent, in apostolic 
times, as faithfully representing the 
meaning of Jesus Himself (cf. Matt. xxiv. 
3, 27, 37, 39). The usual classical sense 
of the word as " presence " must not be 
disregarded. Taken togetherwith the other 
meaning illustrated by the Koivt], -Trapov- 
<ria would thus seem to combine in itself 
the meaning of " actual presence," and a 
near " coming ". This combination of 
meaning in the consciousness of the 
early Church, with its perplexity as to 
the interpretation of our Lord's promise, 
would seem to be reflected in John xvi. 
16-18. lirdiTTai : used of those who had 
attained the highest degree of initiation 
into the Eleusinian mysteries. Judging 
from the use of eiroirTevw in i Peter, the 
word may have passed into ordinary 
speech, but no doubt is used here to en- 
hance the splendour of the vision, and the 
honour done the disciples, at the Trans- 
figuration — " admitted to the spectacle of 
His grandeur' (Moffat, H. N. T. p. 600). 
eirdirTijs is applied to God in Esth. v. i, 
2 Mace. vii. 35, cf. O.G.I.S., 6662s Tbv 
"HXiov *'A<j>paxiv IxoTm^v Kai o-biTTJp* 
(reference to an Egyptian Sun-god). Hof- 
mann holds that the reference is rather to 
the Resurrection and Ascension. peyaXc* 
ioTT|Tos. Cf. Luke ix. 43, Acts xix. 27. 

i6 — 19. 


UTTO TTis lAevoiXoTTpeiToGs ^ Sofns 'O utos U.OU 6 dvainriTOS JAOo outos 1 Matt. iii. 

i<TTiv, €ts ov iyi) cuSoKTjaa, — 18. Kal rauTT)*' TT]f 4>(«)>'T)f i^fieis Mark i. 
, , ,* , - m , A - X , - - , - c ' J.'. Luke 

r|Kou(rap.£»' €5 oupai'ou ek'€)(t;eiaac (tuv aoTtu oi'Tes tf to) ayiw 111.22. 

DO' > J.'^\' rx-m Acts ix. 

opci • 19. Ktti exofjicf pepaiOTcpov Tof TTpoep-qriKoi' Aoyoc, w KaAojs 12, x. 3, 

TTOiciTC " Trpo(rexotn-€9 ws \u)(i'a) <j>aifocTt iw auxfi-iipw tottw, ° ecjs ou xxvi! 13, 

rifxepa StauydaT] Kal <f)a)o-4>dpos dkaTeiXr) cf rais KapSiais up.iit' ' 18. 

n 3 John vi., 

Acts X. 33, 

Phil. iv. 14. o Mark xiv. 33 Luke xiii. 8. 

' airo TTjs fieyaXoTT. syrr. 

Ver. 17. Xa^wv. It is well-nigh im- 
possible to say what is the case agreement 
of the participle here. It is at least cer- 
tain that the subject is Jesus. Dietlein, 
Schott, Ewald, and Mayor agree that 
the writer intended to go on, e^cPaibxrev 
Tov ')rpo4>r]TiK6v Xoyov, for which he 
substitutes Kai €XO|Aev Pc^aioTcpov, after 
the parenthetic i8th verse, irapa ©eov 
•iraTpds. See Hort's note, i Pet. i. 2. 
The usage {without the article) indicates 
the growth of a special Christian ter- 
minology. The two words are treated as 
one proper name. Tip.Tiv Kal So^av. A 
frequent combination, cf. Ps. viii. 6, Job. 
xl. 10, I Peter i. 7, Rom. ii. 7, 10, i Tim. 
i, 17, Heb. ii. 7, 9. Tip.ij is the personal 
honour and esteem in which Jesus is held 
by the Father, cf. Hort's note on i Pet. 
1. 7. " Honour in the voice which spoke 
to Him ; glory in the light which shone 
from Him " (Alford). ^wv^s ■ • • roiaa-Zt. 
This is the only instance of ToiotrSe 
in N.T. ="to the following effect". 
viro TTJs fityoXoirpcirovs 8d|T]s. Re- 
taining reading virb, we may regard 
fity. 8o|a as a vehicle of expression. 
The voice expresses its significance. It 
is not a mere accompan}ing phenomenon 
of the voice. Cf. the instrumental dative 
in i. 21 after TJvexOTj. fiey. 8o|ir)s corres- 
ponds to "the bright cloud" (v«<|>^Xt) 
4(wT€ivT]) of the Synoptics, ovpavcis is 
used in verse 18 to describe the source 
from which the voice came ; " the sky," 
cf. iii. 12, 13. els Sv eyit evSoK-rjcra. 
Moulton [ProlefT. p. 63) points out that 
tendency in N.T. is for els to encroach 
on the domain of kv. Cf. John i. 18, 6 wv 
«ls TOV K^Xirov {ib. p. 235). 

Ver. 18. €V Tw opei tw ay£ai. The 
phrase indicates a view of the place and 
incident which has been taken up into and 
sanctified in the religious consciousness of 
the Church. The Gnostic Acts of Peter 
use the phrase "in monte sacro". ayios 
signifies a place where Jehovah manifested 
Himself, cf. Exod. iii. 5, Isa. Hi. i. 

Vv. 19-21. The Transfiguration con- 

firms Prophecy. " Thus we have still 
further confirmation of the words of the 
prophets, a fact to which you would do 
well to give heed, as to a lamp shining 
in a murky place, meant to serve until 
the Day break and the Day-Star arise in 
your hearts. Recognise, above all, this 
truth, that no prophecy is restricted to 
the particular interpretation of one 
generation. No prophecy was ever 
borne through the instrumentality of 
man's will, but men spoke, direct from 
God, impelled by the Holy Spirit." 

Ver. 19. ^e^aK^Tepov. Originally a legal 
term. See note v. 10; cf. Phil. i. 7, 2 
Cor. i. 21. TOV irpo<|)TjTiKov Xoyov, i.e. 
all in the O.T. scriptures that points to 
the Coming of the Messiah. The pro- 
phecy is now supported by its partial 
fulfilment in the Transfiguration. w 
KaXb>s xoieiTC irpoo-e'xovres. " to which 
ye do well to take heed". " kqX. 
iroiTjo-eis c. aor. part, is the normal way 
of saying ' please ' in the papyri, and is 
classical " (Moulton Proleg. p. 22S). ws 
Xvxvw • . • Kap8. vp.wv. Spitta would 
eliminate the words €«s ov . . . dvoTeiX-[) 
as a gloss founded on Ps. cxix. 105 
and 4 Esdras xii. 42. avxP''np<j> Toiro), 
properly = " dry" or "parched": then 
"squalid" or "rough". Here it means 
" murky ". In Aristot. de Color. 3 rh 
avxfJ-Tjpov is opposed to to XafiTrpov. 
(f>(i)o-(}>opos. " Morning - star." Not 
found elsewhere in Biblical Greek. The 
LXX word is c<i>s(|>opos- In the poets, 
the word is always applied to Venus 
(Cicero, Nat. Deorutn, 2, 20). 

This verse has been much discussed. 
It may be well to mention three gram- 
matical points that emerge. (i) The 
reference of <S. It is simplest to under- 
stand it as referring to the content of the 
preceding clause, and not to t^v 'jrpo<|>' 
Xoyov alone, viz. the fact that the 'Trpo<j>. 
Xoy. is now P«p. on account of the Trans- 
figuration. (2) ?ios ov K.T.X. is to be 
taken with ^aivovn, not with irpoo-t'x- 
ovT€S. {3) iv T. K. vp,u)v is connected 



I. 20 — 21, 

Peter 20. TOOTO •* TrpcuTOi' yu'waicorres on iraaa irpo(f>T]T€ia yP^'i^'^S ISia? 
Tim. ii. I. <> iTTiXoCTews ou yiveTai' 21. ou yap OeXi^fiaTi dk-OpciTrou th'€x6t) 
ii,x. 39. 'irpo4)T)Teia ttotc, dXXa utto iri/eu/JiaTOS dyiou 4>cp6p.Ei'oi, cXdXrjaai' 

absent dTTO ©€0U ^ aV'SpWITOl. 

owing to 

growth of 

a special Christian terminology. C/. Jude 8, 2 Peter ii. 10, ii. 18, i. 20. (Mayor, Ed. xxvii. ff.). 

lowo 0€ov BP, syrh, boh., WH, Ti. ; ayioi ©eov JJ^KL, syrp + Treg. ; oyioi 
sah. ; ayioi rov 0. A ; aYioi airo 8. C, 

with dvarcCX-Q alone, and not with Siavy- 
OLoji. With these presuppositions we 
may briefly consider the two leading in- 

I. Mayor may be taken as representa- 
tive of the view that the verse is wholly 
an exhortation to " search the Scrip- 
tures ". There are three stages: the 
prophetic lamp (tov Trpo<t>. . . . r6ir(o) ; 
the Gospel dawn (rifiepa Siavy.) ; the 
nner light of the spirit (4>a>(r4>dpos . . . 
vf»,wv.). " The lower degree of faith in 
the written word will be followed by 
divine insight". He compares Euth. 
Zig. 6 '7rpo<j)T|TiK6s XiSyos tovs kv dyvoCq. 
<|>o)TaYO)7€i 60)9 KaOapov vpiv to <})<os tov 
€vayY*Xiov 8ia4)avTJ xaX 6 votjtos ioxr^- 
opo9, Tovreo-Ti, XpicrTos, €v Tais Kap8iai9 
vpwv dvaT€i\T). (cf. Huther, Alford). 
The objection to this view is that it 
seems to ignore the place given to the 
Transfiajuration as a religious fact for 
writer and readers alike (exopev). 

2. Another and more probable view 
naturally takes Iws ov . . . vpuv as re- 
ferring to the Second Advent. This pre- 
serves the usual meaning of iQp.^pa in the 
Epistle, and it also gives point to the 
striking sequence of metaphors. The 
Xwxvw <j>aivovTt is the confirmation of 
the prophetic word by the Transfigura- 
tion which the writer has given them 
(cf. V. 16) ; and this is made all the more 
probable if we take the reference sug- 
gested for u in (i) above. The avxi>- 
Toirw would be the world in which they 
live (cf. Ps. cxix. 105). This lamp is meant 
to serve until the glorious appearing. 
One objection to the eschatological in- 
terpretation of €cos ov K.T.X. is the phrase 
6v Tai9 KapSiais vpuv which implies an 
inward Coming. This is largely repelled 
if we accept its grammatical connection 
with dvaTetXf) alone ((3) above). "The 
Morning-Star arises in their hearts, when 
the o-T]fjicia of the approaching Day are 
manifest to Christians. The fulfilment 
of their hope is at the door: the Lord 
is at hand" (von Soden). See note on 
ver. g. 

Ver. 20. TovTO irpuTov ■yivcoo-KovTCs* 

" Recognising this truth above all else " 
(in your reading of Scripture). The 
False Teachers appealed to the O.T. 
scriptures in support of their doctrine. 
oTt Trdo-a . . . ov yivcTai. irdo-a . . . 
ov need not be regarded as a Hebraism. 
It is as normal as in i Jn. ii. 21, Jn. 
iii. 16. i8£as eiriXvo-cws. This passage 
is a noted crux, (i) Hardt, followed by 
Lange, Spitta and others interpret eiri- 
Xvo-. = dissolutio. " No prophecy of S. 
is of such a kind that it can be annulled ". 
But no satisfactory instance of JiriXva. 
in this sense can be adduced. (2) Ac- 
cepting the sense of 18. eiriX. = " pri- 
vate," or "human interpretation," Von 
Soden sees a reference to the methods 
of the false teachers in their attitude 
to Scripture (cf. v. 16, ii. i). I8ia9 
"is opposed to the tfxovT) evex^eio'a of 
'• ^7"' (3) It seems most satisfactory to 
/ understand 18. liriX. as the meaning of 
the prophet himself, or what was in the 
I prophet's mind when he wrote; the ful- 
Ifilment in any particular generation or 
epoch. " The special work of the prophet 
Is to interpret the working of God to his 
jbwn generation. But in doing this, he is 
paying down the principles of God's action 
j generally. Hence there may be many 
fulfilments of one prophecy, or to speak 
more exactly, many historical illustrations 
! of some one principle of Providential Gov- 
lernment" (Mayor, p. 196). The geni- 
tive ciriXvo-€(os is gen. of definition and 
not of origin. " No prophecy is of such 
a nature as to be capable of a particu- 
lar interpretation." 

Ver. 21. ov yap OeXi^fiaTi dv6pa>Trov 
Tjve'xOT) irpo<t>T]T6ia iroTe. With -r^viyji-q 
cf. w. 17, 18. dXXd viro irvevp. . . . 
<|>epopcvoi, cf. Acts ii. 2. uo-ircp 
4>6popev-r)9 'irvofi9 ^laias- Here we 
have the only reference to the Holy 
Spirit in the Epistle, and only in this 
connexion, viz. as the source of prophetic 
inspiration. The spirit is an agency 
rather than an agent. The men speak. 
The spirit impels. It is of much signific- 

II. I. 



II. I. 'EveVorro Se Kal \|/€u8oirpo<j)T)Tai Iv tw \aw, ws Kai ev a Vv. 4, lo, 
uuLC eaoi'Tai vj/eu8o8i8d<rKaXot, ol'xii'es irapCKTa^ouaic atpeacis ' diro)- See 

, y y , t , \ H > 1 ' 1 ' MoultOn, 

\eias, Ktti TOK ayopacrawTa aurous oear7roTT)>' api'OOfiei'Oi, CTrayoi'Tes Pioteg.y^. 

ance for the interpretation of the whole 
passage that avSpuiroi accupies a position 
ot emphasis at the end ol the sentence;, 
thus bringing into prominence the 
agent. The prophets were not ignorant 
of the meaning of their prophecies, but 
thev saw clearly only the contem- 
porary poliiical or moral situation, and 
the principles involved and illustrated 

Chapter II. — Vv 1-3. The False 
Teachers and their jfudgment. " Yet 
there were also false prophets in the 
ancient community, just as among you 
there will be false teachers. Thev will not 
hesitate to introduce alongside the truth 
corrupting heresies, even denying their 
Redeemer, and bringing on themselves 
swift destruction. Many- will imitate 
their vicious example, and thereby the 
way of truth will be discredited. Nay, 
further, actuated by covetousness, they 
will make merchandise of you by lying 
words. Yet you must not think that the 
judgment passed on all such Ion j ago is 
inactive. Their destruction is awaiting 

Ver. I. \|»€uSoirpo4>TJTai iv rii Xau. 
cv Tto \a<{) is used for the chosen people 
in LXX. t|/€v8o'7rpo<j)T]Tat. A class of 
False Proohets is frequently mentioned 
in the O.T In the earlier ages it is not 
suggested that there was conscious deceit 
on the part of the prophet. His pro- 
phecy i.s false, if it is proved so by the 
event (Jer. xxWii. 9). " When a prophet 
lies, without being inspired by a false or 
impotent god, it is because God in His 
an ^er against Israel's sin means to destroy 
him, and therefore put into the prophets 
'a lying spirit'". {Schi:lz. O.T. Th. 
i. 257). Cf. I Kings xxii. 5 fF. These 
are the prophe; s who cry " peace, peace," 
when God is really going to bring judg- 
ment. In the later period sup2rstitious 
acts and pagan practices, such a.s soiritu- 
alism, ventriloquism, professional sooth- 
saying, became common (e.g. Jer. xxvii. 
9; Isa. viii. 19). The cardinal di-tinction 
betwren the true and th-j false prophet lay 
in the moral character of 'iittir teaching 
(Jer. xxiii. 21, 22). xj/cvSoSiSdcrKaXoi,. 
The characteristics of their teaching are 
well-marked in this Epistle. See Intro- 
duction, pp. 115 ff. Compare Phil. iii. 18 
f.. " enemies of the Cross, " who brought 
tears of shame to the eyes of the Apostle ; 

VOL. V. 

the abuses of the Lord's Supper in i Cor. 
xi. ; also Galat. ii. 4, 2 Cor. xi. 13. 

•7rap£i<rd|ov<riv. What is the force 
of irapa- ? The idea of " stealth " or 
"secrecy" — "stealthily to introduce" 
— is hardly in accord with their character 
described elsewhere as To\(AT]Tal ai- 
6d8Eis, 8d|as oi TpcfAOVO-iv p\ao-<^T>- 
p.ovvT€s (ii. lo). Rather the idea seems 
to be of the introduction of false teaching 
alongside the true, whereby the oSos 
o\Ti9eias is brought into disrepute. Cf. 
•Trap5i<r€veYKavT€s, i. 5. The idea of 
stealth is present in irapcio-aKTOws 
(Gal. ii. 5). alpcVeis. Clearly aipcais 
here is used in original sense of 
" tenet " (" animus," " sententia ")> 
(So Spitta, von Soden, Weiss ; but 
cf. Zahn., op. cit. ii. 233). In Galat. 
V. 20, I Cor. xi. 19, the sense is 
" dissensions," arising from such di- 
versity of opinion. It is used in the 
sense of " sect " in Acts v. 17, xv. 5, 
xxiv. 5. Th2 \j/evSo8i8daKaXoi were' 
within the Church. Even the " Alogi," 
who disputed the fourth Gospel in' 
second century, were not excommuni- 
cated. They were, as Epiphanius says,. 
" one of ourselves ". Cf. MME., Expos. 
Feb. igo8. alpccrci; dirtoXcias- The 
Genitive contains the qualifying idea — 
" corrupting tenets ". Our identification 
with a great cause may be maintained, as 
in the case of the false teachers, but per- 
sonal motives may sadly deteriorate, and 
the influence of the life may breei corrup- 
tion. Cf. Ignat. Trail, vi. i ; Eph. vi. 2. 
Kai Tov dyop. . . . apvovp.evoi. Kal = 
"even". C/. Mark i. 27. If thvi ordinary 
use of ScTir JTT)s in early Christian writers 
is fillo-ved here, viz., as referring to 
God, ayopaSo) would also be used of 
God, who redeemed Is.ael out of Egypt 
(2 Sam. vii. 23). The reference here, 
however, is to Christ (cf. Mayor, p. xvii.). 
The N.T. use of ayop. is illustrated in r 
Cor. vi. 20, where reference might be to 
Go i ; but in ib. vii. 23 reference is 1 
clearly to Christ. So in Rev. v. 9. Cf. 
our Lord's words in Mark x. 45, about 
"giving his life a ransom" and Jude v. 
4. The " denial " seems to have con- 
■sisted in an inadequate view of the Person 
and Work of Christ, and their relation to 
the problem of human sin. Cf. Epp. of 
Peter, J. H. Jowett, pp. 230 ff. raxivTjv. 
See note on i. 14. cTrdYovrts. Th» 




b I Tim. ii. eaoTOts TaYikmv diroiXeiai' • 2. Kal ttoXXoI efaKoXouOticrouaii' auToif 
2, 2 Cor. - , / , ^v c _ , 

ii. I, viii. Tals aCTeXyeiatSj 81' ous ti 686s Trjs dXTjGeias |3Xac7cj)T)ijiii9i]creTai * 3. 
2, Luke i- , b . -v i' \ - \ ' c - c . ' . ^ V 

44- Kai ev irKeovezia irXacrTOis \oyots ufxas ejjnropeucroi'Tai ois to 

xxvii. 21. Kpijia CKTraXat ouk dpyei, Kai i^ dirojXeLa aoToii' ou '' ('uo-rdj^et. 4. 

13, I Cor. ei ydp 6 0e6s dyyeXwi' d|xapTr]o■d^'TWl' ouk e<|)€iaaTo, dXXd aetpais ^ 
viii. 6. 

^ creipais KLP, vulg., syrr., boh. +; o-eipois ABC, \VH, Treg. ; o-ipoi; ^, Ti. 
The two last are mere variations in spelling : the last gives a different word which 
seems less applicable to 5o<j"'^' The difficulty is, however, partially explained by 
regarding crcipais as suggested by Secixoi; of Jude 6. o-£ipos or cripos is a pit for 
the storage of grain, and so far as known, the word " does not seem to suggest 
anything awful or terrible " (Mayor). The presumption, considering dependence 
of whole chapter on ideas of Jude, is in favour of (r€ipais> 

middle might have been expected. Cf. v, 
5, where the active is suitably used. 

Ver. 2. do-EXyeiais. are " acts of 
lasciviousness ". 680s ttjs dXTjOeia;. 
a,XT|9eia contains the root-idea of " gen- 
uineness ". It combines the ideas of 
the knowledge of God and His purposes 
in Christ; and of the human obligation 
to right living that springs from it. " He 
that doeth truth cometh to the light." 
The writer of 2 Peter is, as always, con- 
cerned to oppose a merely intellectual 
Gnosticism, which has its ultimate fruit 
in immoraHty. Cf. Ps. cxix. 29, 30. 
pXao-<j)T]|ji,T]9i]or€Tai. The whole Church 
suffered in reputation because of these 
men. Cf. Rom. ii. 24, i Tim. vi. i. 

Ver. 3. ev is causal. TrXeov£|ia = 
" covetousness ". Cf. Luke xii. 15. 
TrXao-Tois : here only in N.T., " manu- 
factured," " feigned," "artificial", ep.- 
TTopcvorovTai Originally used in intrans. 
sense = " go a-trading". Cf. Jas. iv. 
13. Then — "import," in trans, sense. 
Here = " make gain of," " exploit ". 
Cf. 2 Cor. ii. 17, I Tim. vi. 5. 

019 TO Kpip,a cKiraXai ovik dpyci : 
' whose judgment has for long not been 
•nactive," although there is an appear- 
ance of delay. This delay is the argu- 
ment used by the false teachers. £k- 
iraXai occurs in O.G.I. S., 584^ (ii. a.d.), 
Si' wv eKiraXai avTTjv (sc. ttjv TrarpCSa) 
ev)epyeT[Tjo-ev]. (Cf. iii. 4 and ii. I, 
e'TrdyovTes eavTois Taxivrjv diruiXeiov.) 
For dpyei see note on i. 8. The judg- 
ment has long been gathering, and is 
impending. vva-raiei. The word used 
of the slumbering virgins in Matt. xxv. 5. 
In Isa. V. 27 it is used of the instruments 
of God's anger employed against those 
guilty of social abuses. 

Vv. 4-ioa. A histonca.1 illustration of 
the Divine judgment oh the wicked, and 
care of the righteous. 

" God spared not angels who sinned, 

but having cast them into Tartarus, gave 
chem over to chains of darkness, reserving 
them for judgment. He spared not the 
ancient world, but guarded Noah, with 
seven others, while the impious world 
was overwhelmed by a flood. So Divine 
judgment was extended to the cities of 
Sodom and Gomorrah, which were over- 
whelmed by ashes, and overthrown by 
earthquake, as an example of what is in 
store for impious persons, while righteous 
Lot was delivered, grieved and wearied 
as he was by the profligate life of the 
lawless. For day after day this man 
with his righteous instincts, in his life 
among them, was vexed with the sight 
and sound of their lawless deeds. In all 
this we have a proof that the Lord 
knows how to deliver the godly out of 
trial, and to keep the ungodly under dis- 
cipline until the day of judgment, especi- 
ally those who follow the polluting lusts 
of the flesh and despise authority." 

Ver. 4. eI yap 6 Oeos . . . introducing 
a series of conditional sentences. The 
apodosis is found in oIScv Kvpios 
. . . of V. 9. o-eipais- No doubt a 
rendering of Seo-ftois in Jude 6, agree- 
ably to the practice of this writer, who 
is somewhat fond of using rarer words, 
instead of the more commonplace, o-eipd 
usually means a "cord" or "rope" 
(Homer, II, xxiii., 115, Od. xxii., 175). 
It would seem to mean " a golden 
chain " in //. viii,, ig, 25, cf. Plato. 
Theatettis, i. 53 C The meaning 
"fetters" is peculiar to 2 Peter (for 
var. lect. o-eipois, see textual note), 
Taprapucras — " cast into Tartarus ". 
The verb is a aira| Xcy. Tapxapos 
occurs in three passages of LXX. (job 
xl. 15 (20), xli. 22 (23), Prov. xxiv. 51 
(xxx. 16) : but in none of these is there 
any corresponding idea in the Heb- 
rew. The word also occurs in Enoch 
XX. 2, where Gehenna is the place of 



|^o<))ou ^ Taprapojoras TrapeSwKci' CIS Kpicrtc TT)pou(JL€Vous,^ 5. Kai dpxa- e Plato. 
I'ou K6cr|xou outc e^^eiaaro, dXXa * oySooi' ' Nwe SiKatotrurTis Kr|puKa 695c, 
c4>uXa|6r, KaraKXucrp.oP' Kocrixa) aCTePoJi' * eird^a? ' 6. Kai ttoXcis Pcioj^. c. 
iooofiwi' Ktti fofioppas Te<J)pojo-as KaTacrrpO(})T] KareKpti'ec, uirooeiyfjia i. 812, 3 

TV 'T Of**' V 

fjieXXorrwi/ afxc^iaw "^ reOeiKw;, 7. Kai SiKaioi' Awt KaTairot'ou- 27. 

f Art 
fick'Ok' OTTO TT]s tcIk dGecTjuiwc ' CK dCTeXyeta d>'acrTpo<J)T)9 epuaaro, — absent ii. 

7. c/- 

Abboit, J. 
G. pp. 57 f. g Luke xiii. 34, Acts xiv. 27. h Matt. xx. 18. j i pet. iii. 2. 

i5o<{)ov J^BCKLP, Ti., Treg., WH ; £o<})ois ^.\. "The latter reading may 
have arisen from a marginal -ois intended to connect a-eipais, but wrongly applied 
to t,o^ov " (Mayor, Ed. p. cxciv.). 

2 TT]poup.£vovs BCKLP, syrli + Ti., Treg., WH ; KoXa^op-evovs rripew ^A, latt., 
Syrp, boh., sah. 

^ao-cPtcrtv BP, syrh, syrP, WH ; rots aaePeo-iv sah., boh.; ao-ePeiv S^ACKL, 
vulg., Treg., Ti. 

punishment for apostate Jews, and Tar- 
tarus for the fallen angels. In Homer 
(e.g. II. viii. 13) Hades is the place of 
confinement for dead men, and Tartarus 
is the name given to a murky abyss be- 
neath Hades in which the sins of fallen 
Immortals (Kronos, Japetos, and the 
Titans) are punished {cf. Salmond, H.B.D. 
ii. 344 a). Hence 2 Peter uses this word 
in agreement with the Book of Enoch 
and Greek mythology, because he is 
speaking of fallen angels and not of men. 
As regards the cosmology that is here 
implied, it has been suggested that the 
earth is not regarded as flat, but the 
universe is conceived as two concentric 
spheres, the outer heaven, the inner the 
earth. The nether half of heaven is 
Tartarus, and the nether halt of the earth 
is Hades (St. Clair, Expositor, ]u\y, 1902). 
The use o: the word by 2 Peter is remark- 
able as implying an atmosphere of Greek 
thought in the circle in which he moved, 
and for which he wrote. ^oc|>os in Homer 
is used of the gloom of the nether world, 
Od. XX. 356, cf. Heb. xii., 18. Also 
V. 17 and Jude 6, 13. It is implied that 
fallen angels and unrighteous men alike 
undergo temporary punishment until the 
day of their final doom, cf. ver. g. Enocii 
X. 4, 12, lxxx\'iii. 2. 

Ver. 5. apxaiov KcSo-^ov. The article 
is omitted, which is not a mark of illi- 
teracy. This chapter is prophetic in form, 
and the omission of the article is character- 
istic of that style. Cf. Job. iii. 10, Judges 
v. 5. (See Mayor, Ed. xxxiv. xxxv.). 
8iKaio<j"ovTjs KT^pvKa. KT)p. iu this sense 
is used in N.T. only here, and in i Tim. 
ii. 7,2 Tim. i. ii. 2 Peter again borrows 
from Jewish tradition as to the preaching 
of Noah. Cf. Jos. Antiq. \. 3, i, Clem. 

Rom. i. 7. KaTttRXvo-fiov, cf. Matt. xxiv. 
38, 39, Luke vii. 27, Gen. vi. 17. eiralas. 
Aorist participle implies co-incident ac- 
tion, " He saved N. . . . while he sent, 
etc." iirayb) is used of "setting-on," 
" letting loose," e.g. " dogs ". Odyssey, 
xix. 445, Xen. Cyr. x. 19. 6-ySoov. " with 
seven others". Classical Greek usage is 
to add avTov. There is much difficulty as 
to the significance of the numf'ral. The 
reference is no doubt to the number of 
Noah's family. The numeral is placed in 
a prominent place in the sentence to lay 
stress on the small number saved out 
of the inhabited world, as a striking ex- 
ample of mercy in the midst of judgment, 
cf. I Pet. iii. 20. Cf. P. Petr. iii. 28. otu 
eSpaYjAOTOKXeirTei rpiros wv (bis), cf. 
Abbott, J. G. § 562 

Ver. 6. iroXcis Z08, Kai Fop-opp. Not 
genitive of apposition, but cities of the 
district, where Sodom and Gomorrah were 
situated. Cf. Jude 7. 1. Kai F. koI al 
^irepl aiiTas iroXei? KaTa(rTpo<^'[j KarcKpi- 
vev. KaTa<rTpo<j)-{) is dative of instrument, 
" condemned them by overthrow ". Gen. 
xix. 24, 25 seems to imply some further 
destruction after the fire. Perhaps an 
earthquake is meant, a common accom- 
panying phenomenon of volcanic dis- 
turbance. inrcJSei-ypa . . . tcOcikus, 
" constituting them an example to un- 
godly persons of things in store fo'r 
them." With jxeXX. cf. Heb. xi. 20, Col. 
ii. 17. TC<t>pu(ras = " cover up with 
ashes" (not " reduce to ashes ") — found 
in a description of the eruption of Vesu- 
vius. (Dio. Cass. Ixvi. p. 1094). 

Ver. 7. KaTa-irovovpcvov, the word 
applied to the condition of the slave whom 
Moses delivered. Acts vii. 24. It implies 
outward discomfort, aet'o-pwv. Cf. iii. 17, 




^ '"'^h'^'A PX^fjLfiaTi yap Kal a.KOY) StKaios ^ ei'KaToiKw*' iv auToIs "fw^ipav i^ 

I Tim.iii. i^^epas >J'U)(r)i' SiKaiaf d>'6fA0is epyots ePacrdci^ei', — 9. olZev Kupios 
17, Matt. €u<T6|3eis £K ireipaffuou '^ puecrGat, dSiKous 8e els inae'pai' Kpiffews 

Vll. II, 

paCT(jLou ■" puecroat, aoiKous oe eis Tjfiepai' Kpi 

Phil. iv. KoXa^ofjieVoos TTjpetc, 10. jAaXtCTTa 8e tous ottictw crapKos iv eiriOujAia 

12, 1 1 ^ , , ^ \ 

TheJS. iv. fliao-fAOU TTOpeUOficVouS Kttl KUpiOTYJTOS KaTa4>pOCOUl'Tas. ToXfiTJTai. 

4, classi 
I Luke iv. 22, Col. i. 13, Rom. i. 26, 

1 o SiKttios i^ACKLP, syrr., Treg., Ti. ; om. o B, vulg., WH. 

"a stronger word than avo(xos, because 
6ccr(i.os is used especially ot a divine or- 
dinance, a fundamental law " (Mayor). 

Ver, 8. p\€ yap Kal aKofj. Two 
in.erpretations are possible (i) Instru- 
mental dative after c^ao-dvi^ev. " He 
\ exed his righteous soul by what he saw 
and heard." The objections are (a) the 
long interval that separates pX. k.t.X. 
from Ij3aadvi,£cv, (b) that pX^fji|xa is never 
elsewhere used of the thing seen, but is 
used of sight from the subjective, emo- 
tional, and volitional point of view. 
Hence (2), reading Sikoios without the 
article, and taking pX. k.t.X. with that 
word, we may translate with the Vulgate 
"a-pectu et auditu Justus". His in- 
stincts of eye and ear were nobler than 
those of the society around him. rifiepav 
l| ■n|j.€pas. " Day in, day out." Cf. Tjn«pa 
KaO T||ji€pav in Ps. Ixviii. ig. tPao-dvi^ev. 
It is somewhat peculiar that the active 
should be used. " He vexed, distressed 
his righteous soul." May it not be that 
in the use of the active a certain sense of 
personal culpability is implied? Lot was 
conscious that the situation was ulti- 
mately due to his own selfish choice (cf. 
von Soden). 

Ver. 9. oI8«v Kvpics, k.t.X. Apo- 
dosis to protasis begun in ver. 4. 
ireipaa-fiov. See Mayor's note on Jas. 
i. 2. The idea here is primarily of those 
surroundings that try a man's fidelity 
and integrity, and not of the inward 
inducement to sin, arising irom the de- 
sires. Both Noah and Lot were in the 
midst of mockers and unbelievers. This 
Treipaap-o's is the atmosphere in which 
faith is brought to full development. It 
was a condition even tf the life of Jesus. 
vp,€i5 8e eare ol 8i.ap,cfi£VT)KdTes p.£T' €|xov 
£v Tots ireipacrp.oTs |ji,ov (Luke xxii. 
28). It is the word used by St. Luke of 
the Temptation (Luke iv. 13). On the 
one hand, 'TTEipao-p.o's is not to be lightly 
sought (Luke xi. 4), or entered into care- 
lessly (Mark xiv. 3S) ; the situation of 
ircipourpLo's may itself be the result of sin 
(i Tim. vi. 9). On the other hand, it is 

a joyous opportunity for the development 
of spiritual and moral strength (Jas, i. 2, 
12). ireipao-p.o's becomes sin only when 
it ceases to be in opposition to the will. 
The word is peculiar to the N.T. 
dSiKous 8c CIS r\\t.4pav Kpiccu; KoXa- 
^opitvovs TTjpciv : " to keep the unrigh- 
teous under punishment until the day of 
judgment ". The reference may be the 
same as in i Pet. iii. 19, toIs cv 4)uXaKTJ 
irvcvfjiaaiv, if we interpret " spirits in 
prison " as meaning those who had dis- 
obeyed the preaching of Noah, and to 
whom Christ preached. Cf. Book of 
Enoch, x. 4 f. Tip.epav Kpio-coi;. This 
day is also the day of Parousia. The 
same expression is used in iii. 7. It 
is called i^ Kvpiov (iii. 10) ; r\ roxi 
deov T|(X£pa (iii. 12). Three great results 
are brought about on that day. (i) The 
ungodly will suffer diruXcia (iii. 7 ; cf. ii. 
I, iii. 16). It is noteworthy that the 
ultimate fate of the fallen angels is 
not described except as Kpiais (li. 4). 
(2) Dissolution of the material universe by 
lire (iii. 11, iii. 7, iii. 12, iii. 10). (3) The 
righteous are promised " new heavens 
and a new earth ". In this new universe, 
or environment, righteousness has its 
home (iii. 13). The difficult passage (i. 
19), about the day-star, has reference to 
this 'nP'^pO' Kvpiov, when the great Day 
shall dawn, and the s-ign of it shall cheer 
the hearts of the faithful, and the lamp 
of prophecy will be no longer needed. 

Ver. 100. |idXi(rTa 8£ tovs oiriaaj 
capKos . . • iropevope'vovs, "especially 
thosewho follow the flesh as their leader ". 
Cf. Matt. iv. 19, I Tim. v. 15. In Isa. Ixv. 
2 we have iropcvop.cvoi; . . . oiritru tuv 
dfiapTiuv aiiTuiv. The writer now passes 
from the sin of Sodom to the sin of the 
Libertines. ciri6vp.iapia(rp.ov. ciriOvfiiit;^ 
is used of strong desire generally ; " lust " 
in its older meaning. E.g. Luke xxii. 15. 
p.ia(rp.ov is a qualitative genitive, as in 
ii. I. atpeo-cis aTrojXcias : " a polluting 
desire ". KvpioTrjTos KaTacjjpovovvTas. 
Kvp. cannot be taken in a purely abstract 
sense, " despising authority ", KvpioTTjs. 

8— II, 



auOdSeis, S6|a9 ou rpefiooaii' pXaa4)T]fAou>'T£S. II. ottou ayyeXoi 
i<r)(ut Kal SucdiAci j^eij^oi'es ofres 00 i^tpoucriv Kax' auTuv irapd 

is used in the abstract sense of the Lord- 
ship of Christ in Didache iv. i. Honour 
him who speaks the word of God, ws 
Kvpiov, 8dcv -yap t| KvpidTT]s XaXcIrai, 
Ikci Kvpids eo'Tiv. 

As is suggested by this passage in the 
Didache, we may conclude that by 
KvpidTT)TOs KaraijjpovovvTas is meant a 
despising of the Lordship of Christ, which 
was the central theme of the apostolic 
teaching and preaching. The writer in 
ver. 10b, goes on to speak of their attitude 
towards 8d|as, or "angelic beings". 
Cf. Jude 8, KvpioTiiTa 8^ 6.9irov<riv, 
8d|as 8« pXao-<j)T)pov<riv. It is true that 
in Col. i. 16, Ko/pioTTjTcs form one of 
the ranks of angels in the false Gnostic 
teaching, but there is no indication that 
the Libertines here spoken of taught any 
elaborate angelology. On the contrary, 
they spoke lightly of the Unseen Powers 
generally. Their teaching seems to have 
been materialistic in tone. They were 
uis aXoya £aia Y^YtvvTjpc'va (jjvaiKo, (ver. 
12) — creatures of natural instinct, not 
employing the higher powers of reason 

Vv. 106-14 Further descrtptton of the 
False Teachers. " Presumptuous and ar- 
rogant, they do not shrink from irreverent 
speech about the unseen powers, while 
even angels, who are far superior to these 
false teachers in greatness and might, do 
not dare to bring against these powers an 
irreverent accusation. Their irreverence 
is therefore of an ignorant type, as of un- 
reasoning animals, who are born creatures 
of instinct, and are fitted only for capture 
and destruction. Their destruction will be 
in keeping, and they will be defrauded of 
what is really the wages of fraud. Their 
notion of pleasure is to spend the day 
in delicate living. They are spots and 
blemishes, luxuriating in their pleasures, 
while they feast with you. Their eyes are 
full of adultery, and they are insatiable 
in sin, alluring unstable souls. With 
kearts experienced in covetousness, they 
are children of the curse." 

Ver. 10b. ToXpTjrai av6d8ci,s. aid, is 
to be taken as an epithet of ToXp.T)Tal. 
The idea in ToXp. is of shameless and 
irreverent daring. atiOdSeis (avros and 
TJSopai) = "self-willed, ""arrogant". In 
I Tim. i. 7, the tirio-Koiros must not be 
avOdS-qs, where the thought seems to be 
of irresponsibility in regard to the com- 
munit)-. Cf. Didache iii. 6, jit) -yivov 

Yoyyvaos • eireiST) oSTjyci €15 tt)v pXacr- 
<|>T]piav pr]S^ aviOdSTjs p^jSe •7rovTjp6<|)po)v • 
€K yap TOVTwv oiravToiv pXa(r4>T]piai 
ycvvclvTai. The false teachers push for- 
ward their views, regardless of conse- 
quences. Cf. P. Amh. 78, 13 {. (ii. a.d.), 
p[ov] irXeoveKTi av6puiro<i d(v)9d8T]s. 
"An audacious mm is taking advantage 
of me." 86|as ov rpcpoixriv pXaar<{>T]- 
povvT€s. 86|as is used of Unseen Powers 
whether good or evil. How can pXao-4>T]p. 
be used of evil powers? It is obvious 
that we must find some sense for pXao-- 
({>T]pciv here ; and also in Jude 8, that 
will be applicable to 8o|as, apart alto- 
gether from their moral character. In 
Plato, Kep. 381 E, there occurs a passage 
dealing with the popular conception of 
the gods, which holds that they may 
sometimes change their form, and " in 
the likeness ofwandering strangers, bodied 
in manifold forms, go roaming from city to 
city " (cf. Homer, Od. xvii. 485). By such 
notions, as taught for example bv mothers 
to their children, men may be said, 
"els Oeovs pXa<r4)Tipetv ". Not only are 
these a misrepresentation of the Divine, 
but their tendency is to make light of it, 
belittle it, detract from its dignity. Some 
such sense of PX. seems to be required 
here. The false teachers may have scoffed 
at the idea both of angelic help, and of 
diabolic temptation. Their tendency 
seems to have been to make light of 
the Unseen, to foster a sense of the 
unreality both of sin and of goodness, 
and to reduce the motives of conduct to 
a vulgar hedonism (cf. Mayor's note, 

P- 74)- 

Ver. II. oirov = " whereas ". The 
interpretation of this verse turns on the 
meaning of Kar' atirwv. Does it refer to 
the false teachers, or to a distinction be- 
tween two sets of angels, which finds an 
illustration in the contest between Michael 
and Satan for the body of Moses ? (Jude, 
9). In the latter case Kar' avrwv would 
refer to the fallen angels. Another pos- 
sible interpretation is that dyycXoi Icrx^'^ 
Kal 8'uvdpEi pei^ovcs ovtcs are a superior 
class of archangels (Spitta), and kot* 
avTutv would refer to the 8d|ai in general. 
Chase suggests that the reference is to 
the false teachers, and angels are re- 
presented as bringing before the Lord 
tidings as to the conduct of created 
beings, whether angels or men (op. cit. 
7Q7 b). 




m Use of *" Kupio) |3Xda4>r] fjioi' Kpiaiv. 12. ouTOi Se, ws oiXoya j^wa yey£vvr]\i.iva 

stead of <j)uaiKa eis aXwCTic Kal ^Qopdv, Iv ° ots dyt'ooua-ic pXaa4>'n,"-0"^''''£S, 

indicates i^^ TTJ <j>6opd auTwi' Kal 4)0api]a'oi'Tai, 13. dSiKoup.ev'oi ^ p.icrQ6y 
progress ,5 ,' . .5, ' , , , , , . , , , <v v - 

towards aoiKias TjoofT]!' T^YOufAC>'oi TT]>' cc T|fAepa, Tpucpt)!', (nri\oi Kat p.a>p.oi 

tion of 

prepp. with three cases (Moulton, Proleg, 106). n Ron. x. 14, vi. 21, xiv. 21, John xi.x. 37, 

Luke V. 25. 

^ aSiKov|ji£voi {^ BP, syrh + WH ; KOfiiovpievoi ACKL^c, boh., spec, syrh + 
Ti., Treg. 

We may note the tendency in 2 Peter 
exemplified here to put in general terms 
what Jude states in the particular, in the 
story of Michael and Satan. The par- 
ticulars of Jude are omitted (as also the 
name Enoch afterwards) in order to avoid 
direct reference to apocryphal writings. 
Accordingly the sentence, ov (f>£povo'iv 
Kar' aviTuv pXa<r4)T]p,ov Kpio-iv, is only 
intelligible by reference to Jude 9, where 
Michael doe^ not himself condemn Satan, 
but says eiriTn-qo-ou o-oi Kvpios. Cf. note 
on pXacr4)i]p.ouvTes, v. 10. 

Ver. 12. yf.ytvvr\^iva, <|>vo'iKa — "born 
creatures of instinct ". Instinct is here 
distinguished from the rational centres of 
thought and judgment. They are aXoya 
£b>a. Their chief characteristic is that 
they are " alive," and have no sense of 
the moral issues of life. Like animals, 
they exist els aXwtriv Kal <{)9opdv. Iv ots 
a-yvoovcriv pXa<r<j)Tip,oi)vT«s = Iv to-utois a 
..." Speaking lightly of things they 
are ignorant of". Spiritually they are 
incapable. They know not what they do, 
in thus clouding moral issues. Iv ttj 
<{>6opa avTwv Kal (j>9apT]o-ovTai. Here is 
a subtle example of the dependence of 
this epistle upon Jude. In Jude 10, we 
have Iv tovtois <j>6€ipovTai, referring to 
oca 8e 4*i'<'''''''^^ • • • I'fioTavTai,. The 
sense in 2 Peter is confused, and there 
is no distinction between the two kinds 
of knowledge, although the intended 
meaning in both passages is the same. 
Cf. Rom. viii. 5, 6. 

Ver. 13. dSiKO'up.evoi p.iff9ov aSiKias 
{cf. V, 12). This playing upon words is 
characteristic of 2 Peter, dSiKelv has 
usually the sense of "doing harm to" 
(cf. Acts XXXV. 10; Galat. iv. 12). Here 
it would seem to mean " being defrauded 
of the wages of fraud," or "being done 
out of the wages of wrong-doing ". It 
has been customary to see in this phrase 
an illustration of the irresponsible use of 
words in 2 Peter. " Anothei example 
of the author's love of far-fetched and 
~nificial expressions" (Mayor). In P. 

Eleph., however ■zja'^^f (iii. B.C.), the 
writers ask for a receipt with reference 
to a certain business transaction, tovtov 
Se ytvo^ivov laoi^cOa ovk "qSiKTijAevoi 
" this having been arranged, we shall not 
be defrauded ". To this may be added 
Mayor's citation of Plut. Cato Mi. 17 
(p. 766) evpuv XP^'* ■TttXoia t&> 8T)|jiocri(;t 
iroXXois 64>£iXovTos Kal iroXXois to 
ST)p,6<riov, ajxa tt)v ir(5Xiv eiraticrev aSi- 
KOv(x£VTiv Kol a8iKov(rav. The accusative 
rei after dSiK. is very unusual. In classical 
writers it is found only with dSiKi^fia. 
p.i(r66v aSiKias suggests the experience of 
Balaam, of whom the same expression 
is used in ver. 15, who never received his 
promised hire from Balak (Num. xxiv. 11). 
Death deprives the false teachers of all 
their reward. For significance of the 
name " Balaam," in connexion with the 
false teachers, see Introduction, p. 118. 
■qSovTjv in N.T. only in a bad sense, cf. 
Luke viii. 14, Tit. iii. 3, Jas. iv. 1-3. 
Tpv<})T] only in N.T. in Lukevii. 25 where 
it is used of " delicate living," a luxurious 
life, but with no special blame attached. 
The word is also used of gifts of wisdom 
in Prrv. iv. 9, cf. Ps. xxxvi. 8, "the river 
of thy pleasures ". Eden is called irapd- 
Seitros T-ijs Tpv<{>TJs, Gen. ii. 15, iii. 13, 24. 
Iv Ti|Ji.€p(f "in the day-time,", 'in broad 
day-light ". ottiXoi Kal p.up.01, cf. Ephes. 
V. 27, 2 Pet. iii. 14, I Pet. i. ig, Jude 12. 
pufios "reproach," "disgrace". Cf. 
Hort. on i Pet. i. ig, where he traces the 
wav in which pupos and apupos, came 
to be used with superficial meaning of 
"blemish," cf. Ephes. i. 4, v. 27, Heb. 
ix. 14. lvTpv<|)wvT€S : " to be luxurious," 
cf. Xen. Hell. iv. i, 30. Iv Tais airaTats 
ovToiv : to be taken with Ivrpv^. diraTT] 
is a favourite word of Hermas {Mand. 
viii. 5) and is frequently joined by him 
with Tpvc^t] [Mand. xi. 12 and throughout 
Parable 6). According to Deissmann, 
dirdT-tj in popular Hellenistic has the 
meaning " pleasure ". Cf. Matt. xiii. 22 
= Mark iv. 19 (Luke viii. 14), (see his 
Hcllenisiernns des semitischcn Monotheis- 

12-15. OETPOY B 139 

ivTpDd>Cji're.<5 iv rais diraTacs ^ auTuif cruceuciiYOuixcfoi i)\xiv, 14. o Matt. x. 

64)6aX|jious e'xocTcs fxeo-Tous ° jxoixaXiOos Kai dKaraTrauoTous " iii. i. . 

^ d/xapTias, SeXedl^ocTes 'J'uxo^? do-TTjpiKTOOs, KapSi'av' y^>j»\i.vci.(T\i.4.v^v 12. 
p V *' .. , , , \ ' .Q - pi Peter iv. 

TTAeoi/e^tas e^oi'Tes, Karapas 15- KaraAcnroi/Tes euaeia*' i.jas. 1. 

oSok £TrXa>'rj6T](rai', e^aKoXouSi^cracTes tt] oSw tou BaXadp. tou Bdaop ^ q Heb. iii. 


' airaTai9 t>^ACKLP, syrh (mg. oYairais), VVH, Ti. ; ayairai; A'^B, sah., syrp 
J- Treg., VVHm. At first sight it would seem probable that 2 Peter has misread 
a^aTrais in Jude 12. Confusion is common in MSS. of O.T. between aYa-rrau) and 
a.TraToii>, a.yavi\ and oiiraTT] {e-g-, Ps. Ixxviii. 36). Yet onraTTj, aTrarab) has been 
proved to be the correct reading in many cases, axiruv here is an argument in its 
favour. Nestle [op. cit. pp. 324 ff.) and Zahn [op. cit. ii. p. 235 f. ) argue strongly 
for a-yairais and omission of vp.iv (<rvv£v«xovH-fvot = " feasting with one another ") 
(Mayor, Ed. cxcvii). 

"aKaTairavo-Tov9 ^CKLP, 13, 31, Ti., Treg. ; oKaTairaorTovs AB, WH. The 
latter reading "may have originated in a faulty pronunciation on the part of the 
reader, or the v may have been accidentally omitted at the end oi the line, as in B, 
where one line ends with ira- and the next begins with -o-tovs " (Mayor, Ed. cxcvii. 
cf. Moulton, Proleg. p. 47). 

3 Boo-op J^cACKLP, boh., syrh, Ti., Treg. ; Bewp B, syrp, sah., WH, Weiss ; 
Bcbjopo-op J>5. There can be little doubt that Bocrop s the correct reading. The 
leading of ^ is manifestly due to a combination of Boorop and a marginal correc- 
tion -£G)p. Zahn. [op. cit. ii. p. 292) says that everywhere in LXX, Josephus, Philo, 
only the forms Beop or Baiop occur, and that Botrop is inexplicable except as a mis- 
take on the part of 2 Peter due to " imperfect pronunciation or defective hearing ". 
Nestle, however (op. cit. p. 244), after Holmes- Parsons, cites viov tov Boorop in the 
Georgian version of Jos. xiii. 22. Boo-op also occurs as name of a place in Deut. 
iv. 43, I Sam. xxx. 9, i Mace. v. 26. "The support of the ordinary name by B 
against the other MSS. may be compared with its support of Iip<ov against Svpewr 
in i. I " (Mayor, Ed. cxcviii.). 

mtis, [Ncue Jahrb. f. d. Klass, Altertunt, Numbers xxiv. 36 as one "whose eye 

1903), p. 165, n. 5). was closed," i.e. to outer things, and 

Ver. 14. oiKaTaTravo-Tovs dp-aprias. also as one "which seeth the vision of 

For use of genitive with this verb, cf. i the Almighty, falling down and having 

Pet. iv. I. See Grammatical Note, his eyes open," i.e. to spiritual vision. 

StXed^ovTcs. Cf. V. iS and Mayor's Balaam was one who allowed the greed 

note on Jas. i. 14, " entice or catch by a of gain to become stronger than the 

bait ". KaTcxpas tIkvo.. Cf. xsKva vTa- prophetic impulse. He is conscious that 

KOTJs, I Pet. i. 14. he is tempting God, and an evil con- 

Vv. 15, 16. Example of Balaam, science makes him irritable. He fears 

" They have left the straight way and lest God may yet interfere to rob him of 

wandered from it, having followed the his reward. When the ass starts aside 

way of Balaam, who loved the ways of he beats it, but ultimately his passion is 

wickedness, and was rebuked for his subdued by the momentary triumph ot 

transgression, when a dumb ass spoke his highior spiritual instincts, when he 

with a man's voice, and forbade the in- begins to suspect that in the stubbornness 

fatuation of the prophet." of the animal there is really the power 

Ver. 15. T-(j 68u tov BaXadp. The of God exercised to hinder him in his 
comparison of the conduct of the False course. The angel with the drawn sword- 
Teachers to that of Balaam is significant is often the form that men's religion takes 
as determining their character and motive who are disobeying the voice of con- 
(see Introduction, pp. 115 ff.). The science. " There is a strange depth of 
writer of 2 Peter takes the miraculous meaning in the appealing eye of an ill- 
narrative in Numbers xxii. 21-35 literally, treated animal. It is an appeal, in the 
It is no disparagement of the value of the first place, to whatever remnant of [ity 
illustration that we, in our day, can no and generosity may still survive in the 
longer do so. Balaam had the gift of heart of the man who ill-treats it, but it 
real spiritual vision. He is described in is an appeal, in the second place, to the 




OS fiiffGoc dSiKtas ifjyaiTr](T€i', 1 6. eXcy^iv 8e e(T)^ev ISias irapa- 
I'Ofjiias • uTTO^uyioi' d<^(j)vov iv dr9pciirou ^u)vy\ ^9eyi,dii.evov cKoiXuaei' 
TTji' ToG ■n'po<j>TiTOu TTttpacjjpot'iav'. 17. ouToi e.laLv Tnrjvai acuSpoi 
Kat 6p,i)(Xai utto XaiXairos eXaukopiccai, ots 6 {^6(j>os toG ctkotous 
TeTT)pY]Tai. 18. uirepoyKa y^P fJ-aTatoTTjTOS 4>0eyy6/iei'Oi SeXedl^ou- 
(Tiv ec eiridufjiiais trapKos daeXyeiais tous oXiyojs ^ dTro<J)euyoi'Tas tous 
iv irXdk'T) di'aorTpe4)op,eVoos, 19. iXeuBepiav auToIs eirayyeXXoiieKOi, 

' oXiycDS ABt^c, vg., syrr., sah., boh., Treg., Ti., WH ; ovtws ^CKLP ; ovrus 
would require aor. ; a'iroc})vyovTas ("clean escaped" A.V.), read by KLP. In the 
MSS. OVTWS IS hardly distinguishable from oXiyws (Mayor, Ed. cxcviii.). 

justice of the God who made them both, 
a cry of which we may be sure it has 
entered into the ears of the Lord of 
Sabaoth. When animals are put to un- 
necessary suffering, either in the shambles 
or as beasts of burden, or in the interests 
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 
iess clearly than if they had spoken with 
man's voice, they forbade the madness 
of their torturers" (Mayor, p. 203). Cf. 
F. W. Robertson, Sermons, Ser. iv. pp. 
40 f. 

Ver. i5. eXey^iv Se ccrxev, a periphrasis 
for the passive of tXeyxw, = " was re- 
buked ". ISias Trapavo|xias, emphatic, 
"his own transgression". Two inter- 
pretations of iSia? are possible, (i) The 
irapavofji. is a characteristic trait in 
Balaam (Keil. Weiss). (2) As prophet, 
Belaam was expected to do and teach 
God's law. He whose duty it is to 
rebuke others is himself rebuked for his 
own transgression" (Hundhausen, Wie- 
singer). 'n-apavopiia = "a particular 
transgression " as distinct from dvofiia 
= " disobedience in general ". Trapa- 
(|>poviav, " infatuation ". Balaam is pro- 
ceeding against what he knows to be 
the Divine will. 

Vv. 17-19. The Libertines are them- 
selves slaves. " They are like waterless 
wells, and mists that the wind disperses. 
For them is reserved the fate of gloomy 
darkness. They utter ponderous no- 
things, and allure through their lusts 
those who were just escaping from the 
temptations of heathen life. Promising 
freedom to others, they are themselves 
slaves of corruption. Every one is a 
that which has mastered 




17. TTTjyal 



is interesting to compare the exprepsions 

in 2 Peter here with Jude 12. It would 
appear as though he had felt that v£({>^Xai 
avvSpoi was a contradiction in terms, 
and instead he substituted irrjyal. Xat- 
Xairos is a strong expression = " gale," 
a "storm of wind". Cf. Mk. iv. 37, 
Lk. viii. 23. ots 6 ^(5<j)os . . . TeTi]pi]Tai 
is somewhat out of place here, and is 
used appropriately of meteors in Jude 13. 

Ver. 18. virepoyKa. Cf. Jude 16. 
No doubt the reference is to the use of 
Gnostic terms. (laTaioTTjs, used specially 
of moral insincerity. Cf. p-araias dva- 
«rTpo<})ii5, " heartless conduct," i P. i. 18. 
There is no corresponding reality behind 
their words. crapKos, to be taken with 
do-eXyeidis, which is in apposition to 
eiriOup.iais. tovs oXiyws dirotjjeTjyovTas : 
"those who are just escaping"; who 
have been impressed with Christian truth, 
and have had strength to separate them- 
selves from their old surroundings and 
customs ; but are led to return through 
the compromises suggested by the false 
teachers. The phenomenon is not un- 
common in all missionary w ork, of men 
who have escaped from " Gentile vices, 
but are not yet established in Christian 
virtues" (Bigg), tovs evirXavrj dvao-rpe- 
4>op,cvovs = governed by d'iro<|>evyovTas : 
" (es-caping from) those who live in 
error " ; i.e. from their old heathen com- 
panionships. " There is great passion 
in the words. Grandiose sophistry is 
the hook, filthy lust is the bait, with 
which these men catch those whom the 
Lord had delivered, or was delivering " 

Ver. ig. eX^vOcpCav. Doubtless that 
Antinomianism is indicated to which the 
doctrine of Grace has ever been open. 
Cf. Galat. V. 13. It arises from the ever- 
recurring confusion of liberty and license. 
The training of conscience is contem- 
poraneous with the growth of Christian 
character. The Pauline teaching, w-hich 
abrogated external legality, was open to 

l6 — 22. 



auToi SouXoi uirdpxoi'T€s ttjs (^Qopas* w y^P ^'■^ i^TTriTai, toutw r Acts xi. 17 
SeSouXwTai. 20. €1 yotp dTToc^uyoi'Tes to, ^idcrfiara tou koctjjlou cv s Rom. i.t. 
eiTiyKojaei tou Kupiou Kal aa»Tr]pos 'Itjctoo XpioroO, toutois "^Se irdXic "xii. n, 

X » e - , , - V » ' - Matt. XXV. 

€)i.7rAaKen-€s TjTTwi'Tat, yeyorcj' aoTois ra e<7x<iTa xeipora twp' 27, xxvi. 

■n-pwTwi'. 21. KpetTTOv ydp * r]v auTOis 'p,T] eTreyfWKeVai ttjc 686f Arist. 

Tris 8tKatoaij>'T)s r\ iTTiyyouaiv uTroo-rpevJ/ai eK tt^s Trapa8o9ei(r»]s Xcn. 

auTois ayias ecToArjs' 22. ao|ip£pT]K€i' auTOis to tt|S dATjpous 7.40. 

t Luke 
xvii. I (o»J. (?) Touf ). 

aspect of Christianity, not only as faith, 
but as the mora] law aytas cvtoXtjs. 
Cf. i. 5. iv rfj iricTTei v\iutv ttjv a.pfTr)v. 
A strong ethical note pervades the tcach- 
of 2 Peter. 

Ver. 22. TO TTJs dXTjGovs irapoiiiias : 
" the content of the true proverb " has 
been "verified," or " realised " in their 
case. The first proverb is found in 
Prov. xxvi. II. The second is ap- 
parently not derived from a Hebrew 
source. Both are quoted familiarly in 
an abbreviated form {cf. WM. p. 443). 
The interpretation of the second is an 
exegetical crux. Bigg takes Xov<ra(xevTi 
= " having bathed itself in mud ". The 
sense is, " not that the creature has 
washed itself clean in water (so appar- 
ently 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 ". 
This, however, is to force the meaning 
of Xovo-ofx^vT), which is consistently used 
of washing with water. Again, the poini 
of the proverb is to illustrate to. scrxaTa 
X«tpova Twv irpuTov. The dupes of the 
false teachers were cleansed and returned 
to pollution. 

The question is important whether 
Xovo-ap,£VT) is Middle or Passive ? Dr. 
Rcndel Harris (Story of Ahikar, p. Ixvii.) 
may have discovered the original proverb 
in the following, appearing in some texts 
of Ahikar. " My s-on, thou hast behaved 
like the swine which tvent to the bath 
with people of quality, and when he 
came out, saw a stinking drain, and went 
and rolled himself in it ". If this be the 
source of the irapoipta, X. is Middle 
(Moulton, Proleg. pp. 238-39). 

A friend of my own, with a knowledge 
of animals, tells me that the pig is often 
washed in certain forms of disheaith, to 
open the pores of the skin. The animal, 
being unprotected by hair, finds the 
sun's heat disagreeable, and wallows 
again in the mud for coolness. The 
dried mud protects the skin from the 
ravs. 3op3opo9 found only here and in 

abuse, and might easily be dangerous 
to recent converts from heathenism. 
4>9opas. See Mayor's note, ed. p. 175. 
c{)9opd is that gradual decay of spiritual 
and moral sense that follows on wilful 
self-indulgence, fa'ydp . . . SiSovXcoTai. 
Cf. Rom. vi. 16, viii. 21, John viii. 34. 

Vv. 20-23. The consequences of fall- 
ing away. " The case of their victims 
is a serious one. They have escaped 
from the pollutions of the world through 
the knowledge of Jesus Christ, and are 
once more entangled and worsted by 
these. Their last state becomes worse 
than the first. It were better for them 
not to have known the way of righteous- 
ness, than in spite of such knowledge, to 
depart from the holy commandment com- 
mitted to them. They illustrate the 
truth of the proverb : ' the dog that 
turned back to his own vomit, and 
the sow that went to bathe to wallowing 
in the mud '." 

Ver. 20. Here, again, yap loosely 
introduces the subject of the victims 
allured by the false teachers away firom 
their former faith, to, tov 
Koo-pov. (Lev. vii. 8, Jer. xxxix. 34), 
occurs only here in N.T. In LXX the 
word seems to have a technical religious 
sense, the profanation of flesh by ordinary 
use which is set apart for sacrifice. This 
sense lingers here. The body is sacred 
to God, and to give licentious rein to the 
passions is piao-p*. Cf. piao-pds, v. 10, 
and piaivu, Jude 8. toO Koo-pov is the 
world in the sense of the heathen society 
and its practises, eiriyvwcrei. See note 
on i. 2. TovTois is governed b}' cpirXaK- 
«VT£S = " entangled by these". Cf. 2 
Tim. ii. 4, yiyovtv avTois, k.t.X. Cf. 
Matt. xii. 45, Luke xi. 26, and Heb. vi. 
4-8. X. 26. 

Ver. 21. 686v ttjs Si.Kaio<rvv'r]9. Also 
called " the way of truth," ii. 2, " the 
straight way," ii. 15. cvtoXtjs. Else- 
where in N.T. the singular is used to 
mean a particular precept. Cf. Rom. 
vii. 12, I Tim. vi. 14. It is charac- 
-teristic of this writer to emphasise the 




u Luke XX. ■ TrapoiiAias, Kuiav eTrt<rrpeJ/as em to i8io»' e^e'paixa, Kai 'Ys " Xouaa- 
I Cor. vii. flefT) €IS KuXlo-jJlot' |SopP6pou. 

vMid.? III. I. TauTTji' t]8t], dyaTnjTOi, Seurepaf ufiir ypd^(a cttiotoXt^i', 

xxvii.5. iv als Sieyeipw ofj.wi' iv {nrojivqcrei ttji' elXiKpii'TJ Sidroiai', 2. 

a For this » a- ^ > < , cv-c' i~ 

use of so- P'l'ilo'oTJfat T(i)v Trpo€ipT]|i£i'a);' pT^p.aTwi' utto twi' ayicov irpoipifjTWK 

called V.-, ,^ .,,.. „ / y 

epexe- '<Cll TT)5 TWK aTrO(TTO\cU>' UfJLOJl' e^'TO^T]S TOU KOpiOU Kttl <T0JTr]pOS, 3. 

infinitive TOUTO TTpwTOI' yil'CJCTKOl'Tes OTl cXeuaOfTai CTt' e(r)(dTa)V' TCJI' i^ficpu- 

ton, P°o- ^t' efxiraiypiovT) €(jnT-atKTai Kara ras iSias e7rt0u|Aias auTwi' -nopexiov 

kg. pp. 
b Col. iii. 161 2 Cor. vii. 5, ix. 10, Phil. i. 29. 

Jer. xxxviii. 6. Cf. Acta Thomae, 53. 
cISov pdp^opov . . . Kal \|/vxas IkcI 
Kv\iop.£'vas. In the Legends of Pela- 
gia, which, though late, are written in 
good vernacular Greek, both noun and 
corresponding verb are found. IXOovaa 
Trepicrrepa (itXcivT) Kal f3cPopPop(t>pe'vT] 
■jrepieTreTaT^ |xoi, Kal tt)v S-ucrcoSiav tov 
Pop^opov avTTJs ovK -^Swap-qv (^epeiv. 
(Die Pelag. Legend., ed. Usener, p. 21). 
Bishop Wordsworth suggested that the 
double proverb is an inexact quotation 
of two iambic lines — 

£is iSiov l|cpap' lirto-Tpexl/as ktjuv 
XeXoupe'vTj 6' is t'lS KiiXto-pa ^opPopov 

If he is right, 2 Pet. cannot be charged 
with the use of the two rare words, 
^op^opov and ll^papa. Bigg suggests 
(ed., p. 228) that the Proverbs of Solomon 
had been unified by some Jewish 
paraphrast, and this one of the pig added 
to the canonical collection. 

Ch.'Vpter III. — Vv. 1-4. Prophets and 
apostles have warned us that de- 
lay will lead to denial of the Second 

" I am now writing my second letter 
to you. In both I seek to rouse you to 
honest reflection on the words formerly 
spoken by the holy prophets, and on the 
commandment of our Lord delivered by 
vour missionaries. Especially realise 
the truth of their warning, that there 
will come in the last days scoffers, with 
scoffing questions, walking after their 
own lusts, and saying, ' Where is the pro- 
mise of His appearing ? For,' say they, 
'from the time the fathers fell asleep, 
everything remains as it has been from 
the beginning of creation '." 

Ver. I. For tjStj with numeral, cf. 
John xxi. 14. Sevxe'pav «Tri<rToXitiv. Does 
this refer to i Peter ? See Introduction, 
p. 113. cv als: "in both of which," 
ccnstructio ad sensum. Sicyeipco . . . 
vnropvijo-ct : cf, i. 13. 

elXiKpivr) : cf. I Cor. v. S, 2 Cor. i. 12, 
ii. 17, Phil. i. 10. elXiKpivTJ Sidvoiav is a 
technical philosophic term used by Plato. 
Phaed. 66 A = "pure reason," such as 
the geometer employs. In Phaed. 81 C, 
clXiKpiVTjs ^^vxT is opposed to \J;, pcpiao*- 
pevT] Kal oLKaOapTOS. 2 Peter here cannot 
be acquitted of a confusion in the use of 
philosophic terms, probably picked up 
loostly in conversation. At the same 
time, Sidvoia is also used in the philo- 
sophic sense of il/vx^ in Gen. xvii. 17, 
Deut. vi. 5, Num. xv. 39; also in N.T. 
Coloss. i. 21, I Pet. i. 13. ciXiKpivijs is 
of doubtful etymolog}', and signifies ethi- 
cal purity, a mind uncontaminated and 
unwarped by sensual passion. The oppo- 
site state is described in Plato, Phaed. 
81, "She thinks nothing true, but what 
is bodily, and can be touched and seen, 
and eaten and drunk, and used for men's 

Ver. 2. Borrowed from Jude 17. 
pvTjo-Orjvai : epexegetical infinitive. See 
grammatical note. Kal tt)s twv dirotr- 
ToXwv, K.T.X. Double possessive geni- 
tive " of the Lord's command delivered b\' 
your apostles ". Chase [op. cit. p. 811 a) 
suggests that 8id should be inserted after 
Ty\%, and compares the title of the Didache, 
SiSaxT) Kvpiov 8id Twv 8(d8cKa diroo'- 
ToXuv Tois eOvetriv. €vtoXi] = teaching oi 
our Lord on the fulfilment of the moral 
law, cf. ii. 21, John xii. 50. oTroo-ToXwv : 
Are the Twelve meant? cf. Introd. pp. 103- 
4. Probably dir. signifies just those from 
whom they received the first knowledge of 
the gospel, accredited missionaries of the 
Chuich. The word is used of Epaphro- 
ditus, Phil. ii. 25, and of other than 
apostles, 2 Cor. viii. 23. 

Ver. 3. TOVTo irpuTOv yivjio-KovTes. 
Accusative is required, but all MSS. have 
nominative, cf. Jude 18. Iir' eo^druv 
Twv '^pEpuv. Mockers are one of the 
signs of the approach of the end, cf. i 
John ii. iS. Iv epTraiYpovij cpiraiKTai. : 




ucfoi, 4. Kal Xe'yoi'Tcs FIoG ivTiv ri eTravveXta tt]s rrapouo-i'a'' 'au'lou; c i John ii. 

' A' * ' " .. > ' « a Si ' , > ]2 2 John 

atp Tis yiAp 01 nai^p(9 eKOiu.T)0T](Tai', irai'Ta outws oiafie>'ei air 6. 

'^PXT? KTi.fTcaj9. 5. AafWai/et yap auTOus touto WeAoi'Tas on ouoa.|/oi 27, vm. 
i » \ V - ,* o<s " \ t 5 o(> - „ » 5^, I John 

r](Tav EKTraAai Kai y^l ^5 uSaxos Kai 01 uoaros (TuveoTUKra tu» tou iii. s, jer. 

0eou "Xdyoj- 6. 81' wi' 6 xoxe Kocrfxos uSari KaTaKXuaGels dTrwXcTO- ixxxix. 2. 

e Rom. iii. 
24, Eph. 
ii. 8. 

ejATraiKms is an unclassical form. cf. 
Mark xv. 20. This verse is not part of 
the prophetic or apostolic message of ver. 
2, but a particular caution of the writer, 
based on Jude. 

Ver. 4. irov eoTiv, k.t.X. The com- 
ing ot our Lord in the near future was 
evidently an integral part of the apostolic 
teaching, cf. i. 16. " There is no sure 
evidence that Jesus sought to undermine 
the assumntion of His followers, that the 
i'luai giory would be manifested in their 
day ; and even this we may fairly qualify 
with the remembrance that a main motive 
of the principal eschatological discourse, 
reported by the Synoptists, is to warn 
the disciples against premature expecta- 
tions " (J.H- Muirhead, Eschatology of 
jfesus. pp. 126, 127). TT)s irapovcrias : 
See note on i. 16. d<|)' tis yap. k.t.X. 
"The fathers," must mean those of the 
preceding generation, in whose hfe-time 
the irapovo-ia was expected. o-Ctws = in 
statu quo. oir* apxTJs KTiaeus, i.e., 
"contrary to all previous human ex- 
perience ". The Teaching of our Lord 
Himself in one aspect would imply 
that the actual irapovcria, would be at- 
tended with no outward previous dis- 
turbance of life to act as a warning. 
Men would be engaged in their ordinary 
occupations and pleasures (Matt. xxiv. 
36-42). The development and ripening 
of the moral and spiritual issues of men's 
lives are often not outwardly apparent 
(cf. Pagct's " Studies in the Christian 
Character,'" — " The Hidden Issues," pp. 
89 ff). 

Vv. 5-7. The first fart of the argu- 
ment against the scoffers. " It is not 
true that the course of the world is un- 
changing. They have wilfully forgotten 
that the heavens existed originally, and 
the earth was formed out of water, and 
by means of water, by the Word of God. 
By th s very water and Word the world, 
as it then was, was overwhelmed and 
perished. The present heavens and 
earth, by the same Word, are treasured 
up for fire, being reserved for the day 
when impious men shall meet their doom 
and destruction." 

Ver. ■;. XavOdvti Yotp avroi/s tovto. 
" This escapes their notice." tovto is 
nominative. 0€'Xovt«t ' " wilfully "•* of 
their own purpose ". CKiraXai [cf. note, 
ii. 3): "originally," t.e. before the crea- 
tion of the world. The Rabbinical school 
of Shammai held that Gen. i. i, ev apxfj 
€7rotT|0-£v 6 Scbs Tov ovpavov Kttt TT]V yr[V 
meant that the heaven was in existence 
before the six days' work, i.e. CK-iraXai. 
Perhaps this notion is present here. 
e| SSoTos Ktti 8i* vSaTOS. Two kinds 
of water are meant. The first may refer 
to the primeval watery chaos — " the face 
of the waters " (Gen. i. 2). The second 
is perhaps connected with the formation 
of the dry land by " the gathering to- 
gether of the waters into one place " 
(Gen. i. 9). But the meaning is obscure 
[cf. Mayor, ed. Ixxxiii. ; Chase, op. cit. 
797). <rvv€(rT<i>o-a = " was formed ". Cf. 
Philo, i. p. 330. £K YTJs Kal ijSaTOs Kal 
a£pos Kal irvpos (ruvitrrti o8e 6 Koa^xos. 

The above interpretation is in sub- 
stantial agreement with Alford's, who 
distinguishes " the waters above the 
firmament," and " the fountains of the 
great deep ". The Hebrew had no- 
notion of evaporation. The rivers run 
into the sea, and the water returns sub- 
terraneously to their sources again (Ec- 
cles. i. 7). 

Ver. 5. 8u' oiv. Mayor and Schmeidel, 
against the evidence of nearly all manu- 
scripts, read Si* ov.. This is rendered un- 
necessary (i) if the above rendering of 
e| vSaTos K.T.X. i.s taken, and the plural 
81' oiv refers to the two waters. 81* ov 
would refer to Xoyo) alone, or (2) if 81* 
oiv reers to -uSciTtov and Xoya) taken to- 
gether, which would in some ways suit 
the sense of the whole passage better. 
The lalse teachers had ignored the, 
agency of the Divine word. KOTaKXv- 
aflets ; dw. \ty. in N.T. ; found several 
times in P.Tebt. e.g. ^a^^W (u.c. 86) 
[woTT*] . . . (TvjiPeP-qKOTuv KaTaxXvo-fl-fj- 
vai. " So that in consequence of w hat 
happened, it was flooded" ; 56^ (late ii. 

B.C.) Y£tv[ci)0-V« SJ ircpl TOV KaTaK£K- 

Xi)or6aL TO irtSiov "but know about ouj 
plain having been inundated". 




f WM. iii. 
§ xix. « 

7. 01 8e vGi' oupakoi Kal r] -yTj tw auTw ^ Xoyw T€0T)o-aupta(Jie>'oi elffii' 
TTupl Tr]poup.€i'oi €is T^fiepaK Kpiaecus Kal aTTCoXeias TWf dacPuii' 
dcOpwTTOJi'. 8. '*£*' 8e TouTO fiTj Xai'9ai'€Ta) ufids, dYaTrr]TOi, on jxia 
i^p,€pa Trapd Kupiw ws x^^*^"^ "T •^'^'^ X^''*'^ ^""^ "^S ■njiepa fiia. 9. 
oii PpaSuVei Ku'pcos ttjs eTrayyeXias, ws Tii/es |3pa8uTT]Ta ■qYO'J>'Taij 
dXXd p,aKpoGu)j.€l €is u|Jids, |at) PouX6fi€>'6s rit'as d7roXea9at dXXd 
irdt'Tas etS fierdi'Oia*' x^piio^oti- lO- "H^ei 8e 'i^ficpa Kupiou ws 

1tij» ovtw ABP, vulg., sah., boh., WH, Ti. ; tw ovtow ^CKL, syrr., Treg. 

Ver. 7. -jrvpl TT)poTj(xevoi. According 
to the Jewish conception of the rainbow 
promise, water would not again be the 
destructive agency. The heaven and the 
earth are reserved for destruction by fire. 
Te6T)o-avpio-(A£voi : " set apart for ". The 
writer means that both the rainbow pro- 
mise and the delay are not to be regarded 
as implying that there will be no more 
great cosmical changes. 

The idea of the association of a great 
cosmical change with the coming of 
Christ is an interesting one. It involves 
the question of our environment when 
th; natural is exchanged for the spiritual 
body. This writer evidently expects not 
complete annihilation of the present en- 
vironment, but a " new heaven and a 
new earth, wherein dwelleth righteous- 
ness" (v. 13). St. Paul speaks of "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 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 per- 
fected humanity " (Mayor, ed. p. 207. 
See also his most interesting and sug- 
gestive note : " Answer to the objection 
that no change is possible in the material 
universe " ; and with whole passage, w. 
5-7, cf. Ruskin, Sesame and Lilies, p. 

Vv. 8-10. A further argument to ex- 
plain the apparent delay. " One thing 
beloved, you must not forget. The sense 
of the duration of time in the Divine 
Mind is not the same as in the human. 
One day is the same to God as a thousand 
years, and a thousand years as one day. 
God must not be judged as slack by human 
standards, in the fulfilment of His pro- 
mise. He is better than the promise. 
He is long-suffering to usward, not 
willing that some should perish, but 
"that all should come to repentance. We 
know not when His long-suffering will be 
exhausted. The day of the Lord will 



come as a thief. Then the heavens will 
pass away with hurtling noise, and the 
elements being burned, shall pass away, 
and the earth and the works of men con- 
tained in it, will be made manifest." 

Ver. 8. p.ia T|[A£pa, k.t.X. Cf. 
xl. 4. The literal application of 
statement to the story of creation, 
ployed by patristic writers, in which one 
day is interpreted as 1000 years, and 
therefore the creation in six days really 
means 6000 years, is of course absurd. 
On the other hand, it can scarcely be 
said that the writer of 2 Peter has attained 
to the conception that the category of 
time does not exist for the Divine Mind. 
Rather the meaning is that infinite com- 
passion overrides in the Divine Mind all 
finite reckoning. Cf. Barnabas, 15, Jus- 
tin, Dialogue, 81. 

Ver. g. ov ppaSvvei . . . i^YovvTat. 
The idea that is combated is that God 
has made a promise and has not kept it, 
He is, however, better than His promise. 
The additional element of His p.aKpo9v- 
|xia is brought into play. God is greater 
than men's conception of Him, especially 
if theirs is a mechanical view of the uni- 
verse. — ws Tives PpaSvTTjTa -fiYovvTat. 
As nowhere else in the Epistle, here the 
writer of 2 Peter enables us to view the 
summit of the Christian Faith, and to 
rise to a magnificent conception of God. 
(lY) PovX6p.€Vos, K.T.X. Delay does not 
spring from an unwillingness or impot- 
ence to perform. His will is not even 
that "some" should perish, though that 
is regarded by the writer as inevitable. 
Are we to see here opposition in the 
writer's mind to the purely logical inter- 
pretation of the Pauline teaching on 
Predestination ? Some will perish, but 
it is not His Will. His Will is that all 
should come to repentance. The good- 
ness of God should lead to repentance. 

Ver. 10. TiP'^'pO' Kvpiov. No distinc- 
tion is made between the Day of the 
Lord, and the Coming of Christ. This is 
remarkable, as excluding any idea of mil- 




KXc'irTT)?, iv 1] 01 oupat'ol poi^riSoc " TraptXeu'croi'Tai, aroixeia Scgjohnxix. 
Kau<rou)JL€>'a \u6rjacTai, Kal yt] Kal xa ei' aorfj epva eupcGr^aexai ^ ■'^' '" • 

XuO|Jl^l'(i*C TIOTaiTOUS 

II. TouTui' our TTacTOJC 

XXI. 12, 1 

5 - ' ' ' - Tim V 

bet uirapxcik' ujxas 25, Luke 

xxiv. II, 
Anab. i, 7, 17. 

' €vp£0T)o-€Tai ^BKP, syrp ; ovx tvpeOrjo-CTai sah. ; KaTaKaTjtreTai AL, syr^, Ti. ;. 
KauOrjacTai vel. ; KaTaKav6T)aovTai al. ; a<|)ovi<r6T)o-ovTai C ; cm. Kai yrj . . . tvpt- 
6i]<r€Tai vulg. ; om. €vp£eTio-£Tai spec. Both Nestle and Mayor agree in suggesting 
the passive of a compound ot" pcio (KaTapvTjcrcTai or 8t.appvT)(r€Tai. I am indebted 
to Professor J. H. Moulton for the information that the late Henry Bradshaw, of 
Cambridge, suggested the reading tp-ya ap-ya tvp(6T]aiTai. As against this, and 
in favour of the text as it stands, we have 2 Clem. xvi. 3, which seems to be a 
paraphrase of this passage. Kal iraaa t| 71) us poXvpSos ^"ti irvpl rriKopevos, Kal 
t<Jt« <t>avi]0'6Tai xa Kpv<j>ia Kal (|>avepa (pya. xuiv dvOpuirtov. 

lenarian teaching, which speedily made 
its appearance in the Early Church. <Ls 
KXe'irxTis, cf. I Thess. v. 2, Matt. xxiv. 
43, Luke xii. 39, Apoc. iii. 3, xvi. 15. 
That day will surprise those who are 
clinging to the idea that no change is 
possible. poi^TiSov, onomatopoetic, ex- 
pressing the sound produced by rapid 
motion through the air, e.g., flight of a 
bird, or an arrow. It is also used of the 
sound of a shepherd's pipe. No doubt 
the sound of a fierce flame is meant. 
" It is used of thunder in Luc. jfup. 
Trag. I ; of the music of the spheres in 
lamblich, Vit. Pyth. c. 15 ; Oecumenius 
says the word is especially used of the 
noise caused by a devouring flame " 
(Mayor, ed. p. 157). <rxoix«ta. Spitta 
interprets (xx. as being the spirits that 
preside over the various parts of nature. 
But the situation of o-x. between ytj 
and ovpavol makes it practically cer- 
tain that the heavenly bodies are meant. 
The universe consists of ovpavol, o-xoi- 
X«ia and yf). ovpavol is the vault of 
heaven, " the skies ". <rx. would therefore 
mean sun, moon and stars. Cf. Justin. 
Apol. ii. 5, Trypho. 23. Cf. Isa. xxxiv. 4, 
Joel ii. 30, 31, Matt. xxiv. 29, Apoc. vi. 12- 
14 in illustration of the Jewish belief that 
the stars will share in the final destruc- 
tion of the Last Day. Kavo-ovpeva. A 
medical term, used of the heat of fever 
(Kavo-os). This is the only known use 
of the word applied to inanimate objects. 
Whether the writer of 2 Peter has here 
indulged a fondness for unusual words, 
or whether Kavo-(, was ever used in 
Other than a medical sense in the Koivt), 
it is impossible as yet to say. In any 
case it denotes a violent consuming heat. 
cvpe6i^a-exai. The only alternative read- 
ing that is worthy of notice in con- 
nexion with this difficult passage is Kaxa- 
Kai]o-cxai, but one would expect a word 

expressing dissolution, like irapcXevo-ov- 
xai, or Xv6ijo-£xai. cvipcOi^acxai is found 
in an absolute sense in Clement, Cor. ix. 
3 (of Enoch) ovix cipeOTj avxov Odva- 
xos, " his death was not brought to light ". 
In 2 Clem. xvi. (see textual note) ^a.vr\iT- 
exoi is the paraphrase of cvpeOtjo-exai [cf. 
Introd. pp. Qo f.). 

Vv. 11-16. The ethical value of the 
ParoJisia expectation. " Seeing then 
that all these things are to be dissolved, 
how great an eflect it ought to exercise 
on our whole moral and religious life, as 
we look forward to and hasten the com- 
ing of the day of God. The skies shall 
be set on fire and dissolved, and the ele- 
ments shall melt with fiercest heat, but 
we look for new skies and a new earth 
according to His promise, in which 
righteousness shall find a home. Where- 
fore, beloved, with such expectations, 
endeavour to be found in peace, spotless 
and blameless. Do not reckon the long- 
suffering of our Lord as an opportunity 
for licence, but as a means of salvation, 
as our beloved brother Paul wrote you in 
the wisdom granted to him. He indeed 
spoke in all his letters of these things, in 
which there are some things hard to be 
understood, which ignorant and unstable 
persons wrest, as they do the other 
Scriptures, to their own destruction." 

Ver. II. \vop.£V(i)v. Present used for 
a future. Mayor translates "are in pro- 
cess of dissolution," as though the prin- 
ciple of ({>dopd were already at work ; but' 
this is a conception foreign to the mind 
of the writer, who uses it only in a moral 
significance. Nature is "reserved" 
(6T]o-avpi^€o-6ai) for destruction. Dis- 
solution is the goal in sight. iroxa-jrotJs. 
" What sort of men." A later form of 
-iroSa-irds. vTrdpxtiv implies not merely 
existence, but existential character. 
dvaaxpo(|)ais Kal cvacPcfais. The use. 





ev dyiais di'ao-Tpo4)aLS t<ai euae^eiais, 12. TrpoaSoKwi'Tas Kai 
<T7reu8o>'Tas ttjp' irapoucriai' ttjs tou OeoG T^jxepas, 81 tjc oupacoi 
TTupoufiet'ot Xu9-»]aoi'Tat Kat (TTOLy^ela KauorouiAefa rr^Kexai. 13. 
KaifOU9 8e oupafous Kal yrji' Kai^rji' Kara to i-ndyyekiia auxoO 
TrpoorSoKwfJi.ei', cc ois SiKatoaui'T] KaroiKei. 14. Ato, ciYcnTTjToi, 
h 2 Cor. xii. xauTa TrpocSoKoii'Tes aTTOuSdaaTe doTrtXoi Kal dfJLW|J.T)Toi ^ aurw 
eupeOfjfat ii' etpi^vrj, 15. Kal tt|1' tou Kupiou i^fAwv' fAaKpo0u|Jiiaf 
awTT^piac ■pyeiaSe, KaGoJS Kal 6 dyaTTTjTos iip.ajf d8€\4>os flaCXos 
KaTo. Trjc SoGelffac auTw ao^JiaK eypail/ec upiiv', 16. ws Kal cc irdaais^ 

^iraaais xais ^KLP, Ti. ; om. rais ABC, Treg., WH, Weiss. 

els Odvarov; Ephes. i. 4, clvai, dp.up.ovs 
KaTevaJiriov avTov. For ao-TriXoi Kai 
d)jib>p.T)Toi, cf. note on v. 13. dp,a>fiT)T09 
occurs in Epistle of Aristeas (ed. Wend- 
land), with reference to sacrificial victims. 
ev eipTJvj). Peace and righteousness are 
one. Cf. Ps. Ixxxv. 10. The " well- 
doers " will be able to meet the Parousia 
with calm expectation, 

Ver. 15. Kttl TT)V TOV Kvpiov . . . 

Tiyeio-Oe. Cf. v. 9. The Divine long- 
sufftring is capable of interpretation as 
" slackness," or as opportunity for license 
instead of as o-wTtipiav, an opportunity 
for repentance. KaOus Kal 6 dyaTrijTos 
. . . eypax|/£v viaiv. The interpretation 
here largely depends oh (i) whether the 
reference of KaOws is confined to the idea 
in the first clause of the verse, or (2) is 
to be extended to include acrn-iXoi Kal 
dfx.(6p.t)T0i . . . elpi^v^ in ver. 14, or (3) 
is still further extended to include the 
whole treatment of moral disorder aris- 
ing from delayed Parousia. In the case 
of (i) Romans would be the most ap- 
propriate among the known canonical 
epistles. In that epistle the idea of 
God's long-suffering is most prominent 
(cf. ii. 4, iii. 25, 26, ix. 22, 23, xi. 22, 23). 
(2) Almost any of St. Paul's epistles 
might be meant. {3) If the question 
of moral disorder arising from difficulties 
about the -Tropovaia is placed in the 
foreground, " none of the existing Pau- 
line Epistles can be in question except 
I Corinthians (in this Church there were 
very similar extravagances, and the 
Resurrection was by some denied) and 
Thessalonians" (Bigg). A decision on 
this point involves the discussion on the 
destination of the epistle, for which see 
Introduction, pp. 205 f. {cf. Zahn., Infrod. 
ii., pp. 2ir-2). 6 dyaiTTiTos • • • flavXcs 
need not imply that Paul was alive. Kaxd 
TTjv SoOeicrav axixo) iro^iav. Cf. i Cor. 
iii. 10, Gal. ii. 9, i Cor. iii. 66, Col. i. 28. 
Ver. 16. u)9 Kal ev irdaais rats 

of the plural in cases of abstract nouns is 
peculiar to the writer and to i Peter. He 
emphasises once more the close connexion 
between morality and religion. 

Ver. 12. aTrevSovras. Either (i) 
" earnestly desiring," cf. Isa. xvi. 5, 
snrevScov SiKaiocruvifjv, or (2) preferably, 
" hastening the coming ". " The Church 
miy be said to bring the day nearer 
when it prays, ' Thy kingdom come ' " 
(Bigg). The writer is here referring to 
the Jewish idea that the sins of men 
prevented Messiah from appearing. " Si 
Judaei poenitentiam facerent una die, 
statim veniret Messias, filius David." 

The words are capable of a still more 
spiritual meaning, which, however, is 
rather beyond the consciousness of this 
writer. The kingdom of God is "with- 
in " us, and Christians may be said to 
hasten this coming by holiness of life. 
Christian conduct is itself both a rebuke 
to vice and a realisation of the presence 
of Christ in the hearts of His disciples. 

TiqK£Tai. Again present for future. 
The phrases in this verse are repeated 
from ver. 10 in order to introduce the more 
impressively the idea in ver. 13. 

Ver. 13. Kaivovs Se ovpavois • • • 
irpoa-SoKW/xev. Cf. Isa. Ixv. 17. eoTat 
ydp 6 ovpavos Kaivb; Kal 4] yTJ Kaivi]. 
Enoch xci. 16. See note on ver. 7. 

oupavds might appropriately be trans- 
lated " sky ". ev ois SiKaioo-uvrj KaToi- 
K€i ; "wherein righteousness dwells," 
or "has its home". In the word there 
is both the sense of permanence and of 
persuasive influence. Both in the hearts 
of men, and the new environment, there 
will be nothing that militates against 
righteousness. The Parousia is both 
judgment on the wicked and triumph for 
the kingdom. Cf. v. 7. 

Ver. 14. aoTTiXoi Kal d|Aw(iT)Toi. avroi. 
aviTo) is dative = " in relation to Him," 
or "in His sight". Cf. Rom. vii. 10. 
cvpe'dr) p.01 y\ cvtoXt) tj els ^cdtjv avrt] 



Tals tTvicTToXals XaXwi' iy aurais irepl tootwc, iv als eaxlc Suak'orjTci 
rn'a, a 01 d|jLa9€i'5 Kal awTi^piKTOi o-Tpe^XouCTii' ws «&•■ "rds Xonrds 
ypa4)ds Trpos ti^' ISiac auTwi' d.TrciXeiai'. 

17. 'Yfieis ouv, ciYcnrr]Toi, irpoyu'wo^KOt'Tes 4>uXdaae(796 IVa pLTj jfj 

i Acts ii. 8, 
Tit. i. 12. 

ciricTToXais. This statement implies 
neither the inclusion of all the epistles 
that have come down to us, nor the 
formation of a canon. It is much more 
natural to take it as referring to a collec- 
tion of letters made not long after Paul's 
death, and read in the churches. The 
term 6 dYtt'TT)Tos Tifxuv dSeX<|>6s in ver. 
15 would seem to refer to one whose 
memory is still quite fresh in the hearts 
of the readers. XaXuv iv auTais irepi 
TotJTwv : *' where he touches on these 
subjects" (Mayor), irepi tovtuv indi- 
cates a widening of the reference to in- 
clude Paul's treatment of the whole 
question of the Second Coming. The 
mention of Paul's name here implies a 
desire on the part of the writer to show 
that on this point the Pauline and Petrine 
teaching are at one. The false teachers 
founded their Antinomian doctrine on 
Paul's teaching about the Grace of God. 
€v als, K.T.X. This clearly involves 
that a collection of letters is meant. 
SvoTo-qra Tiva. "What are the 8w<rv- 
OT]T<i referred to ? " Probably St. Paul's 
doctrine of God's free grace (Rom. iii. 
5-8), with his apparent disparagement of 
the law in Rom. iii. 20-28, iv. 15, v. 20, 
vi. 4, vii. 4-11 ; his teaching with regard 
to the irvevpiaTiKol, i Cor. i. 15 ; with re- 
gard to the strong, whom he seems to 
just fy in their neglect of the rule made 
at the Apostolic Council, as to elSuXoOvxa 
(Acts XV. 29; Rom. 14; i Cor. viii., x. 
25) ; as regards the Resurrection in bap- 
tism (Rom. vi. 3-11; Col. iii. i; i Cor. 
XV. 12) ; perhaps as regards predestination 
(Rom. ix. 11-21), and the Parousia (2 
Th. ii.) " (Mayor), oi d|j.a6ei9 Kai d<mi- 
piKToi. d|Jia6i]S is not used elsewhere in 
the N.T. It signifies not so much '• un- 
learned " as " uneducated " ; a mind un- 
trained and undisciplined in habits of 
thought, lacking in the moral qualities 
of a balanced judgment. do-T-rjpiKToi 
refers more to conduct, those whose 
habits are not fully trained and estab- 
lished. The reference of d^. Kai doTTjp. 
is of course not to the Libertines, but 
to a class among the readers. In ver. 
17 o-TT)pi7p,6s is used of the readers, in 
distinction to the False Teachers, who are 
called dOco-fxcov. oTpePXovo-iv ; of per- 
sons, " to torture," of things, " to wrest " 
or " twist ". 

•us Kai xds Xonras Ypa<|>ds. (i) There 
has been much discussion among com- 
mentators as to the meaning of ^pacjids- 
Spitta takes Ypa4)as in sen.^e of " writ- 
ings," and concludes that these were by 
companions of the Apostle Paul ; but 
this is a very unusual sense of YP*"t'''i 
unless the name of an author is given. 
Mayor and others interpret as the O.T. 
Scriptures ; while some who arc prepared 
to assign a late date in the second cen- 
tury to the epistle, think that both Old 
and New Testament Scriptures are 
meant. On every ground the hypothesis 
of Ypa4>ds = O.T. Scriptures is to be pre- 
ferred. (2) The difticulty in connexion 
with the meaning of YPa(t>ds is largely 
occasioned by the plirase ras Xoi-irds YP- 
Does this mean that the Epistles of St. 
Paul are regarded as Scripture ? At- 
tempts have been made (e.g., by Dr. 
Bigg) to cite classical and other parallels 
that would justify the sense for rds 
Xonrds, "the Scriptures as well". In 
these, certain idiomatic uses of dXXos 
and other words are referred to, but no 
real parallel to this sense of Xoiiros can 
be found, and the connexion implied in 
Xoiirds is closer than dXXos- The result 
of the whole discussion is practically to 
compel us to take rds Xonrds yP*<I>^5 i" 
the obvious sense " the rest ot the Scrip- 
tures," and we cannot escape the con- 
clusion that the Epistles of Paul are 
classed with these. The intention of the 
author of 2 Peter seems to be to regard 
the Pauline Epistles, or those of them 
that he knew, as Ypac^ai, because they 
were read in the churches along with the 
lessons from the O.T. 

Vv. 17, 18. Final exhortation. 
" Having then, brethren, been fore- 
warned, be on your guard lest you fall 
from your own foundation, carried away 
by the error of lawless men. Grow in 
the grace and knowledge of Our Lord 
and Saviour Jesus Christ. To Him, 
be glory both now and in the day of 

Ver. 17. This verse gathers up various 
thoughts that appear elsewhere in the 
epistle. ripoYivcoaKovTts repeats ravra 
■TrpaiTOV y\.v<ii<TKOVTi% of i. 20, iii. I ; 
dOeo-pcov occurs ii. 7 : irXdvTi ii. 18. 
o-vvairaxOcvTcs (cf. Galat. ii. 13), "car- 
ried away". d9€o-p.<i»v, see note ii. 7. 



III. 18. 

k Gal. ii. 13. roil' dSeVfici)!/ TrXai/T) ^ (Twatray^QiuTes eKTre'crTjTC tou iSiou crTr\piy\i.ou, 
18. au|dc€T€ Be iv y^dpiTi Kal yvuxiei tou Kupiou iqixuc Kal ccjTfipos 
Itjctou XpioTou. auT(L iq 86|a Kal vuv Kal cis i^fiepai' aiuwos. 

<rTT)piYfAov, " steadfastness " ; perhaps 
" foundation " is better, although in this 
sense we would expect <rrrjpiy\La. There 
is, however, a tendency in N.T. to con- 
fuse words in .|Aa -p.09. Cf. KvXio-fxa 
(2 Pet. ii. 22). apiravfAos (Phil. ii. 6). 
The foundation is the x^pis and yvaio-is of 
V. 18. iSiov is in emphatic contrast to 
the untrustworthy basis of the Libertine 

Ver. 18. €v x«ipiTi Kal yv"*''*'' tov 
KvpCov, K.T.X. The genitive is to be 
taken with both words. yvwctis here 
means " spiritual instruction," a know- 
ledge that has its source in Christ Him- 
self, as distinct from iTriyvwo-is, which is 
personal communion with Christ (see 
note i. 5). yvij)(T\,<i is the privilege of the 

" friend " of Christ. Cf. John vii. 17, 
XV. 15. avTu). Note that the doxology 
is addressed to Christ, and, therefore, 
Kvpiov iqficiv. also refers to Him. els 
T|p€pav aluvos : " in the day of eter- 
nity ". The meanings of €15 and ev 
in later Greek are somewhat interchang- 
able (cf. Moulton, Proleg. 234 f.). T|p. 
alwvos is a very rare phrase not found 
elsewhere in N.T. It is found in Sir. 
xviii, 10, where the phrase is ev Tip-epa 
aiuvos. The more usual expression is 
els Tovs aluvas tuv alcovuv. " els tows 
aluvas becomes so immediately the rul- 
ing phrase that this Petrine doxology 
cannot have been written alter liturgical 
expressions had become in any degree 
stereotyped " (Bigg). 



The First Epistle. 

The first Epistle differs from all the other N.T. Epistles save the 
Epistle to the Hebrews in this, that it is anonymous. The author, 
however, claims to have been an eye-witness of the Word of Life 
(i. 1-3) and speaks throughout in a tone of apostolic authority, and 
there is abundance of primitive and credible testimony that he was 
St. John, "the disciple whom Jesus loved," and the last survivor of 
the Apostle-company. 

1. The MSS. Titles. — AB 'ludi'oo (-dvi'oo) a : i^ 'Iwdi'v'ou eTriaroX'?] 
a : L eiTioToXT) KaOoXiKT] Tou dyiou dirooT<J\ou 'icudkcou : P '\iai6,vvoM too 
€uaYYeXt(rTou Kal dTro(r(T6Xou ittKnoKx]) a. Two later MSS. have inter- 
esting titles — 13 cTriaToXT) a 'ludft'ou • euayyeXiKT) OeoXoyia irepl x" • ^ 
Ppon-f]s ulos 'iwdci'Tjs rdSe )(piaTiai'Oio-n'.^ 

2. Patristic Evidence. — Polycarp. ad Philipp. viii. : iras yap os av 
fit] ofioXoyj] '\r\(Tovv XpioroK iv o-apKi tXrjXuG^vai, dn-ixpioT<5s coTif — a mani- 
fest echo of 1 John iv. 2, 3. This proves the early date of our Epistle 
and the esteem in which it was held, and if it does not attest the 
Johannine authorship, it at least suggests it. Polycarp had known 
several of the Apostles and of those who had seen the Lord ; he had 
been a disciple of St. John and had been ordained by him bishop of 
Smyrna ; and he was the leading ecclesiastic in the whole of Asia. 
Cf. Jer. Script. Eccles.; Iren. IH. iii. 4. 

Eusebius {H . E. iii. 39) says that Papias, whom Irenaeus had 
called " a hearer of John and a comrade of Polycarp, an ancient man 

'St. Augustine's discourses on the First Epistle are entitled "Ten Treatises on 
the Epistle of John to the Parthians (In Epistolam Joannis ad Parthos Tractatus 
Decern)," and he elsewhere quotes from the Epistle under this strange title {Quasi. 
Ev. ii. 39). Probably the Epistle was entitled in some MS. Mcddwov tov TrapOcVov, 
as the Apocalypse is entitled in 30 airoKaXvxl'. tov ayiovi €v8o|oTaTovi airoo-ToXou 
Kai evaYY<Xio~rov irapOcvov T)YaTT)fi.€vov €'7rKrTT]6iov iwavvov 9(o\oyov, and TOY- 
nAPGENOY was mistaken tor nPOZIIAPeOYI. The Latin frag, of Clem. Alex.'s 
exposition of the Second Epistle begins: " Secunda Joannis epistolaquae advirgines 
scripta," where "Joannis ad virgines " probably represents 'Iwawov toO irapQivov. 


Clwai/cou fjiei' dKOuoTT)s noXuKapirou 8e eraipos ycyoi'ajs, dpxatos avf\p),'* 
" used testimonies from the first (former) epistle of John (K€xpr]Tai 8* 
6 auTos fiapTupiais diro ttjs \(i)dvvou irporepas cttiotoXtjs) ". irpoxepas is 
merely a grammatical inaccuracy, as conversely irpwros for -irpoxepos 
in Matt. xxi. 36; Acts i. 1 ; 1 Cor. xiv. 30; Heb. x. 9 ; Rev. xxi. 1. 
Cf. Bus. H. E. iii, 24 ; i^ Trporcpa twi/ iivKnokCiv ... at Xonral 8uo. 

Irenseus, a disciple of Polycarp ^ and bishop of Lyons, quotes 1 
John ii. 18, 19, 21, 22, iv. 1, 3, v. 1, and says expressly that he is 
quoting from the Epistle of St. John.^ 

The Muratorian Canon (about a.d. 170) includes our epistle and 
ascribes it to St. John : " Quid ergo mirum si Johannes tam constanter 
singula etiam in epistulis suis proferat, dicens in semetipso : Quce 
vidimus oculis nostris, et auribus audivimus, et manus nortrce pal- 
paverunt, hcec scripsimus } " Cf. 1 John i. 1.^ 

These testimonies are primitive, and there is no need to adduce 
in addition the later and abundant testimonies of Clement of Alex- 
andria, TertuUian, Origen, Jerome, Augustine, Athanasius. 

With no less unanimity and emphasis does ancient tradition 
ascribe the Fourth Gospel to St. John, and it hardly admits of 
reasonable doubt that the Gospel and the Epistle are from the one 
pen. They agree in style, language, and thought. They have the 
same Hebraistic style, abounding in parallelism {e.g. cf. 1 John ii. 
10, 11 with John iii. 18, 20, 21) and parataxis (the co-ordinating koi is 
the favourite conjunction). Their style is identical, and it is unique 
in the N.T. They have, moreover, common phrases and expressions 
Cf. Ep. i. 1, 2 with Gosp. i. 1, 2, 4, 14 : Ep. i. 4 with Gosp. xv. 11, 
xvi. 24; Ep. ii, 1 with Gosp. xiv. 16, 26, xv. 26, xvi. 7 ; Ep. ii. 8 with 
Gosp. xiii. 34, xv. 10, 12; Ep. ii. 11 with Gosp. xii. 35; Ep. iii. 8, 15 
with Gosp. viii. 44 ; Ep. iii. 11, 16 with Gosp. xv. 12, 13 ; Ep. iii. 12 
with Gosp. vii. 7 ; Ep. iii. 13 with Gosp. xv. 18, 19 ; Ep. iii. 14 with 
Gosp. V. 24 ; Ep. iv. 6 with Gosp, viii. 47 ; Ep. iv. 12 with Gosp. i. 14 ; 
Ep. iv. 14 with Gosp. iii. 17 ; Ep. v. 3 with Gosp. xiv. 15, 21 ; Ep. v. 
6-8 with Gosp. xix. 34, 35 ; Ep. v. 9 with Gosp. v. 32, 34, 36, viii. 17, 
18; Ep. V. 10 with Gosp. iii. 33; Ep. v. 12 with Gosp, iii. 15, 36; 
Ep. V. 13 with Gosp. xx. 31 ; Ep. v. 14 with Gosp. xiv. 13, 14, xvi. 23 ; 
Ep. v. 20 with Gosp. xvii. 3. Then they have in common certain 
fundamental conceptions which are thus defined and enumerated by 
Dr. H. J. Holtzmann : " the Son of God in the Flesh, the Life, which 
has its source in Him and is identical with Him, the Being in Him, 
the Abiding in God, the Love of God actualised in the Sending of. 

^ Jer. Script. Eccles. ^ Iren. III. xviii, 5, 8, 

*The Mur. Can, is given in Routh's Reliq. Sacr., i. op, 394 seq. 


the Son, the resultant CommanLlment of Brotherly Love, the Walking 
in the Light, the Begetting of God, the Overcoming of the World, 
etc. ; the antitheses of Life and Death, Light and Darkness, Love and 
Hate, Truth and Lying, Father and World, God and Devil, Children 
of God and Children of the Devil." Thus inextricably are the two 
works intertwined. " Our Epistle," says Rothe, " has throughout as 
its presupposition the peculiar conception of the person and history 
of the Redeemer, in general the peculiar conception of Christianity, 
which prevails in the Gospel. Consequently, if the Fourth Gospel is 
a work of the Apostle John, our Epistle also belongs as indubitably to 
him ; as in the contrary case our Epistle could be no composition of 
the Apostle John." 

The common authorship has nevertheless been called in question 
on the ground of certain alleged divergences which, says Schmiedel, 
" are explained much more easily on the assumption that the two 
writings come from different writers though belonging to one and the 
same school of thought." The divergences are (1) linguistic, and (2) 

(1) The words dyYeXia, e-nayyiKla, Siai'oia, irapouaia, cXiris, d»'0|xia 
and others occur in the Epistle and not in the Gospel. But what 
then ? A writer need not exhaust his entire vocabulary in a single 
writing: that would argue extreme barrenness of mind. Does it 
follow that the Third Gospel and the Book of Acts are by different 
authors because eXiris never occurs in the former and eight times in 
the latter, or that the Epistle to the Romans is not St. Paul's because 
iXaarripiok' occurs in it and in no other of his Epistles? The only 
reasonable inference from the occurrence of words in the Epistle 
which are absent from the Gospel is that the former is not an imita- 
tion of the latter. 

(2) The following instances of doctrinal divergence are adduced : 
(a) tXao-fiiis in Ep. ii. 2, iv. 10 and nowhere else in the N.T. ; whereas, 
says Martineau, " the gospel knows nothing of an atoning or pro- 
pitiatory efficacy in the blood of Christ ". It is true that the word is 
not found in the Gospel, but the idea is. C/. i. 29, x. 11, 15, xi. 49, 
52. (b) xpi<'|Jitt (Ep. ii. 20, 27) is another aira^ Xeyofxei'oi'. The very 
idea, however, is found in the Gospel (xiv. 26, xvi. 13). (c) The 
Gospel is more spiritual in its eschatology, representing the Judgment 
not as future but as present (iii. 18) and the Coming of Christ as 
happening in the experience of each believer (xiv. 3) ; whereas the 

' See Holtzmann's Einl. in das N.T., and his elaborate discussion: Das Frobl. 
dfs erst, johann. Br. in sein. Verhcilt. zum Ev. in Jahrb. f. prot. Theol. (1881-8-2) ; 
Martineau's Seat of Anth., p. 509 ; Schmiedel in Encycl. Bibl., vol. ii., cols. 2556-7. 


Epistle represents the -n-apouo-ia (ii. 28) as " a visible individual occur- 
rence " on a particular day (iv. 17). This is simply erroneous. The 
Gospel also speaks of a final and universal Judgment (v. 29), " the 
last day " (vi. 39, 40, 44, 54 ; xi. 24) , and a personal Coming of Christ 
(xxi. 22, 23).^ (d) The napdKXr]Tos is the Holy Spirit in the Gospel, 
Jesus in the Epistle. Here, however, there is no divergence. The 
doctrine of the Epistle explains the Gospel's SiXKov napdKXtjToi' (xiv. 
16). See commentary on ii. 1. 

It is beyond reasonable doubt that the Epistle and the Gospel are 
from the same pen. " The identity of authorship in the two books," 
says Lightfoot,^ "though not undisputed, is accepted with such a 
degree of unanimity that it may be placed in the category of acknow- 
ledged facts." And they have a very intimate connection. This is 
abundantly apparent from internal evidence. The Epistle opens with 
a reference to the Gospel-narrative, and there is an unmistakable 
relation between 1 John v. 13 and John xx. 31 (see commentary). 
Indeed the Epistle throughout has the Gospel as its background and 
is hardly intelligible without it. It is, in the language of Lightfoot,^ 
" a devotional and moral application of the main ideas which are 
evolved historically in the sayings and doings of Christ recorded in 
the Gospel ". And it is significant that the Muratorian Canon men- 
tions the First Epistle in connection with the Gospel, and the Second 
and Third Epistles after an interval in their natural place among the 
other Epistles of the N.T. 

The precise connection between them is nowhere indicated, but 
it appears from a consideration of the historical situation. The 
fall of Jerusalem in a.d. 70 dispersed the Church, and a colony of 
disciples found a home in Asia Minor. It was a considerable and 
increasingly influential community, including, in the phrase of Poly- 
crates of Ephesus, " great luminaries (fieydXa oroixeia) " — not only 
the Apostles Philip* and Andrew ^ but, according to abundant and 
trustworthy tradition, St. John.^ The latter fixed his residence at 
Ephesus, where there was a church founded by St. Paul.'' It was 
the proudest boast of Ephesus that she was "the Temple-sweeper 
(i-cuKopos) of Artemis " (Acts xix. 35), and the Temple which she had 
reared for her goddess was one of the Seven Wonders of the ancient 

1 John xxi. is an addition to the Gospel, but it is by the same hand, "a post- 
script from the same pen as the rest " (Renan). 

^Ess. on Sup. Rel., pp. i86 f. ^ /jj^.^ p, igS, 

*Eus. H. E. iii. 31, v. 24. * Mur. Can. 

•On the credibility of this tradition see Drummond, The Char, and Auth. of tht 
Fourth Gospel, pp. 814 ff. 

' Iren. III. iii. 4. 


world ; and in that historic and brilliant city St. John exercised his 
ministry to the end of his long life, which lasted until the reign of 
Trajan (a.d. 98-117).i 

It was an active and gracious ministry. It had Ephesus for its 
headquarters, but it comprehended a wide area. St. John took over- 
sight of all the Christian communities in the surrounding country — 
such as the churches of Smyrna, Pergamum, Thyatira, Sardis. 
Philadelphia, Laodicea {cf. Rev. ii.-iii.), counselling and strengthening 
them by letters and visitations. " He would go away when invited," 
says Clement of Alexandria,^ " to the neighbouring districts of the 
Gentiles, here to appoint bishops, there to form new churches, and 
there to put into the office of the ministry some one of those that 
were indicated by the Spirit." And Clement proceeds to relate an 
interesting story, fiu0o»' ou fiuOoK. The Apostle once visited a neigh- 
bouring city — Smyrna, according to the Alexandrian Chronicle — and 
saw there a lad of stalwart form, charming face, and ardent spirit. 
" I deposit this lad in thy keeping," he said to the bishop, "with all 
earnestness, taking the Church and Christ to witness." The bishop 
accepted the trust and, when St. John returned to Ephesus, took the 
lad home, nurtured him, and finally baptised him. Then, thinking 
he had done enough, he let him alone, and the lad fell into evil 
company, committed a crime, and, fleeing to the mountains, became 
the captain of a band of brigands. By and by St. John revisited that 
city, and after settling the business which had brought him, he said: 
" Now then, bishop, restore us the deposit which the Saviour and I 
entrusted to thee". The bishop was thunderstruck, supposing that 
he was being accused of some pecuniary intromission. " It is the 
lad that I am requiring," explained St. John, "and the soul of the 
brother." The bishop groaned and wept : " He is dead! " " How ? 
When ? And what death ? " " He is dead to God," said the bishop, 
and told the story. The Apostle rent his robe and with a loud cry 
smote his head. " A fine guardian of the brother's soul did I leave 
in thee ! Let me have a horse forthwith and some one to show me 
the way." And he rode oflF and found the lost youth, and by tender 
entreaties won him to penitence and brought him back to the 

Such was the ministry of St. John at Ephesus, and it was far on 
in the course of it that he wrote his Gospel, " having employed all 
the time an unwritten message ".' He wrote it, says the Muratorian 
Canon, "at the exhortation of his fellow-disciples and bishops," i.e., 
his own congregation at Ephesus and his colleagues in the neigh- 

^ Iren. III. iii. 4. '^ De Div. Serv. 42. ^ Eus. H. E. iii. 24. 


bouring churches within the circuit of his supervision. It was 
intended for the instruction and edification of the Christians all over 
that extensive area. And the Epistle is, in the phrase of Lightfoot, 
a "commendatory postscript" to the Gospel. This explains the 
circumstance of its having neither address nor signature. It was 
not sent to a particular community, and since it was an appendix to 
the Gospel, it had no need to be inscribed with the author's name. 

The aim of the Epistle is twofold — polemical and religious. 
Irenaeus says^ that "John the disciple of the Lord desired by the 
declaration of his Gospel to remove the error which had been sown 
among men by Cerinthus and, much earlier, by those who are called 
Nicolaitans". And this is borne out by the companion Epistle. It 
is against these two heresies that the polemic of the latter is directed. 

1. It is said that the Nicolaitans were the followers of Nicolas, 
one of the seven deacons (Acts vi. 5),'-^ and this strange story is told 
of him by Clement of Alexandria ^i " He had, they say, a beautiful 
wife, and after the Ascension of the Saviour, being taunted by the 
Apostles with jealousy, he brought the woman forward and gave who 
would permission to marry her. This, they say, is in accordance 
with that expression of his : ' We must abuse the flesh '. And indeed 
the adherents of his sect follow up the incident and the saying abso- 
lutely and unquestioningly and commit fornication without restraint". 
Clement proceeds to attest the moral purity of Nicolas and explain 
his action as an inculcation of ascetic self-restraint, but certainly the 
sect which bore his name was given over to licentiousness. Clement 
says elsewhere * that they were " dissolute as he-goats," and others 
bear like testimony.^ They were Antinomians, disowning moral 
obligation, nullam differentiam esse docentes in mcechando et idolothy- 
ton edere;^ herein being forerunners of the Gnostics and justifying 
TertuUian's classification of them with the CainitesJ This heresy 
was rampant among the churches of Asia Minor in St. John's day 
{cf. Rev. ii. 6, 14, 15), and he deals with it in our Epistle. See i. 5- 
ii. 6, 15-17, iii. 3-10. 

2. Cerinthus also was an Antinomian,^ but his distinctive heresy 
was a theory of the Person of Christ. He taught in Asia, but he 
had been trained in Egypt,^ and the foundation of his system, as of 

' III. xi. 7. ^ Iren. I. xxiii. 

^ Strom, iii. 4; cf. Eus. H. E. iii. 29. * Strom, ii. 20. 

* Cf. Tert. Adv. Marc. i. 29 ; Hippol. Phil. vii. 36. 

^ Iren., I.e. "^ De PrcEscript. Har. 33. 

*Dionysius of Alexandria in Eus. H. E. iii. 28. 

» Theodoret. H. E. ii. 3. 


Marcion's, was that postulate of Greek philosophy — the inherent and 
necessary evil of matter. " He said that the world had not been 
made by the First God, but by a power which is separate from the 
Authority which is over the Universe and ignorant of the God who 
is over all. And he supposed that Jesus had not been begotten of a 
virgin, but had been born of Joseph and Mary as a son in like manner 
to all the rest of men, and became more righteous and prudent and 
wise. And after the Baptism the Christ descended into him from 
the Sovereignty which is over the Universe, in the form of a dove ; 
and then He proclaimed the unknown Father and accomplished 
mighty works, but at the end the Christ withdrew from the Jesus, 
and the Jesus had suffered and been raised, but the Christ had 
continued throughout impassible, being spiritual."^ The essence of 
this is the dissolution (Xuo-is) of the Person of our Lord, the distinc- 
tion between the human Jesus and the divine Christ. St. John 
encountered Cerinthus at Ephesus, and strenuously controverted his 
error. Irenaeus and Eusebius quote a story of Polycarp's that the 
Apostle once visited the public baths, and, seeing Cerinthus within, 
sprang out of the building. "Let us flee," he cried, "lest the 
building fall, since Cerinthus, the foe of the Truth, is within it ! " ^ 
And all through our Epistle he has the heresy in view. See ii. 18- 
23, iv. 1-6, 13-15, V. 1-12. 

The Epistle has also a religious purpose. Its key-note is Love. 
" Locutus est multa," says St. Augustine, " et prope omnia de 
caritate." Its doctrine of love is distinctive and profound. The 
love which it inculcates is love for God and love for the brotherhood 
of believers — love for God manifesting itself in love for the brother- 
hood, and love for the brotherhood inspired by the love wherewith 
the Father has loved all His children. Special emphasis is laid on 
the latter. It is the whole of religion, it is all that God requires {cf. 
ii. 8-11, iii. 10-18, iv. 7-v. 2); for it implies love for God, and love 
for God implies a right attitude of heart and mind toward Him. 
This is the dominant doctrine of the Epistle, and it was the constant 
message of the Apostle's later ministry, so much so that, it is said, 
his people grew weary of its incessant reiteration. See St. Jerome's 
story quoted in commentary on iv. 7. 

This had not always been his manner. He had not always been 
the Apostle of Love. He had once been the precise opposite — 
self-seeking {cf. Mark x. 35-45 = Matt. xx. 20-28), fiery, passionate, 
and vindictive {cf. Luke ix. 51-56), meriting the title which Jesus 
gave him "the Son of Thunder" (Mark iii. 17). His doctrine of 

^ Iren. I. xxi. ' Iren. III. iii. 4 ; Eus. H. E. iv. u. 


the Supremacy of Love was a late discovery, and he proclaims it 
as such (see commentary on ii. 7-11). It was not merely an article 
of his polemic, a protest against the loveless intellectualism where- 
with St. Ignatius charges the heretical teachers (tous erepoSo^oGi'Tas), 
who had "no concern for love, none for the widow, none for the 
orphan, none for the distressed, none for the bondman, none for the 
hungry or the thirsty." ^ It was a personal confession. That was 
an aspect of the Gospel which St, John had himself too long failed 
to perceive ; and it may be that it had been revealed to him by two 
life-transforming experiences. (1) His Exile in Patmos (Rev. i. 9).^ 
During that season of retirement he could look back over his inter- 
rupted ministry and review his methods. Incidents like his encounter 
with Cennthus would recur to him, and would appear to his chastened 
spirit ill accordant with " the meekness and sweet reasonableness of 
Christ" (2 Cor. x. 1). It was right that he should contend for the 
Truth, but had not his intemperate zeal too often caused needless 
offence and defeated its own end by hardening the hearts of his 
opponents? He would discover the truth of St. Paul's precept that 
"the Lord's servant must not strive, but be gentle towards all " (2 
Tim. ii. 24). (2) The writing of his Gospel. As he lived over again 
those three years of blessed fellowship and told " what he had heard 
and seen concerning the Word of Life," he would realise the pity 
and patience of the gentle Jesus, and feel as though he had never 
until that hour understood the Gospel-story. And he would address 
himself to what remained of his ministry in a new spirit. " Little 
children, love one another." "Master, why do you always say 
this ? " " Because it is the Lord's commandment, and if only it 
be done, it is enough." 

The Second and Third Epistles. 

There is no doubt that the Second and Third Epistles are from 
the same hand. Cf. 2 John 1 with 3 John 1 ; 2 John 4 with 3 John 
3, 4 ; 2 John 10 with 3 John 8 ; 2 John 12 with 3 John 13, 14. Are 
they also the work of St. John ? 

This was a disputed question in the early Church. Eusebius in 
his chapter " On the Acknowledged Divine Scriptures and those that 

'^ Ad Smyrn, vi. Cf. Barn. Ep. xx. 2: ovik eXcivTes ■nrwxjiv, ov irovovvres tirt 
KaTairovovfievco . . . dirocrTpcclxjiJicvoi tov evScojxevov Kai KaTairovovvTts tov 

^ Put by Eus. H. E. iii. 23 in the reign of Domitian (a.d. 81-96), by Epiphan, 
Hcer. Ii. 33 in that of Claudius (a.d. 41-54). 


are not such (trepl rCtv ofioXoYoufi^cui' Beidtv YP^'i^''^'' '^°-'- ™'' H'T toioutui')" ^ 
includes the Second and Third Bpistles of John {-f],o\t.evi] Seux^pa 
ital rpiTT) 'Iwdfcou) among " those that are controverted yet recognised 
by most (twi' d.fTiXeYOji.eVw*', yyoipi^kdiy 8' GUI' ofiws toIs tt-oXXois) "• So 
Origen:^ "He (John) has left an epistle of a very few lines; also, 
let it be granted, a second and a third, since not all allow that these 
are genuine. However, there are not a hundred lines in them both. " 
And in the fourth century an opinion was put forward, which still 
finds favour, that their author was indeed John, only not John the 
Apostle but another John denominated "the Presbyter ".^ 

There is, however, very strong evidence, both internal and ex- 
ternal, on the other side. They exhibit coincidences of thought and 
language which link them with the First Epistle. Cf. 1 John ii. 7 
with 2 John 5; 1 John ii. 18, iv. 1-3 with 2 John 7 ; 1 John ii. 23 
with 2 John 9; 1 John iii. 6, 9 with 3 John 11. And the external 
testimony, though scanty, is weighty. The Muratorian Canon, 
despite the corruption of the passage, plainly attests the two epistles 
as works of the Apostle John and as accepted in the Catholic Church 
{superscripti jfohannis duas in catholica habentur). Irenseus^ quotes 
2 John 1 1 with the preface 'ludi'i'Tjs 8e 6 toO Kupiou fia6if)TTis eir^Teice ■rlr\v 
KaraSiKiji' aurwi' (Jir]8e x^'^P^'*' auTois u(j>' ii\i.!^v XeyeCTSai 3ouXT)0eis. And 
again, after a reference to the First Epistle, he quotes 2 John 7, 8 as 
a saying of the Lord's disciple John "in the aforesaid epistle".^ 
This slip of memory only makes the attestation more effective. 
Irenaeus knew that it was a saying of St. John that he was quoting : 
the Second Epistle no less than the First was the Apostle's. Clement 
of Alexandria too recognised more than one Epistle of St. John, for 
in one place he quotes 1 John v. 16 as occurring "in his larger 
Epistle [iv Tfj (leil^oi'i emoToXf])," ^ and elsewhere he speaks of " the 
Second Epistle of John ". ^ 

The ground for the ascription of the two smaller epistles to John 
the Presbyter is the fact that their author styles himself 6 irpeaPuT- 
epos. But it can hardly be maintained in view of his self-revelation 
in the Third Epistle. He appears there as exercising authoritative 
supervision over a wide circle of churches, writing to them, visiting 
them, interfering in their dissensions and settling these by his per-^ 
sonal and solitary arbitrament, sending deputies and receiving their 

' H. E. iii. 25. 

* Comm. in Ev. Joan. v. 3 (ed. Lommatzsch, vol. i., p. 165). 

' Eus. H. E. iii. 39 ; cf. Jer. Script. Eccles. under Joannes Apostolus ; Papias. 

^ I. ix. 3. 5 iii_ xvii. 8. « Strom, ii. 15. 

' Adumbrat. in Ep. Joan. ii. 


reports. This is precisely the sort of ministry which, as we have 
seen,^ St. John exercised in Asia Minor, and it would have been 
impossible for any lesser personage than an Apostle.^ It may, 
moreover, be questioned whether such slight compositions as these 
two little letters would have won recognition had they not been 
recommended by the name of the Apostle John. And it was natural 
that the latter should style himself 6 irpco-puTepos. The term was 
not only an official designation {cf. 1 Tim. v. 1, 17, 19). The second 
generation of Christians used it of their predecessors, " the men 
of early days," Manner der Vorzeit, who had witnessed the great 
beginnings. Thus, Papias uses it of the Apostles,^ and Iren^eus in 
turn uses it of Papias and his contemporaries.* It was therefore 
natural that St. John, the last of the Apostles, the sole survivor of 
"the elder men," should be known among the churches of Asia as 
6 TrpeaPurepos. 

And indeed it is very questionable whether this John the Pres- 
byter ever existed. He was discovered by Eusebius in the preface 
to Papias' work Expositions of Dominical Oracles, but "it is well," 
remarks Barth, " to distinguish between what Papias really says and 
what Eusebius has made of his words ". Here are the words of 
Papias : " I shall not hesitate to incorporate for you with my inter- 
pretations as many things as I once learned well from the elders 
{rCiv irpeajJuTcpui') and remembered well, guaranteeing their truth. 
For I did not, like so many, take pleasure in those that have so 
much to say but in those that teach the truth, nor in those that 
remember alien commandments but in those that remember the 
commandments that have been given by the Lord to the Faith and 
come from the Truth itself. Now if anywhere one came in my way 
who had been a follower of the elders (tois irpeaPuTe'pois), I would 
search * the words of the elders — what Andrew or Peter had said 
{elirey), or what Thomas or James, or what John or Matthew, or any 
other of the Lord's disciples ; and (I would search) the things which 
Aristion and the elder John (6 irpeo-puTepos '{(adw-qs), the Lord's dis- 
ciples, say {\iyov<Ti.v) ".^ 

1 See p. 155. 

2 Cf. Barth, Die Hauptprobl., S. 26 : " In der That nun ist diese ' patriarchalisch- 
monarchische ' Autoritat unerklarlich bei einem einfachen Presbyter einer Local- 
gemeinde; sie erklart sich aber voUkommen, wenn der irpeo-^vrepos wie Paulus ein 
Apostel gewesen ist." 

^ Eus. H. E. iii. 39. ^ V. xxxvi. et passim. Similarly in Heb, xi. 2. 

^ av6Kpivov, not " enquire about". Jerome (Script. Eccles. under Papias) rightly 
renders considerabam. 
^ Eus. H. E. iii. 39. 


And this is what Eusebius makes of the passage : " Here it is 
worthy of observation how he twice enumerates the name of John. 
The former of these he reckons along with Peter and James and 
Matthew and the rest of the Apostles, plainly indicating the Evan- 
gelist ; and the other John after an interval he ranks with others 
outside the number of the Apostles, having put Aristion before him, 
and he plainly names him ' an elder (irpeaPuTcpot') ' ; so that the 
truth of their story is hereby demonstrated who have said that two 
persons in Asia have had the same name, and there are two tombs 
in Ephesus and each is called John's to this day." ^ Eusebius had a 
theological interest in putting this construction on the passage. He 
disliked the Chiliasm of the Apocalypse, and he was glad to find a 
second John to whom he could ascribe its authorship. And he has 
certainly perverted the passage. Papias is here defining the plan of 
his work. His method was (1) to quote a logion of Jesus, (2) to 
interpret it, and (3) to illustrate it by any story which he had gleaned 
from oral tradition. Such stories he derived from two sources. 
One was their followers' reports of what they had heard from the 
lips of "the elders," i.e., as Papias used the term, the Apostles. 
These reports he "searched" for suitable illustrations. But he was 
not wholly dependent on hearsay. Two of the men who had been 
with Jesus were still alive in the earlier years of Papias — Aristion, 
not an Elder or Apostle but a disciple of the Lord, and the Elder 
John ; and he enjoyed the advantage of hearing their livin[» voices, 
and he "would search " their discourses for the material he required. 
The transition from "had said {^lirev)" to "say (Xe'vouo-n')," though 
ignored by Eusebius, is significant and explains the double mention 
of St. John. Papias had derived his knowledge of St. John's teach- 
ing from two sources : (1) from the reports of men who had com- 
panied with him and the other Apostles while they still tarried at 
Jerusalem, and (2) from his own lips after his settlement at Ephesus, 
where, Irenaeus says,^ Papias had been one of his "hearers". 
6 irpeo-poTepos 'Iwdi'j'Tjs must mean "the Apostle John," since the 
Apostles have just been called "the Elders" (toIs ivpeaPuTepois), 
and it is impossible that the term should bear different meanings 
within the compass of a single sentence. In his phrase "from the 
Truth itself (dir' aorns ttjs dXTj0cias) " Papias echoes 3 John 12, 
and this renders it more than likely that he called St. John 6 

^ Eusebius probably had this story from Dionysius of Alexandria [cf. H.E. vii. 
25). It means simply that in the fourth century there were two rival sites for St. 
John's burial-place. 

'■*See p. 151. 


Trpco-puTepos because the latter had so styled himself in each of the 

The Second Epistle is addressed eitXeKTYJ Kupia Kal toIs rcKfois 
auTijs, and the meaning of the address is a disputed question.'-^ It 
was supposed by St. Jerome, ^ and the idea is approved by many 
moderns, that " the elect lady " * is a figurative appellation, signifying 
either the whole Church (Hilgenfeld, Mangold) or a particular 
community (Hofmann, Ewald, Huther, Wieseler). The main argu- 
ments are that the universal affection spoken of in verse 1 could 
hardly have been felt for an individual, and that it is " not impro- 
bable " that this is the Epistle referred to in 3 John 9.^ The meta- 
phor is indeed paralleled by Eph. v. 22-33 and Rev. xxi. 9 ; but it is 
the Church which is thus designated, not a particular community, 
and, on the ecclesiastical interpretation, it is a particular community 
that is here addressed, since St. John sends greetings to the " elect 
lady" from "the children of her elect sister" (verse 13), i.e., pre- 
sumably, his own congregation. And, moreover, the simplicity of the 
little letter precludes the possibility of so elaborate an allegory, while 
the tenderness of its tone stamps it as a personal communication. 

It is therefore not a church but a lady that is addressed, and 
there are authority and reason for regarding Kopia as her name." 
The name was common in those days, and it occurs, e.g., in the 
Oxyrhynchus Papyri, 498: 'AvTotyia. 'AaK\Tjmd8i ttj Kal Kupia. 914; 
Aupi^Xios 'ATr<}>ouTos utos 'ApeouTog fJiTjTpos Kopias- It is the Greek form 
of Martha, which means "mistress {domino)". The objection has 
been urged that, if it be a proper name, St. John must have written 
not €k\€kt^ Kupia but Kupia ttj ckXcktij on the analogy of Taiw tw 
dyaTTTiTw in 3 John 1 ; but either construction is permissible. The 
former is paralleled by 1 Peter i. 1 : cKXeKTols Trap£TTi5ii)j,ois, and if 

1 On the identity of John the Presbyter and John the Apostle see Barth, Haupt- 
probl., S. 26-29 ; Farrar, Early Days, Exc. xiv. 

2 Cf. scholium quoted by Euth. Zig. : fj -Trpbs eKKXrio-iav 7pd.<j>€i fj -irpos xiva 
-yvvaiKa 8ia t«v cviaYYcXiKuv IvtoXwv ttjv EavTTJs oiKiav oiKovofiovo-av irvcw- 


* Ep. ad Ageruchiam. 

•* The words, however, can hardly mean more than "an elect lady". 

5 Schmiedel in Encycl. Bibl., vol, ii., col. 2560. Cf. B. Weiss, Emleit. 

6 Others take *EicX€ktt) as the name ("the lady Electa"). Clem. Alex.: "ad 
quandam Babyloniam (probably a confused reference, for which the translator is 
responsible, to i Peter v. 13) Electam nomine ". Clement apparently took Electa 
as the Church personified, for he proceeds : " significat electionem ecclesiae sancta ", 
But then 'EkXckttjs in verse 13 must also be a proper name, and two sisters can 
hardly have borne the same name. 


there be any irregularity, it is in the latter, where tw dyaTrTjTol is a 
defining after-thought {cf. 1 John i. 2 : ■n\v l^arpi' ttji' aXiitviov, " the life, 
the eternal life "). Carpzov would identify Kyria (Martha) with the 
sister of Lazarus and Mary. The family of Bethany disappear from 
the Gospel-story after the feast in Levi's house at the beginning 
of the Passion-week. They probably fled to escape the fury of the 
rulers, and it is just possible that they had found a home in Asia 
Minor like so many other refugees from Palestine.^ And now 
Martha is living in one of the cities of St. John's diocese, a widow 
with a grown-up family ; and it is natural that she should be dear to 
the Apostle and honoured by the whole Church. This is a pleasant 
fancy, but it is nothing more. 

The facts are sufficiently interesting. The epistle is addressed 
to a devout lady named Kyria, who resided in one of the cities near 
Ephesus with a grown-up family. It is remarkable how large a part 
was played by women in the life of the primitive Church, especially 
in Asia Minor,^ and Kyria was an honourable and influential person- 
age not only in her own community but all over that wide area 
(verse 1). It is probable that, like that of Nympha at Colossae,^ her 
house was the meeting-place of the Church, according to the custom 
of those days when there were no ecclesiastical edifices ; and it 
appears from verse 10 that she afforded hospitality to the itinerant 
evangelists of whom the Third Epistle speaks. A sister of Kyria, 
presumably deceased, had a family resident at Ephesus and con- 
nected with St. John's congregation ; and several of Kyria's sons 
had visited their cousins. The Apostle had met with them and 
found them earnest Christians, and in the gladness of his heart 
he wrote to their mother, testifying his gratification, giving some 
kindly counsel very needful in those days of intellectual unrest, and 
expressing the hope that he might ere long visit her. 

The Third Epistle is addressed to " Gaius the beloved ". Gaius 
(never Caius) was one of the commonest of names, and there 
are three who bear it in the N.T. (1) Gaius of Macedonia (Acts xix. 
29), (2) Gaius of Derbe (Acts xx. 4), and (3) Gaius of Corinth 
(Rom. xvi, 23; 2 Cor. i. 14). The name being so common, our 
Gaius may very well have been different from all these, but it is 
affirmed in the interesting Synopsis Sacra Scriptures ascribed to St. 
Athanasius that St. John composed his Gospel during his exile in 
Patmos and that Gaius of Corinth acted as his amanuensis and 

1 See p. 154. 2 Cf. Ramsay, Tke Church in the Rom. Emp., p. 67. 

•* Col. iv. 15 : NvfAi^av icai ttjv kot' avTTJs eKKX-rjeriav (WH Nest). 


published it at Ephesus.^ And it appears from the " Apostolic 
Constitutions" (vii. 46) that one Gaius was ordained by St. John 
first " bishop " of Pergamum. 

Whatever be the value of these traditions, it is evident that 
Gaius was a prominent personage, probably bishop or presbyter, in 
one of the churches of Asia Minor, and St. Paul's description of 
Gaius of Corinth, " the host of me and of the whole Church," might 
have been written of him. Trouble had arisen in his congregation, 
the ringleader being Diotrephes, probably a wealthy layman. The 
primitive Church was rent by factions, each swearing by one or 
other of the great teachers {cf. 1 Cor. i. 10-17), and it may be that 
Diotrephes belonged to the Pauline faction and abjured St. John 
and disowned his authority.^ The actual truth, however, is that he 
was an opinionative and domineering man who insisted on having 
his own way in everything. The occasion of the trouble was a visit 
which had been paid to the Church of Gaius by a company of 
itinerant evangelists [wandenide Glaubensboten). This order of 
" prophets " was a recognised institution. Their office was to travel 
about preaching to the Gentiles and seeking to win them to the 
Faith. There were sometimes unworthy men among them who 
traded on the Gospel and merited the stinging epithet of " Christ- 
traffickers (xpiCTTefxiropoi)," and very stringent regulations are laid 
down regarding them in the Didache ; ^ but their ministry was a 
needful and heroic one. They abandoned everything for Christ's 
sake and, to obviate misrepresentation, took nothing from the Gen- 
tiles — no food, no lodging. Thus they were dependent on the good 
offices of the believers wherever they went, and it was a debt of 
honour to see that they suffered no lack. Gaius had given a hospit- 
able welcome to that company of " prophets " ; but Diotrephes, 
disowning the Apostle's authority, opposed the reception of his 
emissaries and would have denied them entertainment. On their 
return to Ephesus they reported the incident at a meeting of the 
Church ; and St. John wrote this letter and sent it by Demetrius, 
commending the action of Gaius and intimating his intention of 

^ rh 8J Kara 'lojdvvtjv €{ia"yY'^''°*' virTj-yopevGr] re ■vnr* avirov TOi) 0171011 Mwawov 
Tov airocToXov Kai r\ya.iry\y,ivov, ovtos llopicrTOV ev DaTfibi rfj vr\(no, koX v-rto tov 
avTOv e|€866t) €V *E4>€'<ra) 8ia Faiov tov aYairrjTOv Kai |evo8(ixof tcHv airocToXcov, 
TTcpi oxi Kai RavXcs 'Pw|xaiois 7pa4>(»v ^■t\<Ti • aaird^erai tifxag rd'ios o |cvos [lov 
Ktti oXrjs TTJs iKKXtjo-ias. 

''It has been thought incredible that the great Apostle should have been so 
cavalierly treated (cf. verses 9, 10), but great men are usually less honoured by their 
contemporaries than by after generations. 

*xi.-xiii. Cf. 2 John 10, 11. 


visiting his Church at an early date and reducing the recalcitrant 
Diotrephes to order. 

The Tbxt of the Epistles. 

The accompanying Greek text is the regia editio (1560) of Robert 
Stephanus (Etienne), commonly known in England as the Textus 
Receptus} Constructed from a few late and inferior MSS. when the 
science of Textual Criticism was yet unborn, it is far from satisfac- 
tory ; and the principal variants are presented in the critical notes^ 
The long and patient labours of Mill, Bentley, Griesbach, Lachmann. 
Tregelles, Tischendorf, and Westcott and Hort have cleared away 
the rubbish of corruption and reduced uncertainty to a minimum ; 
and Dr. Eberhard Nestle's text (British and Foreign Bible Society) 
is probably a very close approximation to the sacred autographs. It 
is "the resultant of a collation" of the monumental recensions of 
Tischendorf (8th edition, 1869-72), Westcott and Hort (1881), and 
Bernhard Weiss (2nd edition, 1905). "The readings adopted in the 
text are those in which at least two of these editions agree." 

The materia critica is copious and excellent. 1 . Greek MSS. : — 

t<5 Codex Sinaiticus, 4th c. Discovered by Tischendorf in 
1844 and 1859 in the monastery of St. Catherine at the 
foot of Mount Sinai. Now at St. Petersburg. 

A Codex Alexandrinus, 5th c. Brought from Alexandria to 
Constantinople by Cyril Lucar, Patriarch of Constantinople 
(d. 1638), and sent by him to King Charles I. in 1628 by 
the hand of Thomas Roe on the return of the latter from 
a Turkish embassy. Now in the British Museum. 

B Codex Vaticanus, 4th c. In the Vatican Library at Rome. 

C Codex Ephraemi, 5th c. A rescript or palimpsest, written 
over in 12th c. with a Greek version of thirty-ei^ht 
treatises of Ephraemus Syrus. In the National Library 
at Paris. In 1834-35 the librarian Carl Hase had the 
original writing revived by a chemical process, the applica- 
of Giobertine tincture. The codex was written, probably 
in Egypt, in 5th c. ; corrected first, probably in Palestine, 
in 6th c. (C2), then, probably at Constantinople, in 9th c ' 

K Codex Mosquensis, 9th c. Brought to Moscow from the 
monastery of St. Dionysius at Mount Athos. 

1 See C. R. Gregory's PrrJegomena to Tischendorfs Nov. Test. Gr., pp. 
212 sqq. 



L Codex Angelicus Romanus, 9th c. In the Angelic Library 
of the Augustinian monks at Rome. 

P Codex Porfirianus, 9th c. A palimpsest found by Tischen- 
dorf in 1862 among the books of Bishop Porfirius 

D Codex Bezae, 5th or 6th c. In the Library of the Uni- 
versity of Cambridge, to which it was presented by 
Theodore Beza in 1581. The Greek text with a slavish 
Latin translation. Much mutilated, our Epistles being 
represented only by the Latin version of 3 John 11-15.^ 

These manuscripts are uncials, ^ ancl there are besides upwards of 
two hundred minuscules or cursives, ranging in date from 9th c. to 
16th c.3 

2. Ancient Versions : * — 

Syriac — 

(1) Syrvg Peshitto or Vulgate, 3rd (?) c. Contains the 
First Epistle. 

(2) Syrph Philoxenian or Heraclean Version, 6th c. The 
three Epistles. 

(3) Syrbo Pococke's edition (1630) of 2 Pet. and 2 and 3 
John from codex in Bodleian Library, Oxford. 

Vg Latin Vulgate, St. Jerome's revision (a.d. 382-84). The 
three Epistles. 

Egyptian — 

(1) Cop Memphitic Version, 3rd (?) c. The three Epistles. 

(2) Sah Thebaic Version, 3rd (?) c. The three Epistles. 
Aeth Ethiopic Version, from 4th to 6th c. The three Epistles. 
Arm Armenian Version, 5th c. The three Epistles. 

These versions have no small value for the determination of the 
original text. It is usually plain which of several disputed readings 
the translator had before him, and whether his MS. contained a 
word or passage of doubtful authenticity. 


Clem. Alex. Adumbrationes in Epp. Joan. \., ii. (a rude Latin 
translation) ; Didymus, the blind teacher of St. Jerome in the Cate- 
chetical School of Alexandria (a.d. 308-95), commentary on the 

1 Gregory, pp. 345 seq. 

2 The signs * 2 3 a b c affixed to uncials denote corrections by later hands. 
^ Gregory, pp. 616 seq. * Ibid., pp. 803 seq. 


Cath. Epp., translated into Latin by Epiphanius Scholasticus ; Aug., 
In Epistolam ^oannis Tractatus Decern (1st Ep., stopping abruptly- 
at V. 3) ; Bede, Expos.; Euthymius Zigabenus (12th c). 

Erasmus, In N. T. Annotat.; Luther; Calvin (1st Ep.) ; Beza ; 
Carpzov, Commentatio in Ep. 2 Joan.; in Joan. Ep. 3 Brevis Enar- 
ratio ; Wetstein ; Bengel ; Liicke ; Olshausen ; Neander (1st Ep.) ; 
Dusterdieck; Huther in Meyer (translated by T. & T. Clark); 
Braune in Lange ; Alford; Haupt (1st Ep., translated by T. & T. 
Clark) ; Rothe, Der erste Brief Johannis practisch erkldrt (a beautiful 
work) ; Alexander in Speaker's Commetitarv ; Plummer in Cambridge 
Bible; Westcott, The Epistles of St. John; H, J. Holtzmann in 
Hand-commentar ziwi Neuen Testament ; Bernhard Weiss, Die drei 
Brief e des Ap. Joh. ; Farrar, Early Days of Christianity, chaps. 
xxxi-vii. ; Cox, Private Letters of St. Paul and St. John ; Maurice, 
Epistles of St. John ; Findlay, Fellowship in the Life Eternal ; Law, 
Tests of Life (Lectures on 1st Ep.).i 

^ The two last appeared after this commentary was written. 



I. I. "O *'HN *" dir' dpxTJS, o AKr]K6ajuiei', o "^ EupdiKafJ-ev tois 6<})8aX-^ Rev. i. 4, 
fiols Tp.w*', o "^ eQeacTdp-eOa, Kai ^ at ^eipes iqfAwt' " eij/T]\d4)T]aai' Trcpi *> J°J"i '• ?• 

d John i. 14. e Luke xxiv. 39; John XX. 27. 

1 See Introd., p. 151. 

2 Tert. (de Anim. 17; adv. Brax. 15) quotes thus: quod vidimus, quod audivi- 
mus, oculis nostris vidimus et mantis nostrcE contrectaverunt de sermone vita, as 
though reading 6 cOeao-d^cOa, & aKt|Koa|ji€v, lupaKafJicv tois 6(^6aX|xois "fWi-Hv, k.t.X. 

The First Epistle. 

Chapter I. — Vv. 1-4. The Preface. 
" That which was from the beginning, 
which we have heard, which we have 
seen with our eyes, which we beheld and 
our hands felt, concerning the Word of 
Life — and the Life was manifested, and 
we have seen and testify and announce 
to you the Life, the Eternal Life, which 
was with the Father and was manifested 
to us — that which we have seen and 
heard, we announce to you also, that ye 
also may have fellowship with us. Yea, 
and our fellowship is with the Father and 
with His Son Jesus Christ. And these 
things we are writing that our joy may 
be fulfilled." 

The Apostle here characterises and 
commends his Gospel {cf. Introd. p. 154). 
I. lis theme — the earthly life of Jesus. 
No mere biography, since Jesus- was not 
one of the children of men but the Eter- 
nal Son of God, the Word made flesh. 

(a) An ineffable wonder but no dream, an 
indubitable reality. His readers might 
doubt it, since they belonged to a later 
generation atid had never seen Jesus ; 
but St. John had seen Him, and he as- 
sures them, with elaborate iteration, that 
it is no dream : ' ' These eyes beheld Him, 
these hands felt Him ". " Because," 
says Calvin, "the greatness of the thing 
demanded that its truth should be certain 
and proved, he insists much at this point ". 

(b) His narrative was necessarily incom- 
plete, since the infinite revelation was 
larger than his perception or understand- 
ing of it. " He would give only a little 

drop from the sea, not the sea itself" 
(Rothe). A complete biography of Jesus 
is impossible, since the days of His flesh 
are only a segment of His life, a moment 
of His eternal years. 2. His purpose in 
writing it : (a) that his readers might 
share his heavenly fellowship ; (b) that 
his joy might be fulfilled. 

Ver. I. 0, i.e. the Logos and the 
Eternal Life which He manifested. C/. 
v. 4 ; irav to yeyevvt]\Livov with note. 
TJv, " verbum seternitatis significativura 
non habentis initium " (Clem. Alex.). 
It " was " ere it " was manifested ". air* 

apx^s, n''trfc^"l5. (Gen. i. i). The 
Logos already was when time began. 
" The design of the Apostle is to remove 
the idea of novelty which could lessen 
the dignity of the Gospel" (Calvin). Cf. 
Athan., Synops. Script. Sacr. : 6eo\oyu>v 
8J I^T^Y^^Tai jATj vecSrepov €ivai rb Ka6' 
T|pas (jtvoTTi^piov aXXoL Kal e^ oipx^S \t-kv 
atl Tvyxaveiv avTO vvv 8J 'Trc<|>av6pu(r9ai 
Iv TO) Kvpiw. aKT], "we have 
heard " ; either the editorial " we " {cf. 
Rom. i. 5 ; Col. iv. 3) ; or, with Lightfoot, 
St. John and the elders of Ephesus who 
had certified the authorship and authen- 
ticity of the Gospel (xxi. 24) ; or " I and 
the rest of the Apostles " — not hearsay 
but the testimony of eye - witnesses. 
cOEao-dfieOa, "we beheld" — a spectacle 
which broke on our astonished vision. 
This seems to be the force of the transi- 
tion from perfect to aorist, though it may 
be simply an instance of the decay of 
the distinction between perfect and aorist 



fjohni. I, t jq(j Xoyou TT]s ^UTjs ' 2. Kal i^ ^ojt] e4)avepw0T), Kal eupaKaii.ei', 

g John 1.7, ^g^l g jjiapTopojp.ei', Kal dTrayYeXXoixei' ufAtf Trjt' j^curji' ttji' aicifiof, 

Acts i. 8, •> ^Tis r\v ' TTpos t6>' Trarepa, Kal i^avepijiQr) r\} ' 3. o €<apdKa\iey Kal 

h Heb. viii. iKTiKoauiev, dTravYcXXoaei' ualv/ IVa Kal uu€i$ '' Koii'Uf iaf eXT""^ 
6 ; Mark 1 1 1 1 ^ 

iv. 20 ; jj,c0' i^fuii' • Kal ' 1^ KOivbiy'ia he r\ T^jxercpa (JtcTO, tou iraTpos Kai ficrd 

ijohni. I, TOU ulou auToO Mrjaou XpiCTTOu • 4. Kal raura ™ ypd({)0|xe»' op.It', ica 

k Acts ii. 42. 1 ii. 24 ; John xvii. 21 ; 2 Cor. xiii. 13. m ii. 12, 13. 

1 Ktti vjiiv ^ABCP, Syrvg, Sah., Aeth., Arm., edd. 

(see Moulton's Gram, of N.T. Gk., i. 
pp. 142 f.). l\|/T]\d(j>T](rav : the word is 
used of the fumbhng of a blind man in 
Gen. xxvii. 12 LXX (ir^ Tton \|/ir)\a<j>TicrT) 
p,c 6 iraTTip. ircpl, t» Betreff des Wortes 
des Lebens (Holtzmann) ; i.e. " We did 
not grasp all the wonder but only its 
skirts". " Vom Worte des Lebens will 
er verkiindigen, denn ihn selbst verkiin- 
digen z\i konnen, dazu fiihlte er sich 
nicht in Stande " (Rothe). tov Aoyou 
TTJs StDTJs, '"the Word who gives life," 
" des Wortes, ohne welches es kein 
Leben gibt" (Holtzmann). Calvin : 
" Genitivus loco epitheti pro Vivifico". 
Rothe's " das Wort vom Leben (the word 
concerning life) " is Pauline (of. Phil. ii. 
16) but not Johannine. 

Ver. 2. A parenthesis reiterating the 
assurance of the reality of the manifesta- 
tion. The Apostle heaps assurance upon 
assurance with elaborate emphasis, and 
the cumbrousness of his language should 
not be removed by devices of construc- 
tion or punctuation, making ver. i a 
complete sentence : (r) " That which 
was from the beginning (is) that which 
we have heard, etc. " ; (2) " That which 
was from the beginning, which we 
have seen , . . beheld, our hands also 
handled". Cf. Tert. in crit. n. p.ap- 
Tt)poi»(xev, according to the Lord's parting 
charge (cf. John xv. 27 ; Luke xxiv. 48 ; 
Acts i. 8). •^ p.apTvpia 'Irjaov Xpi<rToii 
(Rev. i. 2, 9, xix. 10) was the apostolic 
d-TrayyeXCa. dirayy€XXo[i€v, k. t. X. : 
" Whence we gather that Christ cannot 
be preached to us without the Heavenly 
Kingdom being opened to us, so that, 
being wakened from death, we may live 
the life of God " (Calvin). Observe the 
note of wonder in the Apostle's language. 
Speech fails him. He labours for ex- 
pression, adding definition to definition. 

Ver. 3. o Icop. Kal aK., not merely a 
resumption but a reiteration of the pro- 
tasis. Kai vp.€is, " ye also " who have 
not seen Jesus. Koivuviav, not merely 
knowledge through hearsay of what the 
Apostles had known as eye-witnesses, 

but personal and direct communion with 
the living Lord. This St. John proceeds 
to make plain. The phrase Kal . . . 8e, 
et . . . vera, atque etiam, introduces an 
important addition or explanation [cf. 
John vi, 51, viii, 16, 17, xv. 27; Acts 
xxii. 29 ; Heb. ix. 21 ; 2 Peter i. 5). 
" Christ walks no longer in the flesh 
among us, but He appears still continu- 
ally to the world of men and rev^eals Him- 
self to those who love Him. Through faith 
a real personal contact with the Christ 
now glorified in the Spirit is possible " 
(Rothe). There is a gracious constraint 
on all who know this blessed fellowship 
to bring others into it. Cf. i Cor. ix. 
16. Bunyan, preface to The J eriisalem- 
Sinner Saved : " I have been vile my- 
self, but have obtained mercy, and I 
would have my companions in sin par- 
take of mercy too, and therefore I have 
writ this little book", 

Ver. 4. T|p.€is, clearly the editorial 
plural. The reading v|iuv seems at the 
first glance more attractive than t| p.iov as 
evincing a generous solicitude on the 
part of the Apostle for the highest good 
of his readers, viz., the fulfilment of their 
joy. Rothe : " Wer es weis, dass das 
uranfangliche Leben erschienen ist und 
er mit demselben und dadurch mit dem 
Vater Gemeinschaft haben kann, dessen 
Herz muss hoch schlagen ". In truth, 
however, -qp,a>v evinces a still more gener- 
ous solicitude — the very spirit of Jesus. 
As He could not be happy in Heaven 
without us, so the Apostle's joy was in- 
complete unless his readers shared it. 
Cf. Samuel Rutherford: — 

" Oh ! if one soul from Anwoth 
Meet me at God's right hand, 

My heaven will be two heavens 
In Immanuel's land." 

Vv. 5-10. The Message of the Incar- 
nation and the Duty which it brings. 
" And this is the message which we 
have heard from Him and are announc- 
ing to you, that God is light, and dark- 
ness — in Him there is none. If we say 




" 11 X°-P°- %wf ^ ri ireTrXripwjJieVT). 5. Kai auTt] i(n\v ^ r\ ° eTTayYeXta ' " John iii. 

i]v dKr]K6a|ji€i' dir' auTOu, xal '' dt'oyyeXXofjiec ofAif, on 6 ©cos <j>ois ''vi. 24, 

eari, Kal 'aKoria iv auTu ouk ecmi' ouSeuia. 6. '' cdv eiirwaci' on 2 John 

Koii'wi'iac e'xouei' u,€T auTou, Kal iv tw (TKorei TrepnTaxwiAek, J>eu- ij^wi-c/. 
- , ^ ^ _ ^ ' ^ ,3 John, 1. 

oop,€0a, Kai oil TroioufAek Tr\v dXi^deiav • 7. ' cd*' Sc if tw cjxjjtI o iii. ii. 

Tr€pnTaTW|xef, ws aiiros ccrrii' €►> tw <|>(«)Ti, Koicajfiai' €xo)Jiec jact' xxviii. n; 

aXXrjXwf, Kai to ai|xa 'ItjctoO Xpiarou "* tou utou auTou Ka9aptl^€i * 25,xvi. 12, 

14. 15 ; 

I Peter i. 12. q John i. 4, 5, 8, 9, viii. 12, ix. 5 ; James i. 17. r ii. 4, John iii. 19-21 ; John, viii. 
'2. xn. 35, 36. s Exod. X. 22, 23. t Heb. ix. 13, 14. 

'v|Xb»v ACKP, Syrph., Vg., Cop., Aeth., Arm., Aug. ; ti(i.uv ^BL, many minusc, 
Syrvg, Sah., edd. 

2eo-Tiv avTTj^BCKLP, edd. 

'ayyeXia ^^ABKL, Syrvg., Vg. (annuntiatio), Aeth., Arm., Aug. (atmuntiatio), 

^ Itio-ov XpioTov AKL, Syrph, Vg., Cop., Tert. (de Eudic. 19), Aug. ; cm. Xpio-- 
Tow .-"^BCP, Syrvg, Sah., Arm., edd. 

■' KaOapicrei or Kadapiei some lesser authorities, Cop., Sah., Aug. {purgabit). 

that we have fellowship with Him and be 
walking in the darkness, we lie and are 
not doing the Truth ; but if we be walk- 
ing in the light, as He is in the light, we 
have fellowship with one another, and 
the blood of Jesus His Son cleanseth us 
from every sin. If we say that we have 
not sin, we are deceiving ourselves and 
the Truth is not in us. If we confess 
our sins, faithful is He and righteous to 
forgive us the sins arid cleanse us from 
every unrighteousness. If we say that 
we have not sinned, we are making Him 
a liar and His Word is not in us." 

Ver. 5. dyyeXia in N.T. only here 
and iii. 11. €irayY€Xia could only mean 
" promise" (cf. ii. 25). diraYyeXXciv and 
avayY^XXeif both mean " announce " the 
former with reference to the source of 
the message (aKT)K6a[Aev dir' avrov) and 
the latter to its destination. " Quod 
Filius aufitmciavit, renunciat apostolus " 
(Haupt). ovK eo-Tiv ov8ep.ia : the double 
negative makes a stronger negative (cf. 
Luke xxiii. 53). The manifestation of 
God in Christ was to those who beheld it 
a splendid glory, the breaking of a great 
light into the darkness of a sinful and 
sorrowful world. Cf. Matt. iv. 14-16. 
Light means warmth, health, sight, in a 
word " life " [cf. ver. 2). 

Light is given that we may " walk in 
it " and enjoy its blessings. It is thus 
that the Gospel attains its end and ful- 
fils its purpose in us. The Apostle now 
proceeds to warn his readers against two 
heresies which ignored this condition of 
heavenly fellowship. 

Vv. 6, 7. The. heresy of Antinomian- 
ism, represented by the Nicolaitans (cf. 
Introd. p, 156). eav €iiro)p,cv, a gentle 

and charitable hypothesis. He does not 
charge his readers with actually hold- 
ing this pernicious doctrine, and he 
includes himself ("we," not "'ye"). 

irepiiraTeiv, Heb. Tj^n, of the whole 

course of life. The Greek phrase is 
dva(rTp£(j>co-dai. (cotiversari), God is 
light and sin darkness, peccata tcnebra 
sunt (Aug.). and it is impossible to be 
living in sin or compromising with it and 
at the same time be enjoying fellowship 
with God. \|/cv8dp.€6a : we may believe 
the lie, being self-deceived (ver. 8) ; for 
disobedience to the Truth blinds us to it. 
Knowledge comes by doing (cf. John vii. 
17). TT)v dXi]e€iov, see note on ver. S. 
" Walking in the light " has two blessed 
results: (i) "fellowship with one 
another," which may mean either /<?//ow- 
ship with God — lie with us and we with 
Him (Aug., Calv.), or iommunion of 
saints — our fellow-believers with us arid 
7iie with them. In fact the one idea im- 
plies the other. They are inseparable. 
Communion with our brethren is the 
consequence and evidence of communion 
with God. Cf. iv. 20. (2) "Cleansing 
in the blood of Jesus." to alpia Mtjctov, 
God's Infinite Sacrifice for the sin of the 
world — a N.T. phrase of peculiar poig- 
nancy and fragrance. Cf. Ignat. ad ' 
Rom. vii, : to alp.a ovitov, 8 Ictiv oYairrj 
Q<|)9apTos. When we walk in the light, 
that demonstration of the length to 
which God has gone in sacrifice for our 
sakes, is ever before us, and the amazing 
spectacle subdues our hearts, takes pos- 
session of them, and drives out every evil 
iilTection. Cf. Catherine of Siena : " The 
blood and tears of the Divine Son are able 



1. 8— lo. II. 

41 XV 22 ^H'"^^ diTo iraaTjs ajiaprias. o. Eai' eiiruficf on ap,apTiaK ouk 

V u^ 6'''"'^X0H'^''> cauTous '^ TrXacwp.ei', Kal "i^ dXT]0€ia ouk Icttii' iv t^jxif. 9. 

^ iv. 6 ; » ^^1, ofioXoywiyie*' rds dfiaprias ilfAW>'j tticttos ccti. Kal SiKaios, ii'a 

20, xii. 9 ; ^(J,YJ i^jiit/ rds dfJiapTias, Kal KaOapior) i^fxds diro ■irdo'T|S dSiKias. 

xxii. 29, 10. iav ciTrwjxci' on oux iip.apTr^Kap.ei', ^ v|/euCTTT)i' iroiouiief auTOf, 

II, 24. Kal "* 6 Xovos auTOu ouk lank iy ■ 
w ii. 4. 

X Ps. xxxii. II. I. " TcKi/ia fxou, TauTa yp'^'t*''' "K'i''> i"** fAT) dfjidpTT]Te- Kal 

xxviii. 13. y Rom. iii. 26. z Rom. iii. 4. a i. 8, ii. 4 : John v. 38, viii. 37. a Gal. iv. 19 
(T.R., WH). C/.comm. 

to cleanse us from head to foot ". irdo-ris 
dfjiapTias, " every sin,' i.e. every out- 
break of the sinful principle ; not " all 
sin " (irdo-Tis ttjs dp.apTia9). Cf. Rom. 
iii. ig : irav <rT6\i,a . . . 'Trds 6 Kotr^ko^. 

Vv. 8-10. The heresy of Perfec- 
tionism. Some might not say, with the 
Antinomians, that they were absolved 
from the obligation of the moral law, but 
they maintained that they were done 
with sin, had no more sinful propensities, 
committed no more sinful acts. In op- 
position hereto the Apostle asserts two 
facts : (i) Inherent corruption. Dis- 
tinguish dp.apTiav txiw (" to have sin ") 
and d|jiapTdvciv (" to sin "), corresponding 
to the sinful principle and its manifesta- 
tion in specific acts. Our natures are 
poisoned, the taint is in our blood. 
Grace is the medicine, but recovery is a 
protracted process. It is begun the 
moment we submit ourselves to Christ, 
but all our lives we continue under treat- 
ment. -irXavwp,Ev, " lead astray " {cf. 
Matt, xviii. 12). y\ dXi^Oeia, in Johan- 
nine phraseology not simply " der Wahr- 
heitssinn, die Wahrhaftigkeit der 
Selbstprtifung und der Selbsterkennt- 
niss " (Rothe), but the revelation of 
" the True God" (ver. 20; John xvii. 3), 
which came "through Jesus Christ" 
(John i. 17), Himself "the Truth" 
(John xiv. 6). Nearly equivalent to 
6 Xi^Yos (ver. 10). The Truth is a 
splendid ideal, never realised here, else 
it would cease to be an ideal ; always as 
we pursue it displaying a fuller glory, 
And thus the nearer we approach it the 
further off it seems ; when we walk in 
the light we see faults which were hidden 
in the darkness. Self-abasement is a 
characteristic of the saints. When Juan 
de Avila (a.d. 1500-69) was dying the 
rector of his college approached him and 
said : " What joy it must be to you to 
think of meeting the Saviour I " " Ah I " 
said the saint, " rather do I tremble at 
the thought of my sins." (2) The fre- 
quent falls of the believer. We all 
" have sinned {y\^<>.ftTr\Ka\x€v)" i.e., com- 
mitted acts of sin (dp,apTias) manifestinor 

the strength and activity of the sinful 
principle {r\ dp,apTia) in our souls. This, 
however, is no reason for despair. There 
is a remedy — forgiveness and cleansing 
in the blood of Jesus; and there is a 
way of obtaining it — confession, ithttos, 
i.e., to His promise [cf. Heb. x. 23). 
SiKaios : He would be unrighteous if 
He broke His promise ratified by the 
blood of Jesus. Peace is not got by 
denying our sinfulness and our sins, but 
by frankly confessing them and availing 
ourselves, continually and repeatedly, of 
the gracious remedy. "Woe to that 
soul which presumes to think that he 
can approach God in any other way 
than as a sinner asking mercy. Know 
yourself to be wicked, and God will wrap 
you up warm in the mantle of His good- 
ness " (Juan de Avila). "Remission of 
sins cannot be sundered from penitence, 
nor can the peace of God belong to con- 
sciences where the fear of God does not 
reign " (Calv.). 

Perfectionism has two causes : (i) The 
stifling of conscience : " we make Him a 
liar, i.e., turn a deaf ear to His inward 
testimony, His voice in our souls. (2) 
Ignorance of His Word: it "is not in 
us ". Such a delusion were impossible 
if we steeped our minds in the Scriptures. 
Consider the lapses of the saints, e.g., 
David, Peter. 

Chapter II. — Vv. i, 2. The Remedy 
for the Sins of Believers. ' My little 
children, these things I am writing to 
you in order that ye may not sin. And 
if any one sin an Advocate have we with 
the Father — Jesus Christ, a righteous 
One. And He is Himself the propitia- 
tion for our sins, and not for ours only 
but also for the whole world." 

Ver. I. Observe the sudden change in 
the Apostle's manner. His heart is very 
tender toward his people, and he adopts 
an affectionate and personal tone: (i) 
He passes from the formal "we" to 
"I". {2j He styles them rcKvia |iov, 
filioli mei, meine Kindlein — his favourite 
appellation {cf. ii. 12, 28 ; iii. 7, 18 ; iv. 
4 ; v, 21). Not only was it very suitable 



idv Tis dfidpTT), '' TrapdK\T)TOi' eypfiiv "^ irpos toc irarepa, 'Xr^trouv ^ 9f- '^°^^- 
Xpio-Toc ** SiKaioi' • 2. Kal auTos "^ iXao-fios can irepl T(i>v a\i.apTiS>v ^ ^^}^- 

Luke xxiii. 47 ; Acts vii. 52, xxii. 14 ; i Peter iii. 18. e In N.T. only here and iv. 10,' 
Rom. iii. 25 ; Heb. ix. 5 ; iAao-Kco-eoi Luke xviii. 13 ; Heb. ii. 17. f Rom. viii. 3. 

'On the lips of the aged teacher, but it 
was a phrase of Jesus {cf. John xiii. 33). 
St. John had caught the phrase and its 
spirit. He remembered how the Master 
had dealt with His disciples, and he 
would deal with his people after the 
same fashion and be to them what Jesus 
had been to himself— as gentle and 

He assumes this tone because he is 
about to address a warning to them, and 
he would fain take the sting out of it and 
disarm opposition. He foresees the 
possibility of a two-fold perversion of his 
teaching: (i) " If we can never in this 
life be done with sin, why strive after 
holiness ? It is useless ; sin is an abid- 
ing necessity". (2) " If escape be so 
easy, why dread falling into sin ? We 
may sin with light hearts, since we 
have the blood of Jesus to cleanse us." 
" No," he answers, " I am not writing 
these things to you either to discourage 
you in the pursuit of holiness or to em- 
bolden you in sinning, but, on the con- 
trary, in order that (iva) ye may not sin." 
■Cf. Aug. : " Lest perchance he should 
seem to have given impunity to sins, 
and men should now say to themselves, 
* Let us sin, let us do securely what we 
will, Christ cleanses us ; He is faithful 
and righteous, He cleanses us from all 
iniquity,' he takes from thee evil security 
and implants useful fear. It is an evil 
wish of thine to be secure ; be anxious. 
For He is faithful and righteous to for- 
give us our sins, if thou art always dis- 
pleasing to thyself and being changed 
until thou be perfected." As a physician 
might say to his patient : " Your trouble 
is obstinate ; the poison is in your blood, 
and it will take a long time to eradicate 
it. But I do not tell you this to discourage 
you or make you careless ; no, on the 
•contrary, to make 5'ou watchful and dili- 
gent in the use of the remedy " ; so the 
Apostle says : " My little children, these 
things I am writing to you in order that 
ye may not sin ". 

If, however, we fall into sin, let us not 
lose heart, for flapaKXTjTOV cx^H'^^ irpos 
Tov RaTepo. irapaKXriTOSj " one called 
to your side," so, in a forensic sense, 
"one who undertakes and champions 
your cause," " an advocate ". Vulg., 
■Advocatus ; Luth., Fursprecher bei dent 
Vater. Here of the ascended Jesus ; in 
John xiv. 16, 26, XV. 26, xvi. 7, of the 
Holy Spirit, where Vulg. simply trans- 

literates Paracletus, and both our ver- 
sions give " Comforter," Luth., Troster 
— an impossible rendering, since the 
word is not act. but pass. Render 
"Advocate" in every case. Cf. saying 
of R. Li'ezer ben Jacob : " He who does 
one commandment has gotten him one 

advocate (l2''v'p1C> -irapaKXTjTos), 
and he who has committed one trans- 
gression has gotten him one accuser 

l"Yli"'IDp' KOT'iJ-yopos). Repentance and 
good works are as a shield in the face of 
punishment." In the days of His flesh 
Jesus was God's Advocate with men. 
He told the Eleven in the Upper Room 
that, though He was going away, God 
would not be left without an Advocate 
on the earth to plead His cause and win 
men to faith (John xvi. 16, 17). The 
Holy Spirit has come in the room of 
Jesus, and still from age to age performs 
the office of God's Advocate with men. 
Nor has the advocacy of Jesus ceased. 
He is our Advocate in Heaven, pleading 
our cause with God. The history of 
redemption is thus a progressive economy 
of grace : (i) the O.T. dispensation, 
when God was conceived as remote in 
high Heaven ; (2) that of the Incarna- 
tion, when He revealed Himself as a 
Father and, by the advocacy of His 
Eternal Son, made His appeal to the 
children of men ; (3) that of the Holy 
Spirit, under which we live in the enjoy- 
ment of a double advocacy — our Glorified 
Redeemer's, who " maketh intercession 
for us " (Rom. viii. 34) in the Court of 
Heaven (cf. Christina Rossetti's Verses, 
p. 41: "Day and night the Accuser"), 
and the Holy Spirit's down here, wooing 
us to faith by His gracious importunities. 
SiKaiov, Rothe: "Only the righteous 
One, the guiltless, the One that is sepa- 
rate from sin, can be the Advocate with 
God for sinners, in general the Mediator 
of salvation, and make His friendship fo^ 
us prevalent with God, because only such 
a one has access to God and fellowship 
with God (Heb. vii. 26 ; i Peter iii. 18 ; 
John xvi. 8, 10) ". " What better advo- 
cate could we have for us, than He that 
is appointed to be our judge?" (Jer. 
Taylor, The Great Exemplar, I. i. 3). 

Ver. 2. Our Advocate does not plead 
that we are innocent or adduce extenu- 
ating circumstances. He acknowledges 
our guilt and presents His vicarious 




^ |i°^"g'"^5'T|xw»' • ou -irepl twi' TjfAeTc'pui' Se }i6vov, dWa Kal irepl o\oo * tou 

h John xni.,t^(yj^ou 3. Kai *" ef TOUTW yiMcSo-KOfici' on iyvu}Ka\i.€v aoroc, cat' 

ijohnxiv. » ^^5 efToXds auToO TTjpwfJiec. 4. 6 Xiytay,^ ""Eyi/wica aurot'," Kal 

10; Rev. x^5 ei/To\ds auTou |xt) Trjpuc, \j;€ucttt]S eo-rt, Kal '' iv toutu) t^ dXr|6eia 

xiv. 12; ouK eCTTii' • 5. OS 8' &y ' TYjpTJ auToG Toi' XoyoK, dXir|6(ij9 iv toutco i^ 

xxviii. 20; 2 Cor. vii. 19. k i. 6, 8. 1 John viii. 51, 52, 55, xiv. 23, xv. 20, xvii. 6 ; Rev. iii. 8. 

1 Xtyiav oTi ^AB, edd. 

work as the ground of our acquittal. He 
stands in the Court of Heaven dpviov 1L9 
€o-4>aY(jiEVov (Rev. v. 6) and the marks of 
His sore Passion are a mute but eloquent 
appeal : " I suffered all this for sinners, 
and shall it go for naught ? " irepi oXov 
Tov K6(r\Lov, pro totius mundi (Vulgate), 
•' for the sins of the whole world ". This 
is grammatically possible {cf. Matt. v. 
20), but it misses the point. There are 
sins, special and occasional, in the be- 
liever ; there is siti in the world ; it is sin- 
ful through and through. The Apostle 
means "for our sins and that mass of 
sin, the world ". Cf. Rothe : " Die 
• Welt ' ist ihrem Begriff zufolge iiber- 
haupt siindig, ein Siindenmasse, und hat 
nicht bios einzelne Siinden an sich ". 
The remedy is commensurate with the 
malady. Bengel : " Quam late patet 
peccatum, tam late propitiatio". 

Observe how the Apostle classes him- 
self with his readers : " we have," '^ our 
sins " — a rebuke of priestcraft. Cf. 
Aug. : " But some one will say : ' Do 
not holy men pray for us ? Do not 
bishops and prelates pray for the people ? ' 
Nay, attend to the Scriptures, and see 
that even the prelates commend them- 
selves to the people. For the Apostle 
says to the common folk 'withal praying 
for us '. The Apostle prays for the folk, 
the folk for the Apostle. We pray for 
vou, brethren ; but pray ye also for us. 
Let all the members pray for one an- 
other, let the Head intercede for all." 

Vv. 3-6. The Proof of our Interest 
in Christ's Propitiation and Advocacy. 
•' \n(\ herein we get to know that we 
know Him — if we observe His command- 
ments, rie that saith ' I know Him,' 
and observeth not His commandments, 
is a liar, and in this man the Truth is 
not ; but whosoever observeth His Word, 
truly in this man the love of God hath 
been carried to its end. Herein we get 
to know that we are in Him ; he that 
saith he abideth in Him is bound, even 
as the Lord (eKctvos) walked, himself also 
so to walk." The Apostle foresees a 
question which may be raised : " How 
can I be assured that Christ is all this 

to me — my Propitiation, my Advocate ? 
And how can 1 be assured that I have 
an abiding interest in Him ? " He an- 
swers : (i) We attain to personal and 
conscious acquaintance with Christ by 
observance of His commandments {3,-5(1) ; 
(2) we attain to assurance of abiding 
union with Him by " walking even as 
He walked" (56,6). 

Ver. 3. The principle is that it is not 
enough to understand the theory ; we 
must put it into practice. E.g., what 
makes an artist .' Not merely learning 
the rules of perspective and mixture of 
colours, but actually putting one's hand 
to brush and canvas. First attempts- 
may be unsuccessful, but skill comes by 
patient practice. Cf. Rembrandt's ad- 
vice to his pupil Hoogstraten : " Try to 
put well in practice what you already 
know ; and in doing so you will, in good 
time, discover the hidden things which 
you inquire about ' . To know about 
Christ, to understand the doctrine of His 
person and work is mere theory; we get 
to know Him and to know that we 
know Him by practice of His precepts. 
yivucTKcii (cognosco) is to oi8a (scio) as 
Yivofxai ifo) to ei(ii (sum). tyv<LKa\i.iv , 
cognovimus, " we have got to know," 
i.e. " we know ". TTjpeiv, " keep a watch- 
ful eye upon ". Cf. Matt, xxvii. 36 : Kal 
Ka6Y]p[,Evoi eTijpcuv aiiTov «K€i. 

Ver. 4. (IT) TT)p(Lv, in classical Greek 
a gentle hypothesis, merely suggesting a 
possible case ; but in later Greek [atj is 
the regular negative with participles. It 
was an actual error, else the Apostle 
would hardly have spoken so emphatic- 
ally about it. \jȣ\5o~nfjs, see note on i, 6.. 
dXi^Ocia, see note on i. 8. 

Ver. 5. i\ dydirT) tov Qiov, " the love of 

God," is ambiguous like riin^ n^rTi^, 

amor Dei, V amore di Dio, Vamour dc 
Dieu, die Liebe Gottes. It might be 
objective genitive, " love for God," "die 
Liebe zu Gott" (Rothe). But the be- 
Hever's love for God is never perfected in 
this life. The genitive is subjective (cf. 
iv. 9), amor Dei erga hommem, per 
Christum nobis reconciliatus (Bengel), 




"" aydirT\ tou ©eoO TcreXciuTai. iv toutw Y'^>'<^(7K0)Jie»' on iv auTw "^ 'g. '.-• '7. 
° iajiev.^ 6. 6 Xeywc ° iv auTw ji^t'cti', p 6<|)ei\€i, KaOws '* ckcivos ircpie- ^"'- 3?; 
irdTTiCTc, Kal aoTos ootw "^ "^ TrepiiraTeii'. 7. dSeXibot,^ ouk ci'toXth' 34.. /. 36, 

r # T 7 1 XV11.4, 23 

• KaicTji/ ypd^d) ufxlK, dXX' ci'ToXTjf iraXaidi', '^r eiX^'''^ '^'"'' "^PX^5" Heb. ii. 

1^ citoXt) ■« iraXaid ecTTic 6 Xovos ov TiKouCTaTe dir' dpYris* 8. 14. xi. 40 

- ^n2 Cor. V. 

irdXic ci'toXtji' Kait'Tjc ypd^(3} ufiii', o cane dXrjOcs iv auxw Kal iv 17- 

4-7- P iii. 16, iv. 11 ; 3 John 8 ; John xiii. 14 ; Matt, xxiii. 16, 18 ; Luke xvii. 10 ; Rom. xv. i 

Heb. V. 12. q Cf. comm. r Eph. v. 2 ; Col. ii. 6. s Matt. xiii. 52, xxvi. 28, 29, xxvii. 60 

Mark i. 27. t John xiii. 34, xv. 12 ; Mark xii. 29-31. 

1 Punct. €crn£v • WH, Nest. 

^ Kai avTos ovTws J^^CKP, Syrph, Cop., Arm., Tisch., Nest. ; om. ovtws AB, Vg. 
Sah., Aeth., Aug., WH. 

^ ayaiririToi ^ABCP, Syrvg ph, Vg., Cop., Sah., Arm., Aug., edd. 

^ air apxT]s om. ^ABCP, many minusc, Syrvg ph, Vg., Cop., Sah., Aeth., Arm. 
Aug., edd. 

and the idea is that the redeeming love 
of God has attained its end in the man 
who observes His Word. C/. Isa. liii. 
II. St. Augustine understands "the love 
of God" as His love for sinners, a for- 
giving love like that of Jesus when He 
prayed on the Cross " Father, forgive 
them ". '• What is the perfection of 
love ? It is both to love one's enemies 
and to love them in order that they may 
be brethren." By cultivating a love like 
this we get to know that we know Him. 
€v TovTw (b) points forward to 6 Xeywy, 
K.T.X., introducing a second assurance. 
It is not enough to know Him ; we must 
be sure of continuing in fellowship with 
Him, of "abiding in Him" to the end. 
This assurance comes by "walking even 
as He walked"; i.e. the conformation 
of our lives to His is an evidence 
of our abiding interest in Him, our 
vital union with Him. We get like 
Him by imitating Him, and our Ukeness 
to Him is an irrefragable evidence to 
ourselves and the the world that we are 
His, as a son's likeness to his father 
proves their relationship. 6<{>£iXei, " is 
bound," "istschuldig" (Rothe), of moral 
obligation. The claim (\iy<i}v) must be 
honourably attested, avros in this sec- 
tion refers grammatically to Jesus Christ 
vv. I, 2). The change of pronoun (iKel- 
vos) does not imply a change of person, 
since here as in iii. 3, 5, 7, 16, iv. 17, 
cKtivos is not a mere pronoun. It is 
used like ille, and signifies "that great 
One," "the Master". Cf. 2 Tim. ii. 12, 
13. irepiiraTeiv, see note on i. 6. Aug. : 
" Perhaps He admonishes us to walk in 
the sea. Far from it ! He admonishes 
us to walk in the way of righteousness." 
Vv. 7-11. A New Meaning in an Old 
Commandment. " Beloved, it is no new 
commandment that I am writing to you, 

but an old commandment which ye had 
from the beginning. The old command- 
ment is the word which ye heard. Again, 
it is a new commandment that 1 am 
writing to you — a thing which is true in 
Him and in you, because the darkness is 
passing away and the light, the true 
light, is already shining. He that saith 
he is in the light and hateth his brother 
is in the darkness even until now. He 
that loveth his brother abideth in the 
light, and there is no stumbling-block in 
his way ; but he that hateth his brother 
is in the darkness, and walketh in the 
darkness, and knoweth not where he is 
going, because the darkness hath blinded 
his eyes." 

St. John has lately discovered the 
supremacy of Love in the Christian 
revelation (see Introd. pp. 157 f.). His im- 
perfect realisation of this has been the 
defect of his teaching hitherto, and he 
would now repair it : " It is not a new 
commandment that I am writing to you; 
it is part of the Gospel which I have 
been preaching to you all along. But I 
have never adequately understood it, and 
therefore it is new to your ears as it is to 
my heart." 

Ver. 7. oYaiTTjToi, St. John's favourite 
style (cf. iii. 2, 21, iv. i, 7, 11). About 
to enjoin love, he begins by loving. 
Kaivo?, "novel," " new JM kind" (novtcs) 
as distinguished from ve'os, " new in 
time" (recens). dir' dpxiis, here not as 
in i. I, but " from the beginning of your 
Christian life ". y\ £vtoXt| t| iraXoid, cf. 
i. 2 : TT)v ^(dTjv TT)v aluviov. 

Ver. 8. irdXiv, "again," i.e. in an- 
other sense, from another point of view, 
not in itself but in our recognition of it, 
" it is a new commandment ". o etrriv 
dXtiOes, in apposition to tvroXi^v — "a 
thing which is true," viz., the paramount 




V Veni7 • "''■''*' * °^'' "^ '^•'OTia "irapdycTat, Kal *t6 <j)ois to dXrjOii'Si' r\hr\ ^4)aii'Ci. 
iCor. vii. g. T o Xeyojk' ec Tw ({>utI elfai, Kal toc d8eX(j)6i' auTou p,i.aa>f, ek rfj 

^/°h^°' ^''^*^°'^'-^ i<TTiv Icjs dpri. 10. ^ 6 dyaTrwi' tok d8eX4>ok' auTOJ, iv tw 4>wtI 
V.35; fiieVei, Kttl * CTKat'SaXoi' ci* auTu ouk cotii'.^ II. 6 8e fiiawf toi' 
viii. 12, dScX<|>6i' auTou, ** ev ttj CTKOTia £<rri, Kai iv ttj aKOTia TrepiiraTel, Kal 

xxi. 23. OUK oISc "^ TToG UTrdvei, oti 11 CTKOTia €To<j>Xw<re tous 6d)0aXiious auTOu. 

y iv. 20. ' ' 

z i. 5-7 ; Ps. xxxvi. 9. a Johann. only here and Rev. ii. 14 ; <rKavSa\i^fiv John vi. 61, xvi. i. 

b John iii. 8, viii. 14, xii. 35, xiii. 36, xiv. 5, xvi. 5. c John xi. 9, 10, xiv. 35, 36 ; Is. vi. 10 (John 

xii. 40). 

^ €v avT(d ovK eo-Tiv BKLP, WH, Nest, 

necessity of Love. This truth, though 
unperceived, is contained in the revela- 
tion of Jesus Christ (Iv avrw) and proved 
in the experience of behevers {ev v(iXv). 
It is a fact that hatred of one's brother 
clouds the soul and shuts out the light. 
"I knov/ this," says the Apostle, "be- 
cause the darkness is passing away and 
the light, the true light, is already shin- 
ing," i.e. my eyes are getting accustomed 
to the light of the Gospel-revelation, 
and I have seen this truth which at first 
was hidden from me. Adjectives in 
-iv<is denote the material of which the 
thing is made ; and dX-qOivd; is used of 
the real as opposed either to the type 
(cf. John vi. 32, XV. i ; Heb. viii. 2, ix. 
24) or to the counterfeit (cf. Symb. Nic. : 
Qiov d\T]6iv6v Ik 0€ov dXrjOivov "very 
God of very God," i.e. the real God as 
opposed to false gods, idols, which were 
"things of naught "). The opposite of 
TO 4>(i)s TO d\T)9iv($v is, on the one hand, 
the dim light of the Jewish Law (the 
type) and, on the other, the false light of 
human speculation (the counterfeit). 

Ver. g. He says and perhaps thinks 
he is in the light, but he has never seen 
the light ; it has never shone on him. 
dSeXcfxiv, on the lips of Jesus a fellow- 
man [cf. Matt. V. 45 ; Luke xv. 30, 32), 
in the apostolic writings a fellow-Chris- 
tian (cf. V. 1-2, 16) — one of the apostolic 
narrowings of the Lord's teaching. Cf. 
" neighbour " — with the Rabbis, a fellow- 
Jew; with Jesus, a fellow-man (cf. Luke 
X. 25-37). There is no contradiction be- 
tween this passage and Luke xiv. 26. 
The best commentary on the latter is 
John xii. 25. 

Ver. 10. Iv TW <|>«i)tI |xcvci : he does 
not merely catch glimpses of the light 
but "abideth in it," being of one mind 
with God, the common Father, who " is 
light " (i. 5). (TKavSaXov ovk eiTTiv Iv 
ai»T«, " there is no occasion of stumbling, 
nothing to trip him up and make him 
fall, in his case " — an echo of John xi. 
9, 10. Another interpretation, less agree- 
able to the context but more consonant 

ovk ccTiv €v avTw ^AC, Tisch., WH 

with the common use of o-KoivSaXov (cf. 
Matt. xiii. 41, xviii. 7; Rom. xiv. 13), is: 
Because he is winsome and gracious, 
there is in him no stumbling-block to 
others, nothing to deter them from 
accepting the Gospel. The love of 
the primitive Christians impressed the 
heathen. Cf. Tert. Apol. 39 : " Vide, 
inquiunt, ut invicem se diligant : ipsi 
enim invicem oderunt ; et ut pro alterutro 
mori sint parati ; ipsi enim ad occidendum 
alterutrum paratiores erunt ". Ep. ad 
Diogn. I : Kal Tiva 4>i,Xoa-TopYiav ex- 
owo-i irpos aXXi]Xovs. This spirit disap- 
peared, and in view of the bitter contro- 
versies of the 4th century the Pagan 
historian Ammianus avowed that " the 
enmity of the i- hristians toward each 
other surpassed the fury of savage beasts 
against man ". Another interpretation 
takes avToj as neuter : " There is no 
occasion of stumbling in it," i.e., in the 
light. Cf. John xi. 9. 

Ver. ir. St. John recognises no neutral 
attitude between "love" and "hatred". 
Love is active benevolence, and less than 
this is hatred, just as indifference to the 
Gospel-call amounts to rejection of it (cf. 
Matt, xxii, 5-7). Observe the climax : "in 
the darkness is, and in the darkness 
walketh, and knoweth not where he is 
going ". Itv<|)X<ijo-€V, aor. of the inde- 
finite past, where we would use the perf. 
(cf. Moulton, Gram, of N. T. Gk., i. pp. 
135 ff.). The penalty of living in the 
darkness is not merely that one does not 
see, but that one goes blind. The neg- 
lected faculty is atrophied. Cf. the mole, 
the Crustacea in the subterranean lakes 
of the Mammoth Caves of Kentucky. 

Observe how St. John emphasises and 
elaborates the old-new commandment 
" Love thy brother," reiterating it, put- 
ting it negatively and positively. 

Vv. 12-17. The Appeal of Experience. 
" I am writing to you, little children, be- 
cause your sins have been forgiven you 
for His name's sake; I am writing to 
you, fathers, because ye have got to 
know Him that it is from the begmning 




12. ypd^(3) ujxii', TCKi'ia, on &^i(t)vrai ufiiv al dfiapriai ''Sia xo'''^^"-.^ 

ocoixa auToG. 13. fpci^xo ujaik, Trarepe?, on eyk'WKaTe rbv * dir' 9; John 

dp)(T]s. YP'^*!*'* ufiTc, reacicTKOi, on * I'ei'tKiiKaTc ' toi' ^ iroi'ifjpoi'. Kev. li. 3. 

ypd<})(«) ^ ufjLiK, ' -rraiSia, on lycoSKaTe TOf irar^pa. 14. "Eypail/a ujaij/, f Matt. xix. 

irarepes, on eyt'djKaTe Toc ' dTr' dpxT]s. ''EYpa(j/a ujiii', veavivKoi, on Acts, ii. 

icTYupot eore, Kai ' 6 Xdvos toG 0€ou iv fieVei, Kal i/cciKiiKaTe tov g John xvi. 

33; Rom. 
xii. 21. h iii. 12, v. 18, 19; John xvii. 15 ; Matt. v. 37, vi. 13, xiii. ig, 38. i Ver. 18, 

iii. 17 (v.l.). k Eph. vi. 10. 1 i. 10 reff. 

'-7pa4>a> K, Vg., Aug.; £Ypa\|/a J^ABCLP, Syrvgph, Cop., Sah., Aeth., Arm., 

3 TO B. 

I am writing to you, young men, because 
ye have conquered the Evil One. I 
wrote to you, Httle ones, because ye 
have got to know the Father; I wrote 
to you, fathers, because ye have got to 
know Him that is from the beginning ; I 
wrote to you, young men, because ye 
are strong, and the Word of God abideth 
in you, and ye have conquered the Evil 
One. Love not the world, nor the things 
that are in the world. If any one loveth 
the world, the love of the Father is not 
in him ; because everything that is in 
the world— the lust of the flesh, and the 
lust of the eyes, and the braggart boast 
of life — is not of the Father but is of the 
world. And the world is passing away 
and the lust of it, but he that doeth the 
will of God abideth for ever." 

The Apostle has been setting forth 
searching truths and is about to make 
an exacting claim ; and here he pauses 
and with much tenderness reassures his 
readers : " I am not addressing you as 
unbelievers or casting doubt upon the 
sincerity of your faith. On the con- 
trary, it is because I am assured thereof 
that I am writing this letter to you and 
wrote the Gospel which accompanies it ". 

Ver. 12. TeKvla, all the Apostle's 
readers, his customary appellation (see 
n. on ii. i). d(^i<i)VTa.i, perf., the Doric 
form of a<^eivTai. rh ovofia a-iirow, the 
character, mind, purpose of God revealed 
in Christ. "The name of God" is 
" whatsoever there is whereby he makes 
himself known" [Westm. Larg. Catech.). 

Ver. 13. He now subdivides rcKvia 
into TraTepes, i.e., mature believers with 
a long and ever-deepening {lyvuiKart) 
experience behind them, and veavio-Koi, 
who, though r\ e-iriOvfiia ttjs crapKiis is 
strong within them, have conquered the 
Evil One by the aids of grace — an evid- 
ence of the reality of their interest in 
Christ, air' apxYJs, as in i. t. The 
ancient interpreters took TEKvia, Trarepes, 

vcavicTKoi as a threefold classification, 
according to age (Aug., Athan.) or ac- 
cording to Christian experience, Kara 
TOV eo-u avOpwirov (Euth. Zig.) ; but the 
order would then be either tckviu, vea- 
vio-Koi, iTttTepes or iraT^pes, veavio-Koi, 
TtKvia. According to the variant ypdi^ca 
tip.iv, iraiSia, TtKvia is a general appella- 
tion subdivided into iraTepcs, vEavio-Koi, 
iraiSia. Ver. 14 should begin with 
CYpa\|/a ■ufj.iv, iraiSia. pThe aor. EYpa\|/a 
is most simply and reasonably explained 
as a reference to the Apostle's Gospel 
(seelntrod. p. 154). Having assured them 
of his present conviction of the sincerity 
of their faith, he now goes on to assure 
them that he had entertained a like 
opinion when he wrote the Gospel for 
their instruction. His tone is much like 
that of 2 Pet. i. 12. Other explanations : 
(i) The reference is to a former epistle 
(</• 3 John g) — a gratuitous and un- 
necessary hypothesis. (2) The Apostle 
resumes after a pause whether in com- 
position or in thought, and reiterates 
what he "has written". (3) An em- 
phatic form of expression, like " we 
decree and have decreed ". (4) Calvin, 
reading Ypd(j>(i> vp,iv, TraiSia, regards 
iraTe'pes . . . iTovr|p<5v as an interpola- 
tion. This is to cut the knot instead of 
untying it. iraiSia, a general appella- 
tion for all the Apostle's readers, prac- 
tically identical with T6Kvia. Strictly 
TtKvia carries the idea of relationship by 
birth-regeneration; cf. Aug.: ''Quia re- 
mittuntur vobis peccata per nonien ejus, 
et regeneramini in novam vitam, ideo 
filii". xaiSia, on the other hand, are 
merely "children," /?/<?/z (Aug.), infantes 
(Vulg.), and the distinction is on 
lyvwKaTc TOV FlaTepa. All men are 
children of God, believers are children 
who " have got to know the Father' 

Ver. 14. The Apostle gives the same 
reason as before for writing to the 
fathers, as though there could be none 




m James XV. ^Q^p^^ 15- M'T dyairaTe rbv koctjaov, fAtjSe to, €i' tw K6(T|X(t) • " idv 

n Rom. xiii. ^^^ dvaira Toi- Koo-fiot', ouk etrriv ^ dydTTTj tou Trarpos ^ iv ootw • 

V. 16 24; 16. oTi irdf TO iy tw koctjiw, "^ em0u|i.ia ttjs aapKos, Kai i^ eiriOufiia 

1 Peter ' tC>v 6<i>QaKu.u)V, Kal t] "dXaj^ofeia ^ tou p^ioo, ouk eaTiv ex tou iraTpoSi 
ii. II ; , \ e ^ » > c 

2 Peter ii. dW ^ "J cK TOU KOCTfAou coTu 1 7 . Kai o Koo-fios ■" irapaycTai, Kai Tj 

2 Peter ii. eiriOuixia auTou- 6 8e ' iroiwr to OeXrifia tou ©cou, fJieVei eis Tof ala>i/a. 

14; Mark ... 

i". 19. o James iv. 16 ; Rom. i. 30 ; 2 Tim. in. 2 {akagutv). p Luke viu. 14 ; 2 Tim. 11. 4 

q iv. 5 ; John viii. 23, .xv. 19. r Ver. 8 reff. s John iv. 34 ; Matt. vii. 21, xxiv. 39 ; 1 Peter iv. 2. 

1 Tov xaTpos t^BKLP, Syrvg ph, Vg., Cop., Sah., Arm., Aug., edd. ; rov Qeov AC, 
several minusc, Aeth. ; rov Oeov Kai iraTpos, several minusc. 

2 a\4ov€io B^K ; aXa^ovia ^AB*LP, edd. * aXX ^AKL ; aWa BC, edd. 

Thou art a vessel, but thou art still full ; 
pour out what thou hast, that thou 
mayest get what thou hast not ". y] 
oLYdirTj TOV HaTpoSj like tj dYdirij tov 
©€0v (ver. 5), either (i) "love for the 
Father," in antithesis to dya-rra tov 
Koo-fAov, or (2) " the love which the 
Father feels for us". In fact the one 
implies the other. The sense of the 
Father's love for us awakens in us an 
answering love for Him. Cf. iv. 19. 

Ver. 16. T| Eiri9vp.ia ttjs aapKos, not 
object, gen. (Aug.: "desiderium earum 
rerum quae pertinent ad carnem, sicut 
cibus et concubitus, et caetera hujus- 
modi,") but subject.: "the lust which 
the flesh feels, which resides in the flesh ", 
Cf. T| eiriOvfita twv d<}>OaXjji.iov. dXa^ovia, 
vain pretension, claiming what one really 
has not. Def. Plat. : l|ts Trpoo-iroiTjTiKT) 
dyaOov t\ ayaOJiv tuv |xtj virapxovTojv. 
Suid. : dXa^dvas tovs \\r€v<Tra% ckoLXovv, 
€Tr«t Xe'yeiv eirayye'XXovTat irepl civ jxt] 
laao-iv. Theophr. Char. vi. : irpoo-SoKia 
Tis dyaOuv ovk ovtcuv. St^ii, the vital 
principle {vita qua vivinius), pios, the 
outward life (vita quam vivinius) or live- 
lihood (victus). There is here a sum- 
mary of all possible sins, exemplified in 
the temptations of Eve (Gen. iii. 1-6) 
and our Lord (Matt. iv. i-ii). Cf. Aug. ; 
Lightfoot, Ho7'. Heb., on Matt. iv. i. 
(i) "The lust of the flesh": cf. "The 
tree was good for food" ; "Command that 
these stones become loaves ". (2) " The 
lust of the eyes " : cf. " It was a delight 
to the eyes " ; " Cast thyself down " — a 
spectacular display. (3) " The braggart 
boast of life " : cf. " The tree was to be 
desired to make one wise " : " All the 
kingdoms of the world and the glory of 

Ver. 17. An explanation, especially 
of y\ dXa^ovia tov ^lov. To set one's 
affection on the things in the world is 
"braggart boasting"; for they are not 
ours, they are transient. Cf. Moham- 
med : " What have I to do with the 

greater. He gives the same reason also 
for writing to the young men, but he 
amplifies it: they have the strength of 
youth, but it is disciplined by the in- 
dwelling Word, and therefore they have 

Ver. 15. He is dealing with believers 
who have a large experience of the 
grace of Christ, and on this fact he pro- 
ceeds to base an appeal, a call to further 
advancement and higher attainment : 
" Love not the world ". Yet God " loved 
the world" (John iii. 16). Observe that 
the Apostle does not say that the world 
is evil. It is God's world, and " God 
saw every thing that He had made, and, 
behold, it was very good" (Gen. i. 31). 
His meaning is : " The things in the 
world are transient. Do not set your 
affection on them, else you will sustain 
a bitter disappointment. The world is a 
good and beautiful gift of God, to be 
used with joy and gratitude ; but it is 
not the supreme end, it is not the home 
of our souls ". " Let the Spirit of God 
be in thee," says St. Augustine, " that 
thou mayest see that all these things 
are ffood; but woe to thee if thou love 
created things and forsake the Creator 1 
. . . If a bridegroom made a ring for his 
bride and, when she got it, she were 
fonder of the ring than of the bridegroom 
who made the ring for her, would not an 
adulterous spirit be detected in the ver^' 
gift of the bridegroom, however she 
might love what the bridegroom gave ? 
. . . God gave thee all those things : 
love Him who made them. There is 
more which He would fain give thee, 
to wit. Himself who made these things". 
Again : " There are two loves — of the 
world and of God. If the love of the 
world inhabit, there is no way for the 
love of God to enter. Let the love of 
the world retire and that of God inhabit, 
let the better get room. . . . Shut out 
the evil love of the world, that thou 
mayest be filled by the love of God. 




18. ' nai8ia, " ecrxciTT) ' (Spa e<rri • Kal KaOus " T|KOUCTaTe on ^ 6 '^ "^ df- ' y^^^- '3 

TixpiCTTOs '^ epxerai, Kal vOv dfTixptoroi ttoWoI y^Y"'''^*^''' ' ^oOei' " J°^° ^'■ 

54, xi. 24; Acts ii. 17; I Cor. xv. 52; 2 Tim. iii. i; James v. i ; i Peter i. 5 ; 2 Peter iii. 3. 
v John V. 28. w Matt. xxiv. 5, 24. x Ver. 22, iv. 3 ; 3 John 7. y John iv. 25. z Acts xxvi. 
19 ; Heb. ii. 17, iii. i, vii. 25, ix. 18. 

' oTt ^BCKP, Syrvg ph, Vg., Cop., Aug., edd. ; om. AL, several minusc. 
2o ^cAKL ; om. t^*BC, Arm., edd. 

■comforts of this life ? The world and I 
— what connection is there between us ? 
Verily the world is no otherwise than as 
a tree unto me : when the traveller hath 
rested under its shade, he passeth on." 
Aug. on iv. 4 : " Mundus iste omnibus 
fidelibus quaerentibus. patriam sic est, 
quomodo fuit eremus populo Israel ". 
avTov, subjective genitive like aapKcSs 
and 64>9a\p.(i>v. to 6£X.T)p.a Toi) 0eov, 
alone permanent amid the flux of tran- 
sitory things. Cf. Aug. : " Rerum tem- 
poraiium fluvius trahit : sed tanquam 
circa fluvium arbor nata est Dominus 
noster Jesus Christus. Assumpsit car- 
nem, mortuus est, resurrexit, ascendit in 
coelum. Voluit se quodammodo circa 
fluvium temporalium plantare. Raperis 
in praeceps ? tene lignum. Volvit te 
amor mundi ? tene Christum." 

Vv, 18-29. A Warning against Here- 
tical Teaching. " Little ones, it is the 
last hour ; and, as ye heard that Anti- 
christ is coming, even now have many 
antichrists arisen ; whence we recognise 
that it is the last hour. From our com- 
pany they went out, but they were not of 
our company ; for. if they had been of 
our company, they would have abode in 
our fellowship; but the purpose of it was 
that it may be manifested that they all 
are not of our company. Andj^havea 
chrism from the Holy One, and ye all 
know. I did not write to you because 
ye did not know the Truth, but because 
ye know it and because every lie is not 
of the Truth. Who is the liar but he 
that denieth that Jesus is the Christ ? 
This is the Antichrist — he that denieth 
the Father and the Son. Every one 
that denieth the Son neither hath he the 
Father; he that confesseth the Son hath 
the Father also. As for ypu, that which 
ye heard from the beginning, let it abide 
in 3'ou. If that abide in you which ye 
heard from the beginning, ye also in the 
Son and in the Father will abide. And 
this is the promise which He Himself 
promised us — the Life, the Eternal Life. 
These things I wrote to you regarding 
them that would lead you astray. And 
as for you, the chrism which ye received 
from Him abideth in you, and ye have 
no need that any one should teach you; 
but, as His chrism is teaching you re- 

garding all things, and is true and is not 
a lie, and even as it taught you, abide 
in Him. And now, little children, abide 
in Him, that, if He be manifested, we 
may have boldness and not be shamed 
away from Him at His advent. If 
ve know that He is righteous, recog- 
nise that every one also that doeth 
righteousness hath been begotten of 

A heresy had arisen in the bosom of 
the Church (see Introd. pp. 156 f.). It was 
a fatal heresy, a denial of the possibility 
of the Incarnation, and therefore of the 
relation of fatherhood and sonship be- 
tween God and man. St. John's empha- 
tic condemnation of it was justified, but 
his apprehension was groundless. He 
shared the prevailing expectation of the 
imminence of the Second Advent {cf. 
I Cor. X. II, XV. 51 ; Phil. iv. 5 ; i Thess. 
iv. 15 sqq. ; Heb. x. 25 ; James v. 8 ; i 
Peter iv. 7; Rev. i. i, 3, iii. 11, xxii. 7, 
10, 12, 20), and saw in the heresy an 
evidence that the end was at hand. It 
was rather an evidence that the Gospel 
was winning its way. The era of simple 
and unquestioning faith in the apostolic 
testimony was past, and men were be- 
ginning to enquire and reason. A heresy 
has the same use in theology as a mis- 
taken hypothesis in science: it provokes 
thought and leads to a deeper under- 
standing. What seemed to the Apostle 
the pangs of dissolution were in reality 
" growing pains ". 

Ver. 18. Aug. : " Pueros alloquitur, ut 
festinent crescere, quia novissima hora 
est. . . . Proficite, currite, crescite, no- 
vissima hora est". Ver. 28 puts it be- 
yond doubt that ItrxaTq Spa means " the 
end of the world," and rules out various 
attempts which have been made to give 
it another reference and absolve the ^ 
Apostle from the current misconception : 
(i) Aug. says vaguely : " the last hour is 
of long duration, yet it is the last " {novis- 
sima hora diuturna est ; tamen novissima 
est). And Calv. : " Nothing any longer 
remains but that Christ should appear 
for the redemption of the world. . . . 
He calls that ' the last time ' in which alt 
things are being so completed that no- 
thing is left except the last revelation of 
Christ". (2) Lightfoot, Hor. Heb., on 




^24'xx.''3o Yi»''^f"<o|JL€t' OTi €(7xdTrj wpa €OTiV. I Q. « 'E| iifjiui' c^^XOo^,! dW 
b John iii. q^^ r^o-af ''e^ i^fioli' • ei yap r\<Tay e| i^p.wi'j^fiCfJieniKeiaat' i.v'^ft.eQ' iQp.ui' • 
c Matt. i. dXV ** tea ® AiavepoiQCiaLV on ouk cictI Trdi'Tes ii iiuw>'. 20. Kal uucis 

23, XXVI. ' ' ' 

29. 38. 58, f xpiCTfAO ^ ^X^"*"^ diro s Tou dytou, Kal ^ oiSarc Trdi'Ta.* 2 1 . 
i. 26. d I Cor xi. 19. e John iii. 21 ; 2 Cor. iii. 3. f Ver. 27. g C/. Comm. 

1 €|Tj\eov i^^KLP ; €5Tj\eav ABC, edd. 
^Tjo-av €| Tj|io)v ^AKLP, Tisch. ; €| ti|iwv tjo-av BC, WH, Nest. 

2 Xpio-\i.a WH ; xp^o'K'O' Tisch., Nest. ; cf. v. 27. 
'iravTa ACKL, Syrvg (understanding irovra ovOpcoirov) ph, Vg., 

Arm. ; iravres t^BP. Sah., edd. 

OUK €Ypav|/a 
h I Cor. ii. 15. 

Cop., Aeth., 

John xxi. 22, compares D"'^''rT in^"^rTi^ 
».«., " the last times of the Jewish city. 
nation, and dispensation," and remarks : 
" Gens ista vergit jam quam proxime in 
ruinam, cum enatus jam sit ultimus et 
summus apex infidelitatis, apostasis et 
nequitije". (3) Beng. with unwonted in- 
eptitude : The advanced age of St. John 
and his contemporaries in contrast to his 
"little children". "Ultima, non respectu 
omnium mundi temporum : sed in anti- 
theto puerulorum ad patres, et ad juve- 
nes". (4) Westcott: " a last hour," ».«., 
" a period of critical change ". This is 
possible but improbable. The omission 
of the def. art. in the pred. is regular. 
'AvtCxpio'tos (anarthrous) is a proper 
name. Nowhere in N.T. but in the Jo- 
hannine Epp. It may mean (i), on the 
analogy of dvTi<f)i\.6<ro4>osj dvTiKciTuv, 
dvTiK€i|ji.«voSj avTiSecrts, "adversary of 
Christ," Widerchrist (Luth.) ; cf. Orig. 
C. Cels. vi. 45 : t6v tovt<i) Kara Sidpter- 
pov IvavTiov, Tert. De Praescript. Hcer.: 
■' antichristi, Christi rebelles," Aug. : 
" Latine Antichristus contrarius est 
Christo"; (2). on the analogy of dvri- 
^acriXcvs, dvOviraros (proconsul), " anti- 
pope," a " rival of Christ," usurping His 
name, a \)r€uS6xpi'<'"''os (cf. Matt. xxiv. 24 
= Mark xiii. 22); c/". Aristoph. £9. 1038 
5^. ; eyii yap avTi to\i Kiovr6<; elp.1 troi. 
/ Kal "iris p.* IXeXi^OT)? 'AvTiXeuv ■yeyev- 
T^p-eVos ; St. John seems to combine both 
ideas. The heresy arose in the bosom 
of the Church and claimed to be an en- 
hghtened Christianity ; yet, while calling 
themselves Christians. Cerinthus and his 
followers were adversaries of Christ. 
Wetst. : " Qui se pro Christo gerit, ideoque 
ei contrarius est ". avT(xpi<'"'''oi iroXXoi, 
the exponents and representatives of the 
antichristian movement were a numerous 
party. YtYovao-iv, "have arisen," in 
contrast to the true Christ who " was in 
the beginning ". Cf. the contrast between 
the Word and the Baptist in John i. i, 6. 
Ver. 19. Cf. Aug. : " Sic sunt in cor- 

pore Christi quomodo humores mali. 
Quando evomuntur, tunc relevatur corpus : 
sic et mali quando exeunt, tunc Ecclesia 
relevatur. Et dicit quando eos evomit 
atque projicit corpus : Ex me exierunt 
umores isti, sed non erant ex me. Quid 
est, non erant ex me ? Non de carne 
mea praecisi sunt, sed pectus mihi preme- 
bant cum inessent". iva, sc. €|-qX6av 
or yiyove tovto — a frequent Johannine 
ellipse: cf. John i. 8, ix. 3, xiii. 18, 
XV. 25. 

Ver. 20. An expression of confidence 
in his readers : they will not be led 
astray ; they have received " a chrism," 
the enlightening grace of the Holy Spirit, 
" which He poured forth upon us richly 
through Jesus Christ our Saviour" (Tit. 
iii. 6). Baptism was called xpi<''F''°' i" 
later days (Greg. Naz. Orat. xl. 4) be- 
cause of the rite of baptismal anointing 
(cf. Tert. De Bapt. 7 : " Exinde egressi 
de lavacro perungimur benedicta unctione 
de pristina disciplina, qua ungi oleo de 
cornu in sacerdotium solebant"; Aug.: 
" Unctio spiritalis ipse Spiritus sanctus 
est, ciijus sacramentum est in unctione 
visibili ") ; but there is no reference here 
to this rite, which was of a later date and 
was derived from our passage. xp^'^K'O' is 
suggested by avTixpio-Tot. " They are 
avTixpio'Toi, you are \pKnoi." Cf. 
Ps. cv. (civ. LXX) 15 : ptTj aij/Tjo-Oe twv 
XpitTTuv p.ov. Tov 'Ayiov, not the Holy 
Spirit. St. John has to nvevp.a in Epp. 
and Rev., but never to nv€vp,a To^Ayiov. 
Either (i) Christ (cf. Rev. iii. 7) or (2) 
God the Father (cf. Acts x. 38 ; Heb. 
i. 9). The latter is preferable. The Spirit 
irapd Toij FlaTpbs cKiropevcTai (John xv. 
26) — from (aVo) the Father through (8id) 
Christ (cf. Tit. iii. 6). 

Ver. 21. cypaij/a, " I wrote," may refer 
to the Gospel, which is an exposition of 
the Incarnation, tf tov Z(i)TT)pos TJp.*iJv 
'Itjcov XpiaTOv ev<rapKOS olKovop.ia (cf. 
note on ver. 14) ; but more probably " aor. 
referring to the moment just past" (J ebb 
on Soph. O.T. 337). The aor. is appro- 




v}uv, * OTi ouK oiSare rriv &\-f\Bn,av, dXV on oiSare aiTf]v, Kal on ' ^j^^'" 
•nav i|>eu8os '' ck tt]s dXirjOeias ouk eanri.^ 2 2. Ti's eant' 6 ' \j;£ucrTT]S, j^.Y"- ^^• 
el fjiT) 6 dpcoufiei'os on 'iTjaous " ouk cWii' 6 XpioTiJs ; 0(5to9 eorii' 6 "^^^^q^^' 
d»'Ti)(piaT09, 6 dpi'oufjiei'os toc iraTepa Kal TOi' uioi'. 23. "irdg o J'^''' . 
dpi/oufxecos Toc utoe, ouSe toi' Trarepa e)(ei.^ 24. 'Yfieig ouv^ o John v. 
TjKOuaare ° dir' dpxtjs, ei' ufiii/ p.ej'eTw. edc ck uppiK fieiCT) o dir ° Ver. 7. 
dpxTJS TJKOuCTaTe, "Kal up,6is ei/ tw ulw Kal ei* tw irarpi jxei'eiTe. 7.23. 
25. Kal auTT) eorli' *" 17 e-n-ayYeXia, ^i' auTos emjYY^^^'''''''^ TP'^*'' """V x'^i^-49.' 

Acts 1. ^ I 

£(i)r)c TT)i' aioji'ioi'. 26. TaOra cYpa<j/a up.ii' irepl tCjv ivKavdvTcav iTim.iv. 

ujjids. 27. Kal vjxsls to xP^^'fAct* o eXdPere dir' auTOo, ec p.!'' i. i ; . 

)uici'ei, Kai ou xP^^oii' exere i^a ns bioacTKT) ujxas * aW ws to ° auTO r 1. 8 reff. 

Xpttrpia ^ SiSdo-KEi ujxds irepl TTixvTtav, Kal dXt]0es cori, Kal ouk eo-n t John 

xiv. 26 ; 
xvi. 13; Gal. i. 12 ; Heb. viii. 11 (Jer. xxxi. 34) 

^ ecTTiv edd. 

^ Add 6 ofAoXoYMv tov vtov Kal tov -n-axepa e\€i ^ABCP, many minusc, Syrvgph- 
Vg., Cop., Sah., Aeth., Arm., Aug., edd. 

3 ovv om. ^ABCP, Syrph, Vg., Arm., edd. "* xapif^a B. 

^pevei 6v vp-iv ^ABCP, Vg., Cop., Sah., Aeth., Arm., edd. 

« aX\ ws TO ^ACKLP, Vg., Sah., edd. ; aXXa to B, Aeth. 

' atiTo AKL, Cop. ; avTov ^BCP, Syrvg ph, Vg., Sah., Aeth., Arm., Aug., edd. 

^irvevpa ^*, Cop., Aeth. 

priate. No sooner has he spoken of the 
antichrists than he hastens to reiterate 
his assurance of confidence in his readers. 
TT)v aXi]0£iav, see note on i. 8. Ik, of 
parentage {cf. iii. 8-10). His readers had 
only to be reminded of their experience 
(oiSarc), and it would keep them from 
being led astray. An experience is an 
anchor to the soul in time of storm. 
" Tell me," said the dying Cromwell to a 
minister, " is it possible to fall from 
grace ? " " No, it is not possible." 
" Then I am safe, for I know that I was 
once in grace" (Morley's Oliver Crom- 
well, V. X.). 

Ver. 22. \|/€v<rTT)s, cf. n. on i. 6. The 

the Father ; through Him we reach the 
Unseen Father (cf. John xiv. g). 

Ver. 25. eirayycXia, repromissio, " pro- 
mise " ; only here in the Johannine writ- 
ings (see note on i. 5). aviT(5s, i.e., the 
Father. God is the Promiser, and His 
promises are made in Christ (cf. 2 Cor. 
i. 20). 

Ver. 26. €7pa\j/a, see note on ver. 21. 
Tuv TrXavcivTwv, the heretical teachers. 
Pres. partic, "are leading astray" but 

Ver. 27. The ground of the Apostle's 
confidence in his readers. They need 
not be taught but only reminded. aXX' 
«5, K.T.X., a single sentence with one 

Cerinthian distinction between Jesus and _apodpsis. Vulg. makes it a double sen- 
the Christ was a denial of the possibility^ feTnre"with two apodoses : " as His chrism 

of the Incarnation, i.e., of the filial rela- 
tion of man to God. oviic in dependent 
clause after dpvelo-Oai is a common Gk. 
idiom, not unknown in English ; cf. 
Shakespeare, Comedy of Errors, iv. ii. 7 : 
" He denied you had in him no right ". 

Ver. 23. Since the Father is manifested 
and interpreted in the Son. Cf. John i. 
i*i, xiv. g. 

Ver. 24. dir' dpx>is, as in ver. 7. The 
significant iteration of pev£tv is lost in 
A.V. ("abide . . . remain . . . continue"). 
iv Tw Yio) Kal iv tu floTpi : observe the 
order. The Son is the manifestation of 

is teaching you regarding all things, it is 
indeed true and is not a lie ; and even as 
it taught you, abide in Him". Reading 
aXXd, translate: "ye have no need that 
any one should teach you, but His chrism' 
is teaching you ... a lie ; and even as, 
etc." 8i8do-K6i, of the continued teach- 
ing by the grace of the Spirit ; ISiSalev, 
of the illumination at the hour of con- 
version. p.£V£Te, plainly imperat. in next 
ver., can hardly be indicat. here ("ye are 
abiding"). The reading |A£V£tT€ ("ye 
shall abide ") would express the Apostle's 
confidence in the steadfastness of his 

VOL. V. 




II. 28—29. in. 

« John xvii. ^gi}8o9 • Kal KuOus eSiSalec ujxas, iievene ^ iv auTw. 28. ° Kal vvv, 

" i'.*3i/x°x^" TCKi'ia, ficVcTc ei* aurw • tm orai'^ " 4)aKepw0fj, exw/xef ^ '^ irappTjaiat', 

Co'n'ii ^"^"'^ H'T * cllo■X"^'9w|J.e^' dir' auTou, iv rfj '^ irapouo-ta auTOU. 29. ^ eai' 

1 Peter v. 6i8f(T€ oTi StKaios eorri, * yifCiJo-KeTC on * iras 6 iroiuc ttji' SiKaioaunrji', 

w lii. 21, iv. ef auToG YeYE'>'>'TlTai. 
17, V. 14 ; " « 

EP*^'"'- III. I. "iSere iroTairTjc dydiri^v Se'SuKet' ^'^ i^fiti' 6 Traxrip, tea 

iv. 16, X. TCKi'a ©eoC *• KXtjOwfiet'^ • 8id touto 6 K6o-p.os ou yivuxTKei T^p-ds, on 

X Mark viii. 38; Rev. iii. 18. y Matt, xxiv. 3, 27, 39; i Cor xv. 23; i Thess. ii. 19; iii. 13. 

z Phil. ii. I. a John xv. 18. a Matt. viii. 27; Mark xiii. i ; Luke i. 29, vii. 39; 2 Peter iii. 11. 

b Matt. v. g, xxiii. 7, 8, 9, xxvii. 8 ; Luke i. 32. 35 ; John i. 43. 

^ |i6V£iT£ KL ; (levere ^ABCP, many minusc, Syrvg ph, Vg., Cop., Sah., Aeth., 
Aim., Aug., edd. 

2 oTav KL, Syrvg ph, Vg., Aug. ; eav ^ ABCP, Cop., Sah., Arm., edd. 

'eX'^ J^*KL ; o-xwp.€v ^^BCP, edd. 

■»OTi BKL, Syrph, Cop., Aeth., Arm., Aug., WH ; on Kai fc^ACF, Syrvg, Vg., 
;Sah., Tisch., Nest. 

5 SeScoKcv ^ABCKP, edd. ; eSojKcv AL. 

8 icXnea)}i.€v Ktti ia-fi.€v ^ABCP, Syr^g, Vg. {et simns), Cop., Sah., Aeth., Arm«, 

readers, like '■ England expects every 
man to do his duty ". Cf. Matt. v. 48 : 
eo-£cr6£ oviv vijAeis tcXeioi. ev avroi, in eo 
(Vulg ), "in Him," i.e., in Christ and 
therefore in God {cf. ver. 24). According 
to Aug., "in it," i.e., the chrism, unctio 
{permanete in ipsa). 

Ver. 28. Kttl vvv, continuing and rein- 
forcing the exhortation, lav <|>avep&)6fj : 
the uncertainty is not in the manifesta- 
tion but in the time of it, and this is the 
reason for steadfast abiding in Him. Cf. 
unwritten saying of Jesus : £c|)' ois yap 
ov evp<i>, ^r\a\v, eirl tovtois Kal 
Kpivu. o^ojp.£v, aor. marking the sud- 
denness of the crisis. Trappi^cria, pro- 
oerly " freedom of speech " {cf. Mark viii. 
2; John %'ii. 13, xvi. 29, xviii. 20; Acts 
ii. 29, iv. 29, 31, xxviii. 31); then "con- 
fidence," " boldness," especially before 
God {cf. Heb. iv. 16; i John iii. 21, iv. 
17, V. 14), the attitude of children to 
their father in contrast with that of 
slaves to their master {cf. Sen Ep. xlvii.: 
" Infelicibus servis movere labra ne in 
hoc quidem ut loquantur licet. Virga 
murmur omne compescitur: . . . nocte 
tota jejuni mutique perstant"). Kal fXT] 
alcrx'uv'Oiljpev, in contrast to o-xwu-«v 
TrappTjcriav. irapovtria, frequent in N.T. 
but only here in the Johannine writings. 
Not simply "presence" but "arrival," 
"advent" {advent us); cf. Luke xiii. i: 
-irapTJaav, Matt. xi. 50, John xi. 28. 

Ver. 29. In view of the preceding 
verse SiKaios must refer to Christ {cf. ii. 
1), and it is equally certain that «| avrov 
refers to the Father, since "begotten of 
Christ" {cf. Tennyson s "our fair father 
Christ ") is not a Scriptural idea. The 

abrupt transition evinces St. John's sense 
of the oneness of the Father and the 
Son {cf. ver. 24 ; John x. 30). ywuc-Kin, 
scitote (Vulg.), rather cognoscite (Calv.), 
" get to know," " recognise " (see note on 
ver. 3) , perceive the blessed inference, 
appropriate your birthright. It enfeebles 
the sentence to take the verb as indicat. 

Chapter III, Vv. 1-3. Our Present 
Dignity and Our Future Destiny. " See 
what unearthly love the Father hath 
given us, in order that we may be styled 
'children of God'; and so we are. It is 
for this reason that the world doth not 
recognise us, because it did not recognise 
Him. Beloved, now are we children of 
God, and it was not yet manifested what 
we shall be. We know that, if it be 
manifested, we shall be like Him, be- 
cause we shall see Him even as Hp is. 
And every one that hath this hope rest- 
ing on Him purifieth himself even as the 
Lord is pure." 

Ver. I. St. John has been speaking of 
the salvation which Jesus has brought — 
His Propitiation and Advocacy, and he 
sees and would have his readers see in it 
an amazing expression of the love of God. 
Cf. John iii. 16. iroTairds (iroSairos), 
properly cujas, " of what country," 
though approximating in late Greek to 
iroios, qnalis, "of what sort" {cf. Moul- 
ton. Gram, of N.T. Gk., i. p. 95), retains 
something of its proper and original 
signification. The love of God in Christ 
is foreign to this world: " from what far 
realm ? what unearthly love ? " Cf. Matt, 
viii. 27 : " What unearthly personage ? " 
2 Peter iii. 11: "How other-worldly". 
iva, K.T.X.., the purpose of this amazing 




ouK eycw auToi'. 2. dyaiTTjToi, fOe "* TeVca ©eou ecrfief, Kal oottw "^ J^°^" •' *^' 
"i4>avep(oQir] ti ecrofjieQa- ol'8ap.ev 8e ^ on * edv' 4)acepco0TJ, o|aoioi auTw ^ Roni^^iii 
€<rop,e9a, oti 6\|/6fie6a auroc KaGws cotti. 3. Kal iras 6 excoi' TtiVg ^^','1^; 
cXiriSa TauTT]i' ' eir' auTw, ^ dyKi^ei eauTov, KaOoJS eK€ii/os ^ a.yv6<i eart. ^g^r'^p. ",'■ 

iii. 21 ; Exod. xxxiv. 29. f i Tim. iv. 10; Acts xxiv. 15 ; Col. iv. 27; Ps. Ixxviii. 7, cxlvi. 5. 

E John xi. 55; Acts xxi. 24; James iv. 8; i Peter i. 22. h 2 Cor. xi. 2; i Tim. v. 32. 

J Se om. J.^ABCP, Syrph, Vg., Sah., Arm., edd. 

gift ; a wise, holy love, concerned for our 
highest good ; not simplj' that we may 
be saved from suffering and loss but " in 
order that we may be styled ' children of 
God ' ". And we have not only the name 
but the character : "so we are". Vulg. 
and Aug. give simus, as though reading 
u|jL€v for £cr[xcv : " that we should be styled 
and be ". Cf. Aug. : " Nam qui vocantur 
et non sunt, quid illis prodest nomen ubi 
res non est ? Quam multi vocantur 
medici, qui curare non norunt ? quam 
multi vocantur vigiles, qui tota nocte 
dormiunt ? " Sia TotJTo, not anticipative, 
of oTi, but retrospective : "for this rea- 
son," viz., because we are children of 
God. oTi explains the inference : " (and 
no wonder) because it did not recognise 
Him," i.e. the Father as revealed in His 
Son (cf. note on ii. 29). We must accept 
what our high dignity as children of God 
involves in a world alienated fjom God. 
On 6 KocTfios see note on ii. 15. Cf. 
Aug. : "Jam cum auditis mundum in 
mala significatione, non intelligatis nisi 
dilectores mundi. . . . Ambulabat et ipse 
Dommus Jesus Christus, in came erat 
Deus, latebat in infirmitate. Et unde 
non est cognitus ? Quia omnia peccata 
arguebat in hominibus. Illi amando de- 
leclationes peccatorum non agnoscebant 
Deum : amando quod febris suadebat, 
injuriam medico faciebant." 

Ver. 2. Having spoken of our present 
dignity, the Apostle goes on to speak of 
our future destiny. The Incarnation 
manifested our standing as children of 
God, but " it was not yet manifested 
what we shall be". The aorist k^a- 
vepwBr] (cf. eyvu in previous verse) refers 
to the historic manifestation in Jesus 
Christ. The N.T. says nothing definite 
about the nature of our future glory. 
With our present faculties we cannot 
conceive it. It must be experienced to 
be understood. Jesus simply assures us 
of the felicity of the Father's House, and 
bids us take His word for it {cf. John xiv. 
2). lav <j>av£p<o8-i), " if (cf note on ii. 28) 
it may be manifested," taking up ovirta 
£<j>av£po)9T|. This obvious connection is 
decisive against the rendering " if He 
shall be manifested " (cf. li. 28 ; Col. iii. 4). 

OTI, K.T.X. : What we shall be was not 
manifested, but this we know that we 
shall be like Him. And how do we 
know it ? From His promise that " we 
shall see Him even as He is-" {cf. John 
xvii. 24). The argument is two-fold : (i) 
Vision of God implies likeness to Him in 
character and affection (cf Matt. v. 8) ; 
(2) the vision of God transfigures (cf. 
2 Cor. iii. 18), even in this life. 

" Ah ! the Master is so fair, 

His smile so sweet to banished men, 
That they who meet it unaware 

Can never rest on earth again." 

And how will it be when we " see Him 
face to face " (i Cor. xiii. 12) ? St. 
Augustine expresses much of the Apostle's 
thought in a beautiful sentence : " Tota 
vita Christian! boni sanctum desiderium 
est ". 

Ver. 3. The duty which our destiny im- 
poses, eir' aiiToi, "resting on Him," i.e., 
on God as Father. Cf. Luke v. 5 : liri ria 
pr^\l.ari <rov, " relying on Thy word ". 
CKCIV09, Christ; see note on ii. 6. ayvos 
also proves that the reference is to Christ. 
As distinguished from ayiog, which im- 
plies absolute and essential purity, it de- 
notes purity maintained with effort and 
fearfulness amid defilements and allure- 
ments, especially carnal. Cf. Plat. Def. : 
dyveia evXdpeia Toiv irpos tovs Oeovs 
a|AapTT][j.dT(i)V • TTJs 6tov Ti|ji,TJs Kara 
<|)v<riv Gepaireia. Suid. : «iriTa(ris crco({>po- 
trvvTis. God is called ayios but never 
dyvds. Christ is dyvds because of His 
human exper ence. The duty of every 
one in view of his appearing before God, 
his presentation to the King, is ayvii,€iv 
eavTov, like the worshippers before the 
Feast (John xi. 35), like the people before 
the Lord's manifestation at Sinai (Exod. 
xix. lo-ii, LXX). It is his own work, 
not God's, or rather it is his and God's. 
Cf. Phil. ii. 12-13. Aug, : " Videte 
quemadmodum non abstulit liberum arbi- 
trium, ut diceret, castificat semetipsum. 
Quis nos castificat nisi Ueus ? Sed Deus 
te nolentem non castificat. Ergo quod 
adjungis voluntatem tuam Deo, castificas 

1 84 



i Matt 

...Y"' 4. nSs 6 77010)1' TTjw dfxapTtai', Kai ' tiV di'0|Jiiai' Troiel • Kal i^ dfiaprta 

41'; Hj;b. l„j\y 

X. 17 (Jer. 

XXM. 14). niinnTinc iniL<.ii/ ^ ^^^PTl' •'f^'- QfJKXpTia CI* auTU) OUK eOTl. 6. TTaS 


34)- dfJiapTias iqfiwf ^ 

k John i. 4 

I Cor. XV. o 

lii.2Sreff. auTOC, 
•n John i. 

29; Col. ii. 14. n ii. 6 ref. 

T) afofiia. 5. Kai oibare on iKeivos ' e<})av€pw0T), Xva rds 
Kal dfjiapTia ei* auTw ouk eoTi. 
ef auTw ^l.4v(l)v, ° ou^ dpLaprdi'ef irds 6 dp.apxdi'wv, ou^ eojpaKei' 
ouSe eyvdiKiv auTOf. 7. TeKi'ta,'^ p.T)8els irXafaTa) "' ufids * 
o Rom. vi. 14. p i. 8 reff. 

om. Tjiiwv ABP, Syrph, Cop., Aeth., 

' ajiapTias tjfji&jv ^CKL, Syr^g, Vg., Sah 
Arm., Tert. (de Pudic. 19), Aug., edd. 

^TCKvia J^BKL, edd. ; iraiSia ACP, WH (marg.) 

Vv. 4-12. The Obligation of our 
Dignity as Children of God. " Every 
one that doeth sin doeth also lawless- 
ness ; and sin is lawlessness. And ye 
know that He was manifested that He 
might take away the sins ; and sin in 
Him there is not. Every one that abideth 
in Him doth not keep sinning; every one 
that keepeth sinning hath not seen Him 
nor got to know Him. Little children, 
let no one lead you astray : he that doeth 
righteousness is righteous, even as He is 
righteous ; he that doeth sin is of the 
Devil, because from the beginning the 
Devil keepeth sinning. To this end was 
the Son of God manifested, that He might 
undo the works of the Devil. Every one 
that hath been begotten of God doeth 
not sin, because His seed in him abideth ; 
and he cannot keep sinning, because of 
God he hath been begotten. Herein are 
manifest the children of God and the 
children of the Devil : every one that 
doeth not righteousness is not of God, 
and he that loveth not his brother. Be- 
cause this is the message which ye heard 
from the beginning, that we love one 
another. Not as Cain was of the Evil 
One and slew his brother. And where- 
fore did he slay him ? Because his works 
were .evil, but his brother's righteous." 

Vv. 4-S. The Incompat bility of Son- 
ship with Continuance in Sin. 

Ver. 4. 6 TToi. tt)v ap,., the converse 
of 6 iroi. TT)v 81K. (ii. 29). vo|i.os, the 
revelation of God's will, the Father's 
requirement of His children, an expres- 
sion of the true law of their nature. t| 
ap.. €o-T. 1^ av. : the article in both subject 
and predicate make " sin " and " lawless- 
ness " convertible and co-extensive terms. 

Ver. 5. The purpose of the Incarna- 
tion was to " take away the sins " — atone 
for the sins of the past and prevent sins 
in the future, aipeiv, properly " lift up 
and carry away " (cf. Mark vi. 29; John 
ii. 16), but the idea of expiation is in- 
volved since it is " the Lamb of God " 
that " taketh away the sins ". cKeivos, 
see note on ii. 6. ap,apTia, '• sin," i.e. 
the sinful principle ; see note on i. 8. 

Ver. 6. ^ This seems a stark contradic- 
tion of i. S-ii. 2. (i) St, Augustine first 
limits the statement : " In quantum in 
ipso manet, in tantum non peccat," and 
then narrows the idea of " sin " by defin- 
ing it as " not loving one's brother " 
(vers. 10). (2) St. Bernard [De Nat. et 
Dign. Am. Div. vi.) compares Rom. vii. 
17, 20: "secundum hoc quod natus est 
ex Deo, id est secundum interioris 
hominis rationem, in tantum non peccat, 
in quantum peccatum quod corpus mortis 
foris operatur, odit potius quam approbat, 
semine spiritualis nativitatis quo ex Deo 
natus est eum interius conservante ". 
(3) Romanists limit "sin" to 'mortal 
sin ". (4) Many commentators say that 
St. John is thinking only of the ideal. 
All these simply explain away the em- 
phatic declaration. There is really no 
contradiction, and the Apostle's meaning 
appears when account is taken ot the 
terms he employs with accurate preci- 
sion. In the earlier passage he says that 
there is indwelling sin in the believer. 
The sinful principle (apapria) remains, 
and it manifests its presence by lapses 
from holiness — occasional sins, definite, 
isolated acts of sin. This is the iorce ot 
the aorists, dpdpTT|Te, apdpTT| in ii. i. 
Here he uses the present apapravtiv 
(varied by iroitiv ttjv apapxiav) with the 
implication of continuance in sin. The 
distinction between present and aorist 
is well exemplified by Matt. vi. 11 : Sos 
trijpepov as contrasted with Luke xi. 3 : 
81S0V TO Ka9" •qpe'pav, and Matt. xiv. 22 : 
cpP-fii'ai, . . . Kal TTpociYetv. The dis- 
tinction was obvious to St. John's Greek 
readers, and they would feel no difficulty 
when he said, on the one hand: lav tis 
apdpTt], napaKXtjTOv €x°(J''«''' and. on the 
other : iras 6 apaprdvaiv ov\ lupaK£v 
ovTov. The believer may fall into sin 
but he will not walk in it. "Hath not 
seen Him." because he is " in the dark- 
ness " {cf. i. 5-7). 

Ver. 7. An affectionate warning 
against Nicolaitan Antinomianism {cf. 
note on i. 6-7). The Apostle cuts awav 
vain pretences by a sharp principle : a 

4 — 12. 



6 •" Troiwc Tr\v 8iKaio(ruj'T]>', SiVaios cctti, Ka0w9 ekeit'os ■■ SiKaios '^ "' '^' ^^^' 

COTlf. 8. 6 TTOloil' TT)!/ djxapTtai/, *eK ToO Siaj3oXoU CCTTlf • OTI ''!'•' '^*^* 

cItt apx^S o 8id|3o\os djjiapTdi'ei. eis touto " €(|>ai'6poj6T) 6 ulog i°^" ^'"• 


Tou 0eou, iVa ^ Xuctt) "toi epyot toG StaPoXou. 9. lyds 6 yeyeci'T]- " "• 28 reff. 
fxeVos " CK TOU 06OU, du.apTi'ai' ou irotei, on aire'paa auTou iv aurw ^ Matt. xi. 

' ' ' ' ' 2 ; John 

)xei'€i • Kai ou Sui'aTat djxapTdi'etf, on eic tou 0eou yeyei'VTjTai. vii. 7, ix. 

10. ev TouTw ' mavepa eori Ta TeKi'a tou 0eou Kai Ta TCK^a tou Rom.xiii. 

' 12 ; Gal. 

Sia^oXou. Has 6 ut) ^iroioii' SiKaiocrui'Tjv, ouk Iotii' ck tou 0€Ou, y. 19. 

X iv. 7 V. 
Kai 6 jm,T) dyairwi' tov* d8eX(j)ov auTou. 1 1, oti auTT) iarlv r\ * dyyeXia 18. 

r\v i^K0uaaT6 air apx^s, i>'a ayairwixec a\Ar)\oos • 12. ou kuOus 13. xi. 19; 

• IX'" 'd "> ^ ^ ^e^x* *>C\x^ ' ~ ^ J tial. v. 19, 

Kaic CK TOU TTOi'Tjpou T|c, KOI CCTcpase Toi* aoe\90i' auxou • Kai \apiv z Ver. 7. 

ncos l(r<j>a$ei' auroi'; on Ta epya auTou iroi'Tipd r\y, rd Be tou bii.7; John 

xiii. 34, 
XV. 12. c Gen. iv. 8. d ii. 13 reff. e Rev. v. 6, g, 12, xiii. 3, 8, xviii. 24. 

righteous character expresses itself in 
righteous conduct. Christ (eKcivos) is 
the type. He was "the Son of God," 
and if we are " children of God," we 
must be like Him. 

Ver. 8. 6 iroi. ttjv d[i., an emphatic 
and interpretative variation of 6 d[i.apT- 
dvwv — "he that makes sin his business 
or practice ". €k of parentage (cf. vers. 
9) ; " hoc est, ex patre diabolo " (Clem. 
Alex.), air' dpx., a vague phrase. In 
i. I "ere time began" ; in ii. 7 iii. 11, 
" from the beginning of your Christian 
life ". Here " from the beginning of his 
diabolic career '' ; "a quo peccare coepit 
incontrovertibiliter in peccando perse- 
verans" (Clem. Alex.). Xwo-xj, "loose," 
metaphorically of " loosening a bond," 
" relaxing an obligation " (Matt. v. 19 ; 
John V. z8), "pulling to pieces" (John 
ii. 19). 

Ver. g. The Reason of the Impossi- 
bility of a Child of God continuing in 
Sin. The germ of the divine life has 
been implanted in our souls, and it grows 
— a gradual process and subject to occa- 
sional retardations, yet sure, attaining at 
length to full fruition. The behever's 
lapses into sin are like the mischances 
of the weather which hinder the seed's 
growth. The growth of a living seed 
may be checked temporarily ; if there be 
no growth, there is no life. This is the 
distinction between tav ns dp.dpT^ and 
6 dp,apTdv(ov. Alexander in Speaker's 
Comm. understands : " His seed," i.e., 
whosoever is born of God {cf. Isa. liii. 
10, Ixvi. 22), " abideth in Him," i.e., in 
God. This is Pauline but not Johann- 
ine. " He cannot keep sinning," as the 
seed cannot cease growing. 

Vv. 10-12. The Evidence of Divine 
Sonship, viz., Human Brotherhood. 

Ver. 10. The Apostle reiterates the 
"old commandment" (ii. 7-11) as not 
only the paramount duty of believers 
but the evidence of their divine sonship. 
He has said that the evidence lies in 
" doing righteousness," and now he de- 
fines xoieiv 8iKaiocrvi'T]v as ayairav tov 
dS€X4>bv avTov. See note on ii. 9. The 
"righteousness" of the Pharisees con- 
sisted in ritual observance, that of Jesus 
in love. SiKaios had the meaning 
" kind," " sweetly reasonable ". See 
Hatch, Ess. in Btb. Gk., p. 50 ff. On 
Matt. i. 19 St. Chrysostom remarks : 
SiKaiov ei'TavSa tov evapexov Iv airatrt 
Xeysi. lo-Ti p.ev yap SiKaiocrvvT] Kai to 
fAT) irXeoveKTeiv • ccti 8e Kai r\ KaOoXov 
apeTi^. . . . SiKaios ovv aiv. TovTecTTi 
XP'HO'Tos Kai liriciKt^s. 

Ver. II. iva ecbatic, expressing not 
the aim but simply the substance of the 
message. Cf. John xvii. 3. See Moul- 
ton's Gram, of N.T. Gk., p. 206; Moul- 
ton's Winer, p. 425. 

Ver. 12. ov Ka9b>9, k.t.X., a loose, 
almost ungrammatical expression, analo- 
gous to John vi. 58. Were there no ov, 
ver. II might be regarded as a paren- 
thesis : " he that loveth not his brother, 
even as Cain was, etc.". The phrase 
is elliptical : " We must not hate our 
brethren, even as Cain was, etc.". T9V 
irov., see note on ii. 18. ccc^alev, a 
strong word, "slaughtered," "butchered," 
properly by cutting the throat {Jiigulare), 
like an ox in the shambles. 

Vv. 13-24. The Secret of Assurance. 
" Wonder not, brethren, if the world 
hateth you. We know that we have 
migrated out of the domain of death into 
the domain of life, because we love the 
brethren. He that loveth not abideth in 
the domain of death. Everyone that 




iSm''^ dSeX^oj auTou SiKaia. 13. firj ^ 0au)xa^€Te, d8£X<|>oi fAou,' ei ' fiiael 
• ufids 6 KOCTfxo,. 14. 'Hjjieis oiSafiei' on ^ fA€Ta)3£|3i]Kafi,6»' ck tou 

Matt. V 

1 1. 

gjohn V. Oakdrou eis rrji' IfUi-qv, 'on dyairwfi.ei' toos dSeXc^ous • 6 jiT) aya-nCtv 

h Matt. iv. To»' dSeX^xJi',^ (jieVei ci' tw dat'dro). 15. irds 6 jxiaoji' tov' dSeX- 

i iv. iq. Mqv auTou,* "^ di'OpwiTOKTOk'os ecTTi • Kal oiSare on irds dfOpcoTTOKToros 
k Only here . "^ 

and John ouK evei iwni' aioii'ioi' iv auTw ^ iiev'ouaai'. 16. 'E;' tooto) iyvii>- 
viii. 44 in V , , • « 1 , - ' . r c - X V ' » 

N.T. Kaji.ei' rf)*' dydTTTjc,'^ on cKeit'os uirep i^/awi' " ttji/ <|'uxt)V' auxoo IOtjkc • 

m John X. Kai i^fj.€is ° 64>eiXo/i.ei' uTTfcp tC>v aZe\(^(x3y rds \|/uxds nOeVai.' 17. 

18, xiii. OS S' di' 6xy] Toi* ° ^iov Tou KO(rp,oo, Kal P flewprj roc dSeXtfjOf auroG 

37, 38, XV. ' 

13. n ii. 6 reff. o Mark xii. 44 : Luke viii. 43 ; xv. 12, 30. p John xvii. 24, xx. 6, 12, 14 , 

Matt, xxvii. 55, xxviii. i ; Mark v. 15, 38; Luke x. 18. 

ifiT) ABCKL, Syrph, Vg., Cop., Sah., Aug., WH, Nest. ; Kai pnj t^C*P, Syrvg, 
Aeth., Arm., Tisch. 

2(iov om. ^ABCP, Vg., Arm., Aug., edd. 

3 Tov a8€X4)ov om. J«^AB, Vg., Arm., Aug., edd. 

^ eavTov B. ■■ eavro J^^ACLP, Tisch., WH (marg.) ; avrw BK, WH, Nest. 

^ Tt]v aYaiTTjv tov Beov one minusc, Vg. ' Oeivai ^ABCP, edd. 

hateth his brother is a murderer, and ye 
know that every murderer hath not Hfe 
eternal abiding in him. Herein have we 
got to know love, because He laid down 
His life for us ; and we are bound to lay 
down our lives for the brethren. But 
whosoever hath the world's goods, and 
beholdeth his brother in need and locketh 
up his compassion from him, how doth 
the love ot God abide in him ? Little 
children, let us not love with word nor 
with the tongue, but in deed and truth. 
Herein shall we get to know that we are 
of the Truth, and in His presence shall 
assure our heart, whereinsoever our 
heart may condemn us, because greater 
is God than our heart, and He readeth 
everything. Beloved, if the heart con- 
demn not, we have boldness toward 
God, and whatever we ask we receive 
from Him, because we observe His com- 
mandments and do the things that are 
pleasing in His sight. And this is His 
commandment, that we believe the name 
of His Son Jesus Christ and love one 
another, even as He gave a command- 
ment to us. And he that observeth His 
commandments in Him abideth and He 
in him ; and herein we get to know that 
He abideth in us — from the Spirit which 
He gave us." 

Ver. 13. It is natural that the world 
(see notes on ii. 15, iii. i) should hate 
those whose lives contradict its maxims 
and condemn its practices. St. John 
frequently addresses his readers as reKvia 
and aYaTT-qToi, here only as d8cX<{>oi. 
The term suits the context, where he 
enforces love of the brethren. It is no 
wonder if the world hate us, and its 

judgment is not decisive. Nevertheless 
our business is not to be hated by the 
world, but to commend Je.--us to it and 
win it. We must not impute to the 
world's hostility to goodness the conse- 
quences of our own unamiability or tact- 
lessness. " It is not martyrdom to pay 
bills that one has run into one's self" 
(Geo. Eliot). 

Ver. 14. T||i€is emphatic : " Whatever 
the world may say, ive know ". The 
test is not its hatred but our love. 
|X€TaP€PiiKa|X€v, " have migrated ". The 
word is used of transition from one place 
to another (John vii. 3, xiii. i), of passing 
from one form of government to another 
(Plat. Rep. 550 D), of the transmigra- 
tion of souls (Luc. Gall. 4). 

Ver. 15. An echo of the teaching of 
Jesus. See Matt. v. 21-22 and cf. Smith, 
The Days of His Flesh, pp. 96-98. 

Ver. i5. TTjv dYtiTnfjv, "the thing 
called ' love ' ". The love of God in 
Christ Jesus our Lord is the perfect 
type. Till the world saw that, it never 
knew what love is. cKeivos, Christ; see 
note on ii. 6. T|p.ei9 emphatic, "we on 
our part". 6<|>€iXo|A£v, see note on ii. 6. 

Ver. 17. Love must be practical. 
It is easy to " lay down one's life " : 
martyrdom is heroic and exhilarating ; 
the difficulty lies in doing the little things, 
facing day by day the petty sacrifices 
and self-denials which no one notices 
and no one applauds, tov piov tov 
Koafxov, "the livelihood of the world"; 
see note on ii. 16. Ocwp'Q, of a movincr 
spectacle ; cf. Matt, xxvii. 55. KXtio-jj, 
schUesst ; the metaphor is locking the 
chamber of the heart instead of flinging 

13— 20. 



' Xp^iav exoi'Ta, Kal ' kXciott) tci ' airXdyx^tt auTou eiTr' auTou, ' irois 'f\ ** 
aydivi] Tou 0cou iiivei iv auTw ; 18. TCKCia jjiou,^ fir] dyaTTuifiek' 
" Xoyw fJ.i]8e - Y^'^o'<''Tl' ciXX' epyu) ^ Kal dXTjSeia. 19. Kal* iv 
TOUTw yiviiXTKO^iev ^ oTi 6K Tf)s dXirjOetas eafief, Kal ep.Trpoa6e>' auTOo 
irciaop.o' Tois KapSias ^ ruiGtv ' 20. on ^ ''cdi' Karayn'cScrKT) ruiCtv ■fi 
KapSia, OTi ^ jji€i^(i)>' co-rlf 6 0€os ^ ttjs KapSias ^/aw>', Kal y^wcTKet 
Phil. i. 8, ii. i. t iv. 20 ; James ii. 15, 16. u James i. 22, 23, 25. v Mark vi. 23 

Mark ii. 
25 ; Eph. 
iv. 28. 
xxiii. 14, 
XXV. 10; 
Luke iv. 
25 ; John 
XX. 19, 26. 
Luke i. 
78 ; 2 Cor. 
vi. 12 ; 
(o, Ti iav). 

^ (xov om. J»^ABCP, Syrph, Arm., Aug., edd. 

;>^ABCLP, Arm., edd. 

, Tisch. ; om. AB, SyrPh, Vg., Cop., Aug., 

^ lAtjSe TT) ABCKL, edd. ^ ev epyu 

^ Kai ^CKLP, Syrvg, Sah., Aeth., Arm. 

WH, Nest 

6 yvoitrofieea J^ABCP, Cop., Sah., Arm 

Bras KapSias J^^A^CKLP, Syrph, Vg. 
Syrvg, Sah., Aeth., Aug., WH, Nest. 

'' Punct. Tjpwv o Tt. 

*OTi om. A, several minusc, Vg., Cop., Sah., Aeth., Arm., Aug. 

, edd. 
Cop., Arm., Tisch. ; ttiv KapSiav A*B, 

it wide open and lavishing its treasures. 
<rirXayx*'*' CPH"^, viscera, "the in- 
ward parts," viewed by the ancients as 
the seat of the affections. Cf. Col. iii. 
12 : (TirXdyxva oiKTipp.oO. ti dy. t. 0., 
" love for God " (objective genitive), in- 
spired by and answering to the love which 
God feels (subjective genitive). Cf. note 
on ii. 5. 

Ver. 18. Observe the transition from 
instrume 'tal dative to preposition €v : 
" not with word and the to-gue but in 
the midst of deed and truth" — not in 
empty air but amid tangible realities. 
Cf. Bunyan, Good News : " Practical 
love is best. Many love Christ with 
nothing but the lick of the tongue." 
Sheridan, Sell, for Scand. v. i. : " He 
appears to have as much speculative 
benevolence as any private gentleman in 
the kingdom, though he is seldom so 
sensual as to indulge himself in the exer- 
cise of it ". 

Vv. ig-20. A crxx interpretum. Read 
TT|V KapStav T|jx(j)V o, ti ka.v [i.e. av), and 
take the subsequent on as •' because ". 
The foregoing; exhortation may have 
awakened a misgiving in our minds: 
" Am I loving as I ought ? " Our failures 
in duty and service rise up before us, 
and " our heart condemns us ". So the 
Apostle furnishes a grand reassurance : 
" Herein shall we get to know that we 
are of the Truth, and in His presence 
shall assure our heart, whereinsoever 
our heart may condemn us, because, 
etc. ". The reassurance is two-fold : (i) 
The worst that is in us is known to God 
{cf. Aug. : Cor tuum abscondis ab homine ; 
a Deo absconde si fotes), and still He 

** Kvpios C.^ 

cares for us and desires us. Our dis- 
covery has been an open secret to Him 
all along. (2) He " readeth everything" 
— sees the deepest things, and these are 
the real things. This is the true test of 
a man : Is the deepest that is in him the 
best? Is he better than he seems ? His 
failures lie on the surface : is there a 
desire for goodness deep down in his 
soul ? Is he glad to escape from super- 
ficial judgments and be judged by God 
who " readeth everything," who sees 
" with larger other eyes than ours, to 
make allowance for us all " ? Cf. F. W. 
Robertson, Lett. Ivi. : " I remember an 
anecdote of Thomas Scott having said 
to his curate, who was rather agitated 
on having to preach before him, ' Well, 
sir, why should you be afraid before me, 
when you are not afraid before God?' 
But how very easy it was to answer ! 
He had only to say, God is not jea ous, 
nor envious, nor censorious ; besides, 
God can make allowances". So Brown- 
ing :— ■ 

" Thoughts hardly to be packed 
Into a narrow act. 
Fancies that broke through language and 
escaped ; 
All 1 could never be, 
All, men ignored in me. 
This, I was worth to God, whose wheel 
the pitcher shaped." 

€p.irpo(r9«v avTov, and what matter how 
we appear €p,Trpoo-9ev twv dvOpu'Trwv 
(Matt. vi. i.) ? -rreio-ofjiev, " persuade.' 
i.e. pacify, win the confidence, soothe 
the alarm, of our heart. Cf. Matt, xxviii. 
14. Otherwise: " v>'e shall persuade our 
heart . . . that greater is God ". But 



III. 21— 24. IV. 

w ii. 28 reff. 
X John xiv. 

13, 14, XV. 

7, 16, xvi. 

y John viii. 

z Luke xii. 

6, XV. 10, 

18, xvi. 

15 ; John 

XX. 30; 

Rom. iii. 

a Jolin vi. 

29, XV. 17. 
biv. 13; . . 

Rom. viii. 

a Rom. ii. 
18; I Cor. 

irdrra. 21. dyaTTYjTot, iav tJ KapSi'a iqfjiwc ^ fiT) KaTaYifucrKTi 
nffiui/j^ * TT-appi^o-tai' exoiACf -rrpos toi' ©eoc, 22. Kal ^o ecli' aiTWfiei', 
Xap.pdfojj.ei' Trap' ^ aurou, on rds eiroXas auTou rrjpoufi.Ei', ical ^ tA 
dpecTTd "^ et'ojirioi' auToG ■noiou^ev, 23. Kal aoTT) ivrlv r[ erroXr} 
auTou, iVa iTicrT£uo-wp,€>' * tw orojxaTi tou oiou auToO 'Itjctou Xpiorou, 
Kal dyaTrwfJiei' dWTJXous, "* xaOws eSuicef ci'toXtii' y]\uv. 24. Kal 6 
Tr]pu)V rds dfToXas auTOj, ei/ auTw p,eVei, Kal auTos ek* auTu. Kal iv 
TouTo* yn'cio-KOfiei' OTi fieVei ei' ij|xic, "* ck tou Rj'eufiOTOs oS tfiiic 

IV. 1 . 'AyaiTT^TOt, p,v) irai'Tl ir^'eufAaTi Trio-Teucre, dXXd * SoKip-d^cTe 
iii. 13, xi 28 ; Gal. vi. 4; i Thess. v. 21. 

^itifiwv ^CKL, Syr^gph, Vg., Cop., Sah., Aeth., Arm., Tisch. ; cm. AB, several 

minusc, Aug., WH, Nest. 

-tlfjiwv t>^AKL, Syrvgph, Vg., Cop., Sah., Aeth., Arm., Tisch.; om. BC, one 
minusc, WH, Nest. 
3 air^ABC, edd. 
■* •7ricrTev<rw)J.€v BKL, WH, Nest. ; irio-revwuev ^AC, Tisch., WH (marg.). 

how can love for the brethren yield this 
inference ? yivcicrKti TrdvTa, " readeth 
ever\- secret". Cf. John ii. 25. A quite 
different and less satisfying sense is got 
bj' punctuating ttjv KapSiav i^|i.wv. on 
lav, K.T.X. The second on is then a 
difficulty and has been dealt with in three 
ways : (i) It has been ignored as redund- 
ant : •' For if our heart condemn us, God 
is greater, etc. " (A.V. fortified by the 
omission of the participls in some inferior 
MSS.). (2) An ellipse has been assumed 
— either of the substantive verb : " be- 
cause if our heart condemns us, (it is) 
because God, etc." (Alford), or of S^Xov 
(Field, who compares i Tim. vi. 7) : " it 
is plain that God, etc.". (3) on has 
been conjecturally emended into en 
(Steph., Bez.) : " still greater is God, 

Vv. 21-22. irappTjo-iav, see note on 
ii. 28. o eav alrufxev Xa|, though 
not always in the form we expect or 
desire ; the answer may be different from 
but it is always better than our praj-er. 
St. Augustii.e drav.'s a distinction between 
the hearing of prayer " ad salutem " and 
"ad voluntatem," comparing the experi- 
ence of St. Paul (2 Cor. xii. 7-9) : " Ro- 
gasti, clamasti, ^erclamasti : ipsumsemel 
quod clamasti audivi, non averti aures 
meas a te ; novi quid faciam ; tu vis 
auferri medicamentum quo ureris ; ego 
novi infirmitatem tiua jcravaris. Ersro 
iste ad salutem exauditus est, ad volun- 
tatem non est exauditus. . . . Tu morbum 
confitearis, ille medicamentum adhibeat." 
Cf. Juan de Avila : ' Go to prayer ratlT-r 

to hearken than to speak. Bend humbly 
and lovingly before God, expecting." 
TTjpov(j,£v, see note on ii. 3. 

Ver. 23. Cf. our Lord's summary of 
the commandments in Matt. xxii. 34-40 
= Mark xii. 28-31, and observe the apos- 
tolic narrowing of tov •TrXiio-tov «70v (cf. 
Luke X. 29-37) to dXXi]Xovs, «•«• tovs 
dS£X(|3ovs (see note on ii. 9). tw, 
see note on ii. 12. 

Ver. 24. TO.? €VT. avT., " the com- 
mandments of God," resuming ver. 22. 
Cf. iv. 15. «K,the assurance is b.gotten 
of the Spirit ; see note on ii. 21. ov for 
o, by attraction to the case of the ante- 
cedent {cf. Luke ii. 20 ; Rev. xviii. 6). 
eSuKcv, "gave," i.e., when first we be- 
lieved. For the thought cf. 2 Cor. i. 21, 
22 ; Eph. i. 13, 14 ; also Rom. viii. 15, 16. 

Chapter IV.— Vv. 1-6. The Spirit of 
Truth and the Spirit of Error. " Be- 
loved, believe not every spirit, but prove 
the spirits, whether they are from God ; 
because many false prophets have gone 
forth into the world. Herein ye get to 
know the Spirit of God : every spirit 
which confesseth Jesus as Christ come 
in flesh, is from God ; and every spirit 
which confessith not Jesus, is not from 
God. And this is the spirit of the Anti- 
christ, whereof ye heard that it is coming, 
and now it is in the world already. Ye 
are from God, little children, and have 
conquered them, because greater is He 
that is in you than he tiiat is in the 
world. They are from the world ; there- 
fore irom the world they talk, and the 
world hearkeneth to them. We are from 



TO. TTceu'iiaTa, ei ^ eic tou 0£Ou icrriv ' on iroWol " iI/euSoirpocfcfjTai ^ Y"- ^'^• 
~ ' ^ ~ ^ ' Cf. comm. 

eleXriXuSao-ic els Toc Koo-jjiof. 2. iy toutu) yivcjcrKeTe ^ to flk'euiJi.a '^ ^5^"_ 
TOU 06OU ■ TToiP' 7ri'eijji.a o " ojioXoyet 'iT^o-ouf Xpio-Toi' iv aapKi €Xy]\u- ''^^^': ".; 
BoTa,^ CK ToG 0€ou euTi. "?. Kal ttS*' TD'euu.a o ixti ouoXovet "^ to** ^''-26; 
lv](Tout' XpiCTTor* ei/ o-apicl eX-nXuSora,^ eK tou Oeou ouk cctti * Ka*" 6. 

TOUTO eCTTl TO TOU Clf TlXptCTTOU, O dKT]K6aT€ OTl ^ €p)(6Tai, Kttl CUC CI' 3 John 7; 
xiii. 3, xvi. 27, 28, 30, xvii. 8 ; i Cor. xiv. 36. e John ix. 22 ; 2 John 7. f ii. 18 reff. 

^ YivworK£T€ ^cABCL, Syrph, Cop., Sah., Aeth., edd. ; yivbitrKiTai K, Syrvg, Vg., 
Aug. — an itacism. 

-eXtiXvaoTtt J»^ACKL, edd. ; «Xt]Xv9€voi B, Vg., V/H (marg.). 
2 fit^ o|ji,oXoYEi. all Gk. MSS. and all versions except Vg. ; Xvei Socr. H. E. vii. 
32 (of Nestorius) : airiKa yovv Tiyvo-qcrev on Iv T-fj KaOoXiKf) 'Icoavvov l-yeYpairTO ev 
TO IS iraXaiois dvTiYpd^toi; oti iriv irvevp.a o X-uet tov '\r\iro\iv d-rro rov 6eoij ovk tern. 
TavTT]v ydp tt)v Sidvoiav €k tcIi' iraXaiuiv avTiYpttf^wv irepieiXov 01 \Q)pi'C,eiv diro 
Toi TTJ5 oiKovo^ia; dvOpoiirov PovXop.€voi ttjv OcorrjTa * 816 Kal ol TraXonoi lpp.T]V€is 

•airo toOto eTreo-qp,TJvavTO, uis Ttves eltv paSiovpY»]«"avT£S ttjv e'7rKrToXi]v, Xveiv aTro 
ToO Oeoti TOV avSpojirov 6«Xovt€s. Iren. HI. xvii. 8: et onuiis spiritits qui solvit 
lesum, non est ex Deo. Orig. in Matth. Comm. Ser. 65 (Lomm. iv. p. j6o). Vg. : 

■omnis spiritus qui solvit lesnm. Aug. : omnis spiritus qm solvit Clvistum (after 
quoting omnis spiritus qui non confitetur yesus Christum in came venisse). 

^ Xpio-Tov om. AB, Syrvg ph, Vg., Cop., Aeth., Arm., Iren., Orig., Socr., edd.; 
tcvpiov ^. 

* £v crapKi eXTjXv^oTa om. AB, Vg., Cop., Sah., Aeth., edd. 

God ; he that is getting to know God 
hearkeneth to us ; one who is not from 
God, hearkeneth not to us. From this 
we get to know the Spirit of Truth and 
the spirit of error." 

I. The Apostle has just said that the 
Spirit begets in us the assurance that 
God abideth in us. And this suggests a 
warning. The Cerinthian heresy al^o 
had much to say about " the spirit". It 
boasted a larger spirituality. Starting 
with the philosophical postulate of an 
irreconcilable antagonism between mat- 
ter and spirit, it denied the possibility of 
the Incarnation and drew a distinction 
between Jesus and the Christ (see Introd., 
p. 157). Its spirit was not " the Spirit of 
Truth " but " a spirit of error," and thus 
the necessity arises of " proving the 
spirits". 8oKi|Jid^ei,v, of " proving " or 
" testing " a coin (vop.i<rp.a). If it stood 
the test, it was SoKip-ov (cf. 2 Cor. x. 18) ; 
if it was found counterfeit (kiPStiXov), it 
was dSoKifiov [cf. I Cor. ix. 27 ; 2 Cor. xiii. 
5-7). Cf. Jer. vi. 30 LXX : dpYupiov'iJiEvov . . . Sti direSoKi-'cv aviTOvs Kvpio;. eK, here oi commis- 
sion, not parentage ; " from God," as His 
messengers. Cf. John i. 24 ; xviii. 3 ; 
Soph., O.C. 735-737: direo-rdXTjv . . . 
OVK el evos o-T£iXavTOs. iroXXoi : Cer- 
inthus had a large following. e^eX-qX. 
els T. KcJo-p.., a monstrous reversal of 
John xvii. 18. Thev went forth from the 

Church into the world not to win but to 
deceive it. 

2. The Test of ihe Sririts. Y'''''^*'''*^'^*' 
as in ii. 29, may be either indicat. ("ye 
recognise") or, like irto-TeveTe, SoKip.d^eTE, 
imp rat. ("recognise"). The former seems 
preferable. 6|xoXoYeX 'It]0"ovv Xpio-Tov ev 
o-apKi eXtjXvWra, " confesseth Jesus as 
Christ come in flesh," an accurate defini- 
tion of the doctrine which the Cerinthian 
heresy denied. The argument is destroyed 
by the fj.lse variant eXr^XvOeVai, "con- 
fesseth that Jesus Christ hath come," con- 
jitetur Jesum Christum in came venisse 

Ver. 3. The Test negatively expressed. 
Omit Xpio-Tov ev o-apKi eXtiXvOcSra. tov 
Mtjo-ovv, " the aforementioned Jesus," 
" Jesus as thus described ". ^■f\ makes the 
statement hypothetical: "every spirit, if 
such there be, whch doth not confess". 
The variant Xvei tov 'Itjo-ovv. solvit 
yesum (Vulg., Aug.), " dissolveth " or 
" severeth Jesus," i.e., separates the d^ 
vinity and the humanity, aptly defines 
the Cerinlhian heresy. It was much 
appealed to in later days against Nesto- 
rius. The ecclesiastical historian Socrates 
(see crit. note) says it was the primitive 
reading, and was altered by " those who 
wished to separate the deity from the 
man of the Incarnation". St. Augustine, 
defining heresy as schism due to lack of 
brotherly love, comments: "Ille venit 




g John XVI. ^q KoafAO) €<7Tii' ri%r\. 4. 'YiAcis €K ToG 6eou ccttc, reKi'ia, Kal 

u jonn XIV. is i/ev/iKr)KaT£ aUTOUS '■ OTl flCl^Wf eaTlV O eV Vp.IV TJ O e»' T(i) KOCTflW. 
i ii. 16 refl. ^ AuTol ' €K TOU KOCTflOU ClCTl ' SlCt TOUTO "^ €K ToG KCCTjJLOU XaXoCfft, Kttl 

31, viii. ^ k6(T|xos ainlijv oIkouci. 6. iip.€ls ck toG ©eoG iv^iev ' 6 yivuxTKOiV 

1 John viii. ^Qy Q^oy^ CtKOUei TJflWC ' ' OS OUK eOTlf €K ToG ©eoG, OUK aKOUEl TJJi.Wl'. 

43> 47- 3 
mi.Sreff; Ek TOUTOU yi.VU)aKOll€y TO 1TV€G|Xa TTJS dXT]0€iaS Kttl TO TTl'eGfJia TT]S 

xxvii. 64 ; " TrXai'r]s. 7. AYaiTTjTOi, " dyaTTtiipet' dXXi^Xous ' oTi "f] dyaTTT) eic to5 
14; James ©€oG cffTi, Kttl irds 6 dyaTrwv, ° ek toG ©coG yeyei'i'YjTai, Kal yicwCTKCi 

V. 20. 
n ii. 7, iii. II- o ii. 29, iii. 9. 

1 avTovs Aug. eutn., i.e., Antichristum. 

colligeie, tu venis solvere. Distringere 
vis membra Christi. Quomodo non negas 
Christum in carne venisse, qui disrumpis 
Ecclesiam Dei, quam ille congregavit ? " 
On the Antichrist see note on ii. 18. 
o OLKr^Koart oTi £px<Tai, "which ye have 
heard that it is coming" — the regular 

Greek idiom. C/. Luke iv. 34 : olSa <rt 

I t 

TIS €1. 

Ver. 4. \ipLcis emphatic {cf. ii. 20, 27, 
iii. 14], as contrasted with the deluded 
world. The faithlul aie God's delegates 
(€k), bearing their Master's commission 
and continuing His warfare (John xx. 
21), and ihey have shared His victory 
(veviKTJKaTi). atiTovs, i.e., the false pro- 
phets (ver. i). Eum (Vulg.) ; "Quern 
nisi Antichristum ? " (Aug.). 6 ev v|xlv, 
i.e., God [cf. iii. 24) ; 6 ev tu K(Scrfj.<d, i.e., 
6 opxwv Tov Koafiov tovtov (John xii. 
31 xiv. 3c).^ 

Ver. 5. aviTOi (as opposed to viitis) Ik 
TOV KocTfiov cio"iv, as its delegates, mes- 
sengers, representatives, and as such 
€K TOV Koo'|jLOv XaXovciv. XaXeiv, not 
" speak " (Xe'yc'-'')' u*^ '' talk," with a 
suggestion of prating (cf. John iv. 42). 
oiKoveiv takes accus. of the thing heard, 
genit. of the person from whom it is 
heaid. Cf. Luke v. i ; Acts i. 4 (where 
both are combined). The world listens 
to those who sj eak its own language. 

Ver. 6. Conversely, those who are get- 
ting to know God, understand the lan- 
guage of His messengers and listen to it. 
CK TovTov, i.e. from their hearkening or 
not hearkening. Men's attitude to the 
message of the Incarnate Saviour ranks 
them on this side or on that — on God's 
side or the world's. Of course St. John 
does not ignore St. Paul's dXtiSevovTcs 
€v dydTTTfj (Eph. iv. 15). The message 
may be the truth and be rejected, not be- 
cause of the hearers' worldliness, but 
because it is wrongly delivered — not 
graciously and winsomely. Cf. Rowland 
Hill's anecdote of the preaching barber 
who had made a wis lor one of his 

hearers — badly made and nearly double 
the usual price. When anything parti- 
cularly protitable escaped the lips of the 
preacher, the hearer would observe to 
himselt : " Excellent I This should touch 
my heart; but oh, the wig!'" ttjs 
dX-r]6e(as, see note on i. 8. to irv. ttjs 
irXdvTjs, "the spirit that leadeth astray '1^ 

Vv. 7-21. The Blessedness of Love. 
" Beloved, let us love one another, be- 
cause love is of God, and every one that 
loveth of God hath been begotten and is 
getting to know God. He that loveth 
not did not get to know God, because 
God is love. Herein was manifested the 
love of God in us, because His Son, His 
only-begotten, hath God commissioned 
into the world, that we may get life 
through Him. Herein is the love, not 
that ive have loved God, but that He 
loved us and commissioned His Son as a. 
propitiation for our sins. 

" Beloved, if it was thus that God loved 
us, we a so are bound to love one another. 
God — no one hath ever yet beheld Him: 
it we love one another, God abideth 
in us and His love is perfected in us. 
Herein we get to know that we abide in 
Him and He in us, because of His Spirit 
He hath given us. And we have beheld 
and testify that the Father hath commis- 
sioned the Son as Saviour of the world. 
Whosoever confesseth that Jesus is the 
Son of God, God in him abideth and he 
in God. And we have got to know and 
have believed the love which God hath 
in us. 

" God is love, and he that abideth in 
love in God abideth, and God in him 
abideth. Herein hath love been per- 
fected with us — so that we may have 
boldness in the Day of Judgment — 
because, even as He is, we also are in 
this world. Fear there is not in love, but 
the perfect love casteth out fear, because 
lear hath punishment ; and he that feareth 
hath not been perfected in love. Wf love 
because He first loved ws. If one say, 




TOf Qeov • 8. 6 jJiT) dyaTTwi', '' ouk eyv<ji toi' Qeov ' on '' 6 ©cog aYdTTH] P W: 3- ♦• 
itTTiv. 9. 'Ev TOUTW i^avepojQy] ■}] dYdirTj tou 0eoG iv r]}i.iv, on TOk "l j^v^^: 
ulov' auToG Toi' ^ fAOMoyefT] ^ aTreaTaXKei' 6 ©eog eis tov k6c7|xoi', ica '^' '"• ^^> 

l^T)(TWfji€i' 81' aoTou. 10. er TouTO) iarlv r\ aydirr], " oo^ on i^jiei5 s Matt. x. 
T|Yain]CTap.€f ^ toi' 0c6f, dW on auTos TiydTTTio'et' 1^^lds, Kal direo-- »'• i7i xx. 
TCiXc TOI' uioi' auTou * iXaajioi' irepl twi' djjLapnwf iQp.oji'. 1 1 . dyairr]- t John iil. 
Toi, ei ^ouTCJS 6 ©eos t|y^'"'^<''^''^M'^5» ^^al iqfxeis ''64>etXofJiei' dXXi^Xous" Ver. 19. 
w John iii. 16. x Rom. xiii. 8 ; Matt, jcviii. 33 ; Rom. xv. 7 ; Eph. iv. 33 ; Col. iii. 13. y ii. 6 reff. 

^ r]yaTri)a-afi.€v Jf^cKL, Tisch., WH (marg.) — an assimilation to the other aors. ; 
TjYaTrTjKafiev B, \VH, Nest. 

' I love God,' and hate his brother, he is 
a liar. For he that loveth not his brother 
whom he hath seen, God whom he hath 
not seen, he cannot love. And this com- 
mandment have we from Him, that he 
that loveth God love also his brother." 

Ver. 7. St. John reiterates the "old 
commandment" (ii. 7-11). It is so all- 
important that he cares not though his 
readers be tired of hearing it. Cf. the 
anecdote which St. Jerome relates on 10: "Beatus Joannes Evangelista 
cum Ephesi moraretur usque ad ultimam 
senectutem, et vix inter discipulorum 
manus ad Ecclebiam deferretur, nee posset 
in pluravocem verba contexere,nih;laliud 
per singulas solebat proferre coUectas 
jiisi hoc : Filioli, diligite alterutrum. 
Tandem discipuli et fratres qui aderant, 
tasdio afftcti quod eadem semper audi- 
rent, dixerunt : Magister, quare semper 
hoc loqueris ? Qui respondit dignam 
Joanne sententiam : Quia prreceptum 
Domini est, et si solum fiat, sufficit." 
Love is the divine nature, and those who 
love have been made partakers of the 
divine nature (2 Peter i. 4) ; and by the 
practice of love they " get to know God " 
more and more. 

Ver. 8. Conversely, a stranger to love 
is a stranger to God. ovk eyvw, " did not 
get to know," i.e., at the initial crisis of 
conversion. On ftrj see note on ii. 4. 

Ver. 9. The Incarnation is a manifes- 
tation of the love of God because it is a 
manifestation of the divine nature, and 
the divine nature is love, ev t||xiv, " in 
our souls" — an inward experience. Cf. 
Gal. i. 16: diroKaXvil/ai tov \)iov aiiTov 
Iv IfAOi. (tovoYtvTJ, (/. Luke vii. 12, viii. 
42, ix. 38. St. John applies the term ex- 
clusively to Jesus. It carries the idea 
of preciousness ; cf. LXX Pss. xxii: 20, 

XXXV. 17, where '^jm'TT', "my dear life," 

is rendered ttjv fJiovoYcvri (lov. airifr- 
TaXK€v. " hath sent as an diroaToXos " 

(cf. Heb. iii. i). An apostle is not simply 
nuntius, but nuntius vices mittentis ge- 
rcns. Cf. Bab. Ber. 34, 2: "Apostolus 
cujusvis est sicut ipse a quo deputatur". 
The perf. is used here because the in- 
fluence of the Incarnation is permanent. 
^t](r(o[x€v, ingressive or inceptive aor. 
Cf. Luke XV. 24, 32 ; Rev. xx. 4, 5. Xva 
t,ri<Tw\>.(v reconciles i^avipudi] t| oYdini 
with T| £<oTj £(t>av6pu6T] (i. 2). The Incar- 
nation manifested the love of God, and 
the love was manifested that we might 
get life. Eternal Life is not future but 
present : we get it here and now. Cf. 
John xvii. 3. Amiel : "The eternal life 
is not the future life ; it is life in harmony 
with the true order of things — life in God ". 

Ver. 10. The love which proves us 
children of God is not native to our 
hearts. It is inspired by the amazing 
love of God manifested in the Incarna- 
tion — the infinite Sacrifice of His Son's 
Hie and death. Aug. : " Non ilium di- 
leximus prius : nam ad hoc nos dilexit, ut 
diligamus eum." airivreiXtv : the aor. 
is used here because the Incarnation is 
regarded as a distinct event, a historic 

Having inculcated love, the Apostle 
indicates two incentives thereto: (i) 
God's love for us imposes on us a moral 
obligation to love one another (ii-i6a); 
(2) If we have love in our hearts, lear is 
cast out (i6b-i8). 

Ver. II. Here, as in John iii. 16, ovtus 
may denote either the extent or the 
manner of God's love — "to such an ex- 
tent," going such a length {cf. Rom. viii. 
32); "in such a manner," righteously, 
not by a facile amnesty but by a propi- 
tiation. 64>ciXopicv : see note on ii. 6. 
Noblesse oblige. If we are God's chil- 
dren, we must have our Father's spirit. 
Cf. Matt. V. 44-48. Thus we requite His 
love. Aug.: "Petre, inquit, amas me? 
Et ille dixit: Amo. Pasce eves mens" 
(John xxi. 15-17). 




CTUTTJpa ToO Koexfiou. 15. ^os ai' 6|jloXoyt)(tt) on 

^'|o\in^^ 18 •^Y"''"'^''* ^2* ©CO*' ouSels TTGJiroTe TeOearat ' eai' dyaTrwfici' dXXi]- 
* ^•?'';"^' Xous, ^6 ©COS iv "flit-^y fieVet, Kal i^ dydiTTi auTOu "^ TeTeXeicofxenr) ecrrlc 
bii. 5ieff. ^j, if]jxl|/.l i^. iv TooTu yiv(t)(TKop.ev oTi iv auTw jxeVofxei', Kal auTos 
d i. I ref. iy if/Ai*', OTI * cK Tou nv'cuji.aTos ttuTOu Se'SwKef TlfllC. 
fjohniii. j^. Kal i](i€is ** TeSedfieOa, Kat * fxapTupoG|X€»' on 6 iraTT)p aTre'cr- 

g Matt. xvi. TaXK€ TOl' uloV 

16, 17- , . 

hjohnvi. Incrous i<mv 6 ulos tou 0€Ou, 6 0e6s e^ auTu ueVci, Kal auTos ci* tu» 

69. ~ h ' ' 

iVer. 9. 0e<S. 16. Kal i^ pels eY^'(uKa)JL€^' Kal ■n€TT{.aT€UKa\J.ev Tr\v 6.ydT[r]v r\y 

1 ii. 28reff. e)(€i 6 0e6s 'cK T^jiii'. 6 ©COS dyaTTT) cori, Kal 6 fxeVwc ci' tt) dydTrt], 
» Matt. ^- k , ^ . ^ , x.-,,,,-2 

15, XI. 22, €y Tw ©eu Jie»'€i, Kai o ©cos ci' auTw.'' 

24,xii.36; ,„' 'c ' ' b 

2 Peter ii. " ~" 

n John XX. ^xb>\i€v ° CK TTJ ilfAc'p? ''"'15 KpicTCUS, on " KaOoJS cKeTcos eoTi, Kal iqp,€is 

o Matt. V. co'p.ei' EK TW Kocr|J.a) TOUTO). 1 8. 4)o^os ouk eorii' ec ttj dydiTT], dXX' 

Luke xiv! "^ TcXei'a dydTrrj " l|a) PaXXet, tok ^ <}>6Po>', oTi 6 4>d^09 '^ KoXaaii' 'Ix^i * 

pRom. viii. 6 8e <})opou/ji,6i'os ou *• TeTcXeicjTai cc ttj dydirr]. 19. 'iQfieis dyairw' 

13; Heb." 

ii. 15. q Matt. XXV. 46. r James i. 4. 8 Ver. 10. 

1 ev Tjniv €<rTiv ^B, edd. 

2€v avTO) [ievei ^BKL, Syrph, Cop., Sah., Arm., Aug., Tisch., WH (brack.), 


17. 'El* TOOTu TCTcXciwTai t] dyditTj fie9' ^}iC)V, Iva ' rrapp'qtTtat' 

Ver. 12. "God — no one hath ever yet irappT)(riav, see note on ii, 28 
beheld Him". By and by " we shall see 
Him even as He is " (iii. 2), but even now, 
if we love, we are no strangers to Him : 
He abides and works in us. TeT€X€i<i)p.£VT), 
" carried to its end " ; see note on ii. 5. 

Ver. 13. Cf. iii. 24. The argument 
is that God would not have granted us 
this priceless gift if he were not in in- 
timate relation with us and had not a 
steadfast purpose of grace toward us. 

Ver. 14. The apostoKc testimony {cf. 
i. 1-3). T||xeis, either the editorial "we" 


see note on n. 6. eoTiv, " is, " not riv, 
"was". Jesus is in the world unseen, 
and our office is to make Him visible. 
We are to Him what He was to the 
Father in the days of His flesh — " Dei 
inaspecti aspectabilis imago". 

Ver. 18. Bern. : '• Amor reverentiam 
nescit ". 4>dpos, the opposite of irappi]- 
<ria. K(SXa<riv ex*'» "implies punish- 
ment," the portion of slaves. The portion 
of slaves is punishment (KoXao-is) and 
their spirit fear; the portion of sons is 

or " I and the rest of the Apostles who chastisement (iraiSeia) and their spirit 
were eye-witnesses". d-irEo-TaXKEV, see 
note on ver. 9. 

Ver. 15. 6|AoXoYir70-x),aor. of a definite 
confession born of persuasion. Such a 
conviction implies fellowship with God. 

Ver. 16. 'Hp.Eis, here " you and 1," we 
believers. Observe the three stages : (i) 
" get to know " (yivwo-KEiv), (2) " believe " 
(irio-TEVEiv), (3) " confess " (oftoXoyEiv). 
Iv r\[>.lv, see note on ver. 9. 

Another incentive to love : it casts out 
fear, r^ aydir'j). " the love just men- 
tioned ". Cf. Tov 4>opov, d (j>dPos (ver. 18). 

Ver. 17. TETEXEiurai, c/. ver. 12. |ie6* 
T|p,uv: love is a heavenly visitant so- 
journing with us and claiming observ- 
ance. Love has been " carried to its 
end" when we are like Jesus, His visible 
representatives, oti resumes ev tovto), 
Tvo . . . Kpio-Ebis being parenthetical : 
" herein . . . because " (iii. 16, iv. g, 10). 

boldness (irapprjaia). Cf. Heb. xii. 7, 
Clem. Alex. : " Perfectio fidelis hominis 
caritas est". Aug.: "Major charitas, 
minor timor ; minor charitas, major timor". 
Bengel has here one of his untranslatable 
comments : " Varius hominum status : 
sine timore et amore ; cum timore sine 
amore ; cum timore et amore ; sine timore 
cum amore". 

Ver. 19. dyairii>p.Ev has no accus. 
The thought is that the amazing love of 
God in Christ is the inspiration of all the 
love that stirs in our hearts. It awakens 
within us an answering love — a grateful 
'ove tor Him manifesting itself in love 
for our brethren (cf ver. 11). The in- 
sertion of avTovis a clumsy and unneces- 
sary gloss. N either should ovv be inserted 
and ayairuixEV taken as hortat. subjunc- 
tive. Vulg. : " Nos ergo diligamus 
Deum, quoniam Deus prior dilexit nos ". 


-21. V. I 3. 



fief auTOf,^ oTi auTos ^ -irpwTOs T|YdTrif]o-ev irffias. 20. ^'Edv Tis eiTTT), 
""Oti dyairoi Toi' Qeov," Kal TOk d8€X(|)6i' auTOu fAicrij), " 4/euCTTif]s 
eo'Tii' ■ 6 ydp p,T) dyairw^ tok d8eX4>oi' auToG oy eoipttKe, TOf 0€Oi/ * oi* 
oux ewpaKe, Trois Suv-arai dyaTrdi' ; ^ 21. Kal *TauTif)»' ttji' erroXTjc 
e'xojjiet' dir' auToG,* i^a 6 dyairoij' toc ©eoi', dyaTra Kal to** dSeXifjov 

V. I. nds 6 TriaTeuuf on *'It]ctous ecrrii' 6 Xpiaros, €K toG OeoG 
ycycVfTjTat ■ Kai "^Trds 6 dyairwi' tok yeccr^aav'Ta dyaira Kal^ toi' 
yeyei'V'TjfAeVoi' "^ e| auToG. 2. "^ cf toutw yii/wo-Kop.ei' oti dyaTrwp.ei' rd 
TCKt'a ToO 6eoG, oral' rbv Qebv dyair6j|Ji€c, Kal Tas ek-ToXas auToG 
Tr]pCj^i€yJ 3. • auTT] ydp icrriv -fi dydirr) toG 0eoG, iVa rds ei'ToXds 

t li. 9, iii. 

17 reff. 
u i. 6 re£f. 
V Ver. 12 

w ii. 7 reff. 
a iv. 15 ref 
b iii. 9 reff. 
c I Peter i. 

22, 23. 
d I Cor. 

xiii. 4,5. 
e John xiv. 

15. 23, 24. 

1 ovTov om. AB, Aeth., Aug., edd. ; tov Oeov ^, Syrvg ph, Vg., Cop., Arm. 
^avTos ^BKL, Syrvg ph, Cop., Sah., Aeth., Arm., Aug., edd. ; o Ocos A, Vg. 
^ ov Svvarai ayairav Ji^B, Syrph, Sah., edd. '' airo tov 6eou A, Vg. 

s ayaira Kai ^AKLP, Syrvg ph, Vg., Aeth., Arm., Tisch. ; om. Kai B, Sah., Aug., 

WH, Nest. 

® TO y€7€VVir)|Aevov ^. 

'tt]p&>h€v ^KLP — an assimilation to TT)pwfji€V in ti. 3 ; iroicoiJiev B, Syrvg ph, Vg. 
Cop., Sah., Aeth., Arm., Aug., edd. 

Ver. 20. Lest the vagueness of the 
objectless dya-TroiiAev encourage false 
security, St. John reiterates the old test : 
Love for the invisible Father is mani- 
fested in love for the brother by our 
side, the image of the Father. Cf, 
Whittier : — 

" Not thine the bigot's partial plea, 
Nor thine the zealot's ban ; 

Thou well canst spare a love of thee 
Which ends in hate of man ". 

\\itv<TTr\<i, see note on i. 6. 

Ver. 21. The Old Commandment. Cf. 
ii. 7-11. 

Chapter V. — Vv. 1-5. What makes 
the Coinmandments of God easy. 
" Every one that hath faith that Jesus 
is the Christ hath been begotten of 
God ; and every one that loveth Him 
that begat loveth him that hath been 
begotten of Him. Herein we get to 
know that we love the children of 
God, whenever we love God, and do His 
commandments. For this is the love 
of God, that we should observe His 
commandments ; and His commandments 
are not heavy, because everything that 
hath been begotten of God conquereth 
the world. And this is the conquest 
that conquered the world — our faith. 
Who is he that conquereth the world 
but he that hath faith that Jesus is the 
Son of God ? " 

Vv. 1-2. A reiteration of the doctrine 
that love for God = love for the brethren. 
Where either is, the other is also. Love 
for God is the inner principle, love for 
the brethren its outward manifestation. 
The argument is " an irregular Sorites " 
(Plummer) : — 

Every one that hath faith in the 

Incarnation is a child of God ; 
Every child of God loves the Father ; 
.'. every one that hath faith in the 

Incarnation loves God. 
Every one that hath faith in the 

Incarnation loves God ; 
Every one that loves God loves the 

children of God; 
.•. every one that hath faith in the 

Incarnation loves the children 

of God. 

These are the two commandments of 
God, the fundamental and all-embracing 
Christian duties — love God and love the 
brotherhood. And faith in the Incarna- 
tion (oTi '1t)o-ovs IfTTiv 6 XpLCTos) is an 
inspiration for both. 

irio-TtTjajv corresponds to iriorTis (ver. 
4). The lack of a similar correspondence 
in English is felt here as in many other 
passages [e.g., Matt. viii. 10, 13 ; ix. 28, 
29). Latin is similarly defective: " omnis 
qui credit" "fides nostra ". 

Ver. 3. ^ dy. t. Oeoi), here objective 
genitive; contrast ii. 5. iva ecbatic (see 




f Matt Yi 5-> ^ ^f«3^^>'»o* >»/ 91 

2S--'o auTou TTjpw/JLei' • Kai ai ei'TOAai, auTOu papeiai ouk cicrii'. 4. OTt ^ 

g 1. I ; John S ^^^ ^^ h ygyg^^Y^pg'j/Q^ CK TOU 6£oG, l/lKoi t6>' K6<T|i.0f ' Kal auTT) eaTif 

^i^h"^ '^^^ '^ V'lKT) f\ viKr\(Taaa toc koo-jjio*', i^ moris r|fjia)V'.^ 5. tis eartf^ 6 

33- VIKWC TOI' KOCTfiOK, CI flT) 6 TTlCTTeuOJl' OTl '|t]CTOUS IctTII' 6 utoS * TOU 

1 Heb. ix. 6eou ; 

II, 12. 

m John xix. 6. OuTo? i<jTiv 6 eXOwv' ' 8i' ™ uSaxos Kal at|xaT09,^ 'lT]aous 6^ 

^ Punct. etcriv, on edd. 2 y^^^y ^ABKP, Vg., edd. ; v|xwv L, Aeth. 

^Tis 60-TIV AL, Vg., Sah., Tisch., Nest. ; ns eo-xi S« B, WH (8t brack.); Syng 
quis enim, Aeth. ^^ ^mj's. 

■* o xpicTos o vios two minusc, Arm. 

^ Kai ai|j.aTos BKL, Syrvg, Vg., Tert. {de Bapt., 16 : veuerat enim per aquam et 
sangjtinem, stent loanncs scrifsit), edd. ; add. Kai trvevfiaTOS ^AP, many minusc, 
Syrph, Cop., Sah. 

•^ o om. ^ABL, Arm., edd. 

Moulton's Gram, of N. T. Gk., i. pp. 
206-9), where the classical idiom would 
require to r][i,a.% Trjpeiv. Cf. John xvii. 3 ; 
Luke i. 43. TOLS €VT., the two command- 
ments — "love God'" and "love one an- 
other " (cf. iii. 23, where see note ; iv. 21). 
Kal at 6VT., K.T.X. : cf. Herm. Past. 
M. xii. 4, § 4 : 01 8€ Itti tois x*^^**''''*' 
sXovTts Tov Kvpiov, TTjv Se KapSiuv avToiv 
»r£'n-<opa)fA€'vr]v, Kal p,aKpav ovTes dirb rov 
Kvpiou, EKcivois alevToXal a-uTai aKXrjpai 
ei<ri Kal Svo-paToi. Aug. In Joan. Ev. 
Tract, xlviii. i : " Nostis enim qui amat 
non laborat. Omnis enim labor non 
amantibus gravis est." 

Ver. 4. The reason why " His com- 
mandments are not heavy". Punctuate 
ovK eiaiv, OTt irdv, k.t.X. The neut. 
(irdv TO Y*7') expresses the universality 
of the principle, " driickt die unbedingte 
AUgemeinheit noch starker aus als ' Jeder, 
der aus Gottgebortn ist ' " (Rothe). Cf. 
John iii. 6. tov koo-jjiov, the sum of all 
the forces antagonistic to the s|"iritual 
life. " Our faith " conquers the world 
by clinging to the eternal realities. 
" Every common day, he who would be 
a live child of the living has to fight the 
God-denying look of things, to believe 
that, in spite of their look, they are 
God's, and God is in them, and work- 
ing his saving will in them " (Geo. 
MacDonald, Castle Warlock, xli.). St. 
John says first " is conquering " (viKa) 
because the fight is in progress, then 
" that conquered " [-i] viKTJcrao-a) because 
the triumph is assured. 

Ver. 5. St. John says : " Everything- 
that hath been begotten ot God con- 
quereth the world ". But he has already 
said : " Every one that hath faith that/ 
Jesus is the Christ hath been begotten 

of God " (ver. i). So now he asks : 
" Who is he that conquereth the world 
but he that hath faith that Jesus is the 
Son of God.'" ("Son of God" being 
synonymous with " Christ," i.e., " Mes- 
siah". Cf. John xi. 27, XX. 31). His 
doctrine therefore is that faith in the 
Incarnation, believing apprehension of 
the wonder and glory of it, makes easy 
the commandments of God, i.e., love to 
God and love to one another. The re- 
membrance and contemplation of that 
amazing manifestation drive out the 
affection of the world and inflame the 
heart with heavenly love. " What else 
can the consideration of a compas-ion 
so great and undeserved, of a love so 
free and in such wise proved, of a con- 
descension so unexpected, of a gentleness 
so unconquerable, of a sweetness so 
amazing — what, I say, can the diligent 
consideration of these things do but 
deliver utterly from every evil passion 
the soul of him that considers them and 
hale it unto them in sorrow, exceedingly 
affect it, and make it despise in compari- 
son with them whatsoever can be desired 
only in their despite ? " (Bern. De Dilig. 
Deo). " There is no book so efficacious 
towards the instructing of a man in all 
all virtue and in abhorrence of all sin as 
the Passion of the Son of God " (Juan de 
Avila). " Fix your eyes on your Crucified 
Lord, and everything will seem easy to 
>u " (Santa Teresa). 
Vv. t-8. The Threefold Testimony to 
the Incarnation. " This is He that came 
through water and blood, Jesus Christ ; 
not in the water only, but in the water 
and in the blood. And it is the Spirit 
that tes'ifieth, because the Spirit is the 
Truth. Because three are they that 



XpioTos ■ ouK ° €f Tw oSttTi fxoKOt', aXV ef Tw uSari Kal ^ tw aijAari ' " pi; , :. 
Kal TO TTfeGfJid eoTL "to p.apTupouf oti to TrfcOfid eaTif ''iq '' dXi^Oeia. .'.3- 
7. oTi Tpels ^ eiaif 01 p.apTopoGt'Tes £»' tw oupai'a>, 6 riaTr|p, 6 Aoyos, 1 '• '^ '^^*- 
Kal TO "Ayiof flieup-a * Kal outoi. ol Tpeis £" €tai. 8- Kat Tpels 
elaiv ol fjiapTopoGi'Tes ef tt] YTl'" ^° irceuiJia, Kai to u8wp, Kai to 

^ Kat €v ABLP, edd. '^ 01 Tpeis ^. 

^ iv t(i) ovpavu . . ev tt] yT a Latin interpolation, certainly spurious, (i) Found 
in no Gk. MS. except two late minuscules — 162 (Vatican), 15th c, the Lat. V^;. 
Version with a Gk. text adapted thereto ; 34 (Trin. Coll., Dublin), i6th c. (2) 
Quoted by none of the Gk. Fathers. Had they known it, they would have employed 
it in the Trinitarian controversies (Sabellian and Arian). (3) Found in none ol the 
early versions — in Vg. but not as it left the hands of bt. Jerome. (4) Quoted by no 
Latin wfiter until Priscillian (close of 4th c). Apparet igitur . . . verba quae 
de tribus testibus caelestibus did solent mtllam prorsus Jidem, ancforitateni utillaiii 
habere, nee a gravi libidinis ant imprudentiae critnine libcrari posse cos qui etiaiii- 
num, falsa quippe ptetate dncti, libris sacris obtrudi paiiuntiir. . . . Error vera 
Jonge est gravissimus, si qui, quod de sanctu tr'niitaie ecclcsia Christi praecepit, a 
•verbis illis Johanni obirusis vel maxwie pendere opinati sunt (Tisch.). 

testify — the Spirit and the water and 
tTie blood, and the three are for the one 

St. John has said thar faith in the In- 
carnation makes the commandments 
easy, and now the question arises : How 
can we be assured that the Incarnation 
is a fact ? He adduces a threefold at- 
testation : the Spirit, the water and the 
blood. His meaning is clear when it is 
understood that he has the Cennthian 
\heresy (see Introd. pp. 156 f.) in vioiv and 
\states his doctrine in opposition to it. 
Cerinth. s distinguished between Jesus 
and the Christ. The divine Christ 
escended upon the human Jesus at the 
Baptism, i.e.. He "came through water," 
and left him at the Crucifixion, i.e.. He 
did not " come through blood ". Thus 
redemption was excluded ; all that was 
needed was spiritual illumination. In 
opposition to this St. John declares that 
the Eternal God was incarnate in Jesus 
and was manifested in the entire course 
of His human life, not only at His Bap- 
tism, which was His consecration to His 
ministry of redemption, but at His Death, 
which was the consummation of His in- 
finite Sacrifice . " through water and 
blood, not in the water only but in the 
water and in the blood ". 

Ver. 6. ovtos, i.e., this Jesus who is 
the Son of God, the Messiah whom the 
prophets foretold and who " came " in 
the fulness of the time. 6 «X6uv, not 
6 €pxop.£vos. His Advent no longer an 
unfulfilled hope but an historic event. 
Sia, of the pathway or vehicle of His 
Advent. 'iTjeroiis XpierTos, "Jesus 


Christ," one person in opposition to the 
Cerinthian "dissolution" (Xvo-ts) of Jesus 
and Christ (see note on iv. 3). Iv ; He not 
only " came through " but continued " in 
the water and in the blood," i.e., His 
rpinistry comprehended bothrthe Baptism 
of the Spirit and the Sacrifice for sin. 

erhaps, however, the prepositions are 
ii'iterchangeable ; cf. 2 Cor. vi. 4-8 ; Heb. 
X. 12, 25. r] aXi]9.; Jesus called Him- 
self "the Truth " (John xiv. 6), and the 
Spirit came in His room, His alter ego 
(vv. 16-18). 

Vv. 7-8 . The Water (the Lord's con- 
"Secrated Life) and the Blood (His sacri- 
ficial Death) are testimonies to the Incar- 
nation, but they are insufficient. A third 
testimony, that of the Spirit, is needed 
to reveal their significance to us and 
bring it home to our hearts. Without His 
enlightenment th" wonder and glory of 
that amazing manifestation \> ill be hidden 
Irom us. It will be as unintelligible to 
us as " mathematics to a Scythian boor, 
and music to a camel ". Tptis ot [xaprv- 
povvTts, masculine though nv£iJp.a, vSup, 
and aljAa are all neuter, because agreeing 
koto, crvvecriv with to flveilpa — a testi- 
mony, the more striking because involu 1- 
tary, to the personality of the Spirit. 
els to £v, " lOr the one end," i.e. to bring 
us to faith in the Incarnation (oti Mtjo-ovs 
eo-Tiv 6 Yios ToO Qiov). This was the 
end for which St. John wrote his Gospel 
(John XX. 31). Thtre is no reference in 
the Water and the Blood either to the 
effusion of blood and water tiom the 
Lord's pierced side (John xix. 34) or to 
the two Sacraments. 



r John xi. 
52, xvii. 


s John V. 

31-37, viii. 

t J ohn V. 

26; Heb. 

viii. 16, X. 

16 (Jer. 

XXXI. 33). 
u i. 10. 
V i. 2; John 

V. 26. 
w John iii. 

36; I Cor. 

iii. 21-23. 

atfjia ' Kal ol Tpeis ^ els to ev elcriv. 9. El ttjk ^aprupiai' toj>^ 
ai/0p(oTrw»' XafiPdfOfi.ei', i^ jiapTupia tou ©eou |xei^<i)i' eariK ' on aurrj 
icTTLV '1] papTupia tou ©eou, r]c^ fiefiapTupT) k€ irepl too uloC auroO. 
10. 6 TTioreuwi' els tov ulbv too ©eou, €)(ei ttji' jxapTopiai' ' ei' eaoTto •'" 
6 fJiY] TTiCTTeowi' tw ©ew,^ "4'eucrTT]i' ireTTOiTjKev' auTOM, oti ou Treiria- 
reuKcc els Tr\v p.aoTupiac, tji/ fie^apTupTjxek' 6 6eos irepi tou utoG 
auToC. II. Kal auTT] eo-Tif i^ fxapTupia oti ^wtji' albiviov eScoKO' 
T^fiic 6 ©eos ■ Kal '' auTH] i^ i^wT] ecTw oiw auTOu eoriJ'. 12. "6 e'xwv 
To»' uioc, e)(ei ttji* ^ui]»' * 6 jxt) ex'**' '•'o^' "lo'' tou Geou, Ty]v ^(i}T]v oujc 


1 tjv KLP ; OTI t^AB, Vg. {testimonium Dei, quod majus est, quoniam testificatus 
est), Cop., Sah., Arm., edd. Punct. o ti. 

2eavT« ^ ; avTw ABKLP ; avTu Tisch., WH (marg.), Nest. ; ovt« WH. 
3t6j ecu ^BKLP, Syrvg, Cop., edd. ; tw viw A, Syrph, Vg. 

Vv. 9-12. Our attitude to the Three- 
fold Testimony. " If we receive the 
testimony of men, thj testimony ot God 
is greater, because this is the testimony 
of God — what He hath testified concern- 
ing His Son. He that believeth in the 
Son of God hath the testimony in him- 
self. He that believeth not God hath 
mada Him a liar, because he hath not 
believed in the testimony which God 
hath testified concerning His Son. And 
this is the testimony, that God gave us 
life eternal ; and this life is in His Son. 
He that hath the Son hath the life ; he 
that hath not the Son of God the life 
hath not." 

Ver. 9. According to the Jewish law 
threefold testimony was valid (Deut. xix. 
15 ; cf. Matt, xviii. 16 ; John viii. 17-18). 
Read (as in iii. 20) o, ti piE^apTvpijKCV, 
"what He hath testified concerni'ig His 
Son," i.e. the testimony of His miracles 
and especially His Resurrection (Rom. 
i. 4). The variant ^v is a marginal gloss 
indicating the re ative (o, ti), not the 
conjunction (oti). The latter is incap- 
able of satisfactory explanation. The 
alternatives are : (i) " B-cause the te ti- 
mony ot God is this — the fact that He 
hath testified," which is meaningless and 
involves an abrupt variation in the use of 
on. (2) " Because this is the testimony 
of God, because, I say, He hath testi- 
fied," which is intolerable. The Apostle 
appeals here to his readers 'o be as 
reasonable with God as with their fellow 
men. Cf. Pascal : ' Would the heir to 
an estate on finding the title-deeds say, 
•Perhaps they are false ' ? and would he 
neglect to examine them ? " 

Ver. 10. A subtle and profound analy- 

sis of the exercise of soul which issues 
in assured faith. Three stages : (i) " Be- 
lieve God " (irio-Teveiv tu ©eu, credere 
Deo), accept His testimony concerning 
His Son, i.e., not simply His testimony 
at the Baptism (Matt. iii. 17) but the 
historic manifestation of God in Christ, 
the Incarnation. God speaks not by 
words but by acts, and to set aside His 
supreme act, and all the forces whxh it 
has set in operation is to " make Him a 
liar" by treating His historic testimony 
as unworthy of credit. (2) " Believe in 
the Son of God " (irio-Tcvciv els tov Ylov 
TOV ©eov, credere in Filium Dei), make 
the believing S-lt-surrender which is the 
reasonable and inevi tabic consequence of 
contemplating the Incarnation andreco:- 
nising the wonder of it. (3) The Inward 
Testimony (tt|v ^apTvpiav ev avToi, 
tesfimonium in seipso). '• Fecisti nos ad 
te, et inquietum est cor nostrum donee 
requiescat in te" (Aug.). The love of 
Jesus satisfies the deepest need of our 
nature. When He is welcomed, the 
soul rises up and greets Him as " all its 
salvation and all its desire," and the 
testimony is no longer external in history 
but an inward experience [cf. note on 
iv. 9 : ev rp.iv), and therefore indubitable. 
These three stages are, according to the 
metaphor of Rev. iii. 20, (i) hearing the 
Saviour's voice, (2) opening the door, (3) 

Ver. II. The Testimony of the Incar- 
nation. Cf. i. 2. eScdKcv, " gave," aorist 
referring to a definite historic act, the 

Ver. 12. (tij with the participle does 
not necessarily make the case hypothetical 
{cf. note on ii. 4). St. John would have 

9— 16. 



1 3. TaCra eypaij/a ofxic tois irKne.uovdiv eis to 6vo\i.a tou uiou ^ "^ ^| '* ' 
TOO 0€ou/ Iva eiSTJTe on l^wrjv ex^Te aioii'ioi', Kai ica maTeuT]Te ^ y J"*^" '^*- 
CIS TO 'ovo[i.a ^ TOU UIOU TOU Oeou. 14. Kal auTT] iarlv r\ ^ irappTjo-ia ^ \\: '8 refl. 

cdi/ Ti aiTWjJieOa KaTot "to 0eXT]fi.a auTOu, 
Kai " iav oiSa^Xei' oTi aKOuei i^ixoii', o "" 

tji' exojJiei' irpos auToi*, oti 
tiKouci i^jULuc ' 15 



a 111. 31 
John xiv. 
13, xvi. 

alTCJ- 23- 

b Matt. VI. 

OTI exop.ei' Td ~ alTtjfiaTa a TJTT|Ka|Ji€i' Tfop ■* auTOu. 10; Luke 

16. 'Edi' Tis iSif] Tof a.Se\4>6i' auTou ' d)xapTdi'oi'Ta dp.apTtai' fJirj irpos '^ Of- ' 

iii. 8 (eai' o-TijKere). d Luke xxiii. 24 ; Phil. iv. 6. e ii. 25 ; Mark iv. 41 ; John vii. 24 ; i Tim. 
i. 18; 2 Tim. iv. 7; Col. ii. 19; i Peter iii. 14. 

ovo|xa Tov viov tov 6eov KLP ; om. ^AB, Syrvgph, 

, edd. 


Tois Tio-Tevovtriv J«^*B, Syrvg ph, edd. ; oi iriareiJOVTes 

TOis iricTTevo'ucriv eis to 

Vg., Cop., Sah., Aeth., Arm 

^ Kai iva iri<rTevTjT€ KLP ; 

^ eav jN^LF.edd. * ^^^p AKLP ; air ^B, edd. 

only too many actual instances before Epistle commends Him 

him in those days of doctrinal unsettle- 

Vv. 13-21. The Epistle is finished, 
and the Apostle now speaks his closing 
words. " These things I wrote to yoa 
that ye may know that ye have eternal 
life, even to you that believe in the name 
of the Son of God. And this is the bold- 
ness which we have toward Him, that it 
we request anything according to His 
will, He hearkenetn to us. And if we 
know that He hearkeneth to us whatever 
we request, we know that we have the 
requests which we have made from Him. 
If any one see his brother sinning a sin 
not unto death, he shall make request, 
and he will give to him life, even to them 
that are sinning not unto death. There 
is a sin unto death ; not concerning chat 
do I say that he should ask. Every sort 
of unrighteousness is sin, and there is a 
sin not unto death. We know that every 
one that hath been begotten of God doth 
not keep sinning, but the Begotten of 
God observeth him, and the Evil One 
doth not lay hold on him. We know that 
we are of God, and the whole world lieth 
in the Evil One. And we know that the 
Son of God hath come, and hath given 
us understanding that we may get to 
know the True One ; and we are in the 
True One, in His Son Jesus Christ. 
This is the True God and Life Eternal. 
Little children, guard yourselves from the 

Ver. 13. The purpose for which St. 
John wrote his Gospel was that we 
might believe in the Incarnation, and so 
have Eternal Life (xx. 31); the purpose 
of the Epistle is not merely that we may 
have Eternal Life by believing but that 
we may know that we have it. The 
Gospel exhibits the Son of God, the 

VOL. V. 

It is a supple- 
ment to the Gospel, a personal applica- 
tion and appeal. eypaxl/a, " I wrote," 
looking back on the accomplished task. 
eiSrJTC, " know," not YivoSo-K-qTC, " get to 
know". Full and present assurance. 

Ver. 14. irappT)(ria. see note on ii. 28. 
As distinguished f;om alreiv the middle 
alT£Xo-9ai is to pray earnestly as with a 
oersonal interest (se^ Mayor's note on 
James iv. 3). The distinction does not 
appear her,-, since alreiv oli-qiJiaTa (cog- 
nate accusitive) is a colourless periphrasis 
for alrcio-Oai. A large assurance : our 
prayers always heard, never unanswered. 
Observe two limitations : (i) Kara to 
0£\T]|jia a-uTov, which does not mean that 
we should first ascertain His will and 
then pray, but that we should pray with 
the proviso, expiess or implicit, " If it be 
Thy will ". Matt. xxvi. 39 is the model 
prayer. (2) The promise is not " He 
granteth it " but " He hearkeneth to us ". 
He answers in His own wa\-. 

Ver. 15. An amplification of the 
second limitation. " We have our re- 
quests '" not always as we pray but as 
we would pray were we wiser. God 
gives not what we ask but what we 
really need. Cf. Shak., Ant. and Cleop. 
I. ii. :— 

" We, ignorant of ourselves. 
Beg ofteni our own harms, which the virise 

Deny us for our good ; so find we profit,. 
By losing of our prayers ". 

Prayer is not dictation to God but aVd- 
Pao-is vov irpos ©civ Kai aiTijo-is Ttov 
Trpoo-rjKovTuv irapa ©cov (Joan. Damasc. 
De. Fid. Orthod., iii. 24). Clem. Alex. : 
" Non absolute dixit quod petierimus sed 
quod oportet petere '. 
Ver. 1 6. After the grand assurance 




' '^^"■. ''"'• ddi'aTO>', aiTT^o-et, xal Soiaei aoTw 'C,(t}r\v, tois afxaprdfoucn ^s.r\ irpos 
Heb. vi. 0(xi/aTOf. loTic ' dfiapria Trpos ddi'aTOi' " ou Trepl eKciCT]; Xe'yw i-Va 
gill. 4. epw-n]<r{] ■ 17. ^irdcra dSiKta dfxapTia eori * Kal loTic d^apria ou 
ijohnxvii. 'n'po9 QdvaToy. 18. OtSaixec on '•irds 6 yeyet'i'Tifiei'Os ^k tou 0eou, 
kii. i3reff. q(,-^ d|JiapTdt'€i * dW 6 YeffTidcls CK ToO 0eou, ' Tirjpei eauTOc/ Kal '' 6 

^ ovTOv A*B, Vg. {gemratio Dei conservat eitm), edd. 

that prayer is always heard, never un- 
answered, the Apostle specifies one kind 
of prayer, viz., Intercession, in the par- 
ticular case of a " brother," i.e. a fellow- 
believer, who has sinned. Prayer will 
avail for his restoration, with one reserva- 
tion — that his sin be "not unto death ". 
The reference is to those who had been 
led astray by the heresy, moral and intel- 
lect l:h1, which had invaded the churches 
of Asia Minor (see Introd. pp. 136 f.) They 
bad closed their ears to the voice of Con- 
science and their eyes to the light of the 
Truth, and they were exposed to the 
operation of that law of Degeneration 
which obtains in the physical, moral, in- 
tellectual, and spiritual domains. E.g., 
a bodily faculty, if neglected, atrophias 
(cf. note on ii. 11). So in the moral do- 
main disregard ot truth destroys veracity. 
Acts make habits, habits character. So 
also in the intellectual domain. Cf. 
Darwin to Sir J. D. Hooker, June 17, 
1868: "I am glad you were at the 
Messiah, it is the one thing that I should 
like to hear again, but I daresay I should 
find my soul too dried up to appreciate it 
as in old days ; and then I should feel 
very flat, for it is a horrid bore to feel as 
I constantly do, that I am a withered 
leaf for every subject except Science". 
And so in the spiritual domain. There 
are two ways of killing the soul : (i) The 
benumbing and hardening practice of 
disregarding spiritual appeals and stifling 
spiritual impulses. Cf. Reliq. Baxter, I. 
i. 29 : " Bridgnorth had made me resolve 
that I would never go among a People 
that had been hardened in unprofitable- 
i^.ess under an awakening Ministry ; but 
either to such as had never had any 
convincing Preacher, or to such as had 
profited by him". {2) A decisive apos- 
.asy, a deliberate rejection. This was 
the case of those heretics. They had 
ab ured Christ and followed Antichrist. 
This is what Jesus calls r\ roii Uvtv- 
p.aTOS pX.a<r<|>ti)J.Ca (Matt. xii. 31-32 = 
Mark iii. 28-30). It inflicts a mortal 
wound on the man's spiritual nature. He 
can never be forgiven because he can 
never repent. He is "in the grip of an 

eternal s n (cvoxo; alwv^ov a|*apTi{|ia- 
Tos) ". Cf. Heb. vi. 4-6. This is " sin 
unto death ". Observe how tenderly St. 
John speaks : There is a fearful possi- 
bility of a man putting himselt beyond 
the hope of restoration ; but we can 
never tell when he has crossed the bound- 
ary. If we were sure that it was a case 
of " sin unto dea h," then we should for- 
bear praying ; but, since we can never be 
sure, we should always keep on praying. 
So long as a man is capable of repent- 
ance, he has not sinned unto death. 
" Quamdiu enim venise relinquitur locus, 
mors prorsus imperium nondum occupat" 
(Calv.). Swo-Ei, either (i) " he (the inter- 
cessor) will give to him (the brother)," 
Tois a|xapT. being in apposition to aiiTw, 
" to him, i.e. to them that, etc. " ; or {u) 
" He (God) will give to him (the inter- 
cessor) life for them that, etc. " The 
former avoids an abrupt change of sub- 
ject, and the attribution to the intercessor 
of what God does through him is paral- 
leled by James v. 20. 

Ver. 17. A gentle warning. •' Princi- 
piis obsta." Also a reassurance. " You 
have sinned, but not necessarily ' unto 

Vv. 18-20. The Certainties of Christian 
Faith. St. John has been speaking of a 
dark mystery, and now he turns from it : 
" Do not brood over it. Think rather of 
the splendid certainties and rejoice in 

Ver. 18. Our Security through the 
Guardianship of Christ. ov\ ap,apTdvEi, 
see note on iii. 6. The child of God may 
tall into sin, but he does not continue in 
it ; he is not under its dominion. Why ? 
Because, though he has a malignant 
foe, he has also a vigilant Guardian. 
6 -yevvTiOeis eK tov Ocov, i.e., Christ. 
Cf. Symb. Nic. : Kvpiov 'lT)<row Xpio-rbv, 
Tov Ylov Tov ©eov, yevvt\divra Ik tov 
Darpos. As distinguished from •yeYevvT)- 
|icvo9 the aor. ycvvi^Ocis refers to the 
" Eternal Generation ". The rendering 
" he that is begotten of God (the regen- 
erate man) keepeth himself (iavrhv), 
qui genitus est ex Deo, servat setpsum 
(Calv.), is doubly objectionable: (i) It 

17 — 21. 



I Luke vii. 

iron^pos oux ' airreTai. auTOu. 1 9. oiSa^ci' on " €K too 0€Ou i<T\i€V, ' ^" 

Kttl 6 KOO-fXOS oXoS ■ Cf ^ TW 7rO|/T|pU KClTat. 20. Ol8a|i,6l' 8e OTl 6 uios J"*"* ''^• 

Tou 0€oG ° ^K€i, Kai SeSojKei' TJfitc Sidcoiac iKO '' yn'cjo-Kwfi.ei' ^ TOf'" "'• 8-.. 

dXtiOit'oi' ■ Kai eVuef ef tw " aXriGi.i'w, ck tw ulC) auTOu 'Itictou J^- 16. 
' f^ ' > ' ' , ojohnvm. 

XpiCTTw" ouTos CCTTif 6 ■* dXtiOn'os ©COS, Kai ' 'H ^ twTi aioSvios- 21. 42- 

"^ . ' .... P (-o,xf ./) I 


q ii. 8. r i. 2. s Luke xii. 15 ; John x ii. 25, xvii. 12 ; 2 Thess, iii. 3 ; i Tim. vi. 20 ; 2 Tim. 

i. 12, 14. t I Cor. X. 14 ; Eph. v. 5. 

TcKi'ta, * (|>uXd^aTe eauTOus "* onro twi' ' eiSoiXwi'. djxrji'.* 

1 Yivuo-Ko^cv J«^AB*LP, edd. — an itacism. 

^Tj om. i^AB, edd. 'eavrovs ^cAKP ; eaura t^*BL, edd. 

^ ttfxTjv KLP, Vg. ; om. ^AB, Syrvg ph, Cop., Sah., Aeth., Arm., edd. A common 
ecclesiastical addition. 

ignores the distinction between perf. 
and aor. ; (2) there is no comfort in the 
thought that we are in our own keeping ; 
our security is not our grip on Christ but 
His grip on us. Calvin feels this : " Quod 
Dei proprium est, ad nos transfert. Nam 
si quisque nostrum salutis suae sit custos, 
miserum erit praesidium ". Vulg. has 
generatio Dei, perhaps representing a 
variant iq •ycvvqo-is tov ©eov. TTjpei, 
see note on ii. 3. SirTerai, stronger than 
" toucheth," rather " graspeth," " layeth 
hold of". A reference to Ps. cv. (LXX 
civ.). 15 : (iTj ai|/T](r0€ twv y^jpivrmv (tov, 
Nolite tangere christos meos (Vulg.). 

Ver. 19. Our Security in God's Em- 
brace, d K^cTfios : " Non creatura sed 
seculares nomines et secundum concupis- 
centias viventes" (Clem. Alex.). See note 
on ii. 15. TW xovTjpcii, masc. as in prev. 
vers. KciTai, in antithesis to ovx airT€Tot. 
On the child of God the Evil One does 
not so much as lay his hand, the world 
lies in his arms. On the other hand, the 
child of God lies in God's arms. Cf. 
Deut. xxxiii. 27. Penn, Fruits of Soli- 
tude : " If our Hairs fall not to the 
Ground, less do we or our Substance 
without God's Providence. Nor can we 
fall below the arms of God, how low so- 
ever it be we fall." 

Ver. 20. The Assurance and Guarantee 
of it all — the fact of the Incarnation (on 
d Yios TOV 6cov TJKei), an overwhelming 
demonstration of God's interest in us and 
His concern for our highest good. Not 
simply a historic fact but an abiding 

operation — not " came (■^XOe)," but " hath 
come and hath given us". Our faith is 
not a matter of intellectual theory but 
of personal and growing acquaintance 
with God through the enlightenment of 
Christ's Spirit, tov aXfjOivdv, " the real " 
as opposed to the false God of the here- 
tics. See note on ii. 8. Iv tw aXTjOivu, 
as the world is ev to* irovripu. 

Ver. 21. Filioli, custodite vos a simu- 
lacris (Vulg.). The exhortation arises 
naturally. " This " — this God revealed 
and made near and sure in Christ — " is 
the True God and Life Eternal. Cleave 
to Him, and do not take to do with false 
Gods : guard yourselves from the idols." 
St. John is thinking, not of the heathen 
worship of Ephesus — Artemis and her 
Temple, but of the heretical substitutes 
for the Christian conception of God. 
T€Kvia gives a tone of tenderness to 
the exhortation, t}'^^''^'''*''^*'^ '^ used of 
" guarding" a flock (Luke ii. 8), a deposit 
or trust (i Tim. vi. 20; 2 Tim. i. 12, 14), 
a prisoner (Acts xii. 4). <|>vXa(r(rciv, 
" watch from within " ; Tir)p€iv (see note 
on ii. 3), " watch from without ". Thus, 
when a city is besieged, the garrison 
<j>vXao'0'ovo'i, the besiegers TTjpoveriv. 
The heart is a citadel, and it must be 
guarded against insidious assailants from 
without. Not <})vXdo-ff£Te, "be on your 
guard," but 4>vXa|aT£, aor. marking a 
crisis. The Cerinthian heresy was a 
desperate assault demanding a decisive 



^ixiraiv: I- "'O nPEIBYTEPOZ cKXexTfj Kupta ^ xal toIs te'ki'Ois au-njs, oSs 
1. 17. 19; eyoj aYairw ^ ef ciXTjOeia, Kai ouk cyu) (lot'os, dXXa Kai ircii'Tes 01 
2; I Peter iyy(j}K6Tes^Tr]v dXi^Oeiai', 2. Sid'^TTji' dXi^Oeiav' Tr]v '^ ^livouaav^ iv ^li-^fy 

b John xvii. Kai •* (i.e0' T)fJi(IiK eoTai els Toi' aiwca ' 3. ecrrai * (xe9' tjjxwi'^ « X'^P'?? 

c I John ij. 
4, 14, 24, 27, iii. 9. d I John iv. 17. e i Tim. i. 2 ; 2 Tim. i. 2. 

1 luavvov P ^ ; luavov (3 B ; ciricrToX-n loiavvov P P, 96 ; io>avvov KaOoXiKi) 
Sevrepa gg ; luavvow eirio'ToX'r] KadoXiKT) p K, loi, 106 ; tou ayiov airoo-roXov 
luavvov Tov OsoXo-yov eiricTToXT) SevTcpa L ; tou avTov aYiov itoavvov tovi OcoXoyou 
eTTioTToXT] ScvTcpa g5 ; eirio-ToXn Sevrepa icoawov tov ctti <rTT|9o-us 4. 

-TT) eKXtKTTj Kvpia 73 J cKXcKTt] TTj Kvpia 31; £kX€kttj Trj Kai Kvpia Aeth. ; 
Kvpi^, Syrvgph, Tisch. ; •EkXcktyj Kvpiq. WH (marg.). 

•' |x£vov<rav ^BKLP, Vg., edd. ; evoiKOvo-av A. 

^ eo-Ttti 8e 15, 36, Euth. Zig. 

^Tjixojv ^BLP, Syrbo, Sah., Aeth., edd. ; vjawv K, Vg. (sit vobiscum gratia), Cop., 


The Second Epistle. 

Vv. 1-3. The Address. " The Elder to 
elect Kyria and her children, whom I 
love in Truth, and not I alone but also all 
that have got to know the Truth, because 
of the Truth that abideth in us ; and with 
us it shall be for ever. Yea, there shall 
be with us grace, mercy, peace from God 
the Father and from Jesus Christ the Son 
of the Father in Truth and love." 

Ver. I. o irpeo-p^Tcpos, see Introd. 
pp. 159 ff. CKXeKT^ Kvpia, see Introd. 
pp. 162 f. ovs, constructio koto, o-vvcaiv, 
because to, rcKva were or included sons, 
not "well an Gemeindeglieder gedacht 
ist" (Holtzmann). iyd>: according to 
the Greek idiom, when a man speaks of 
himself in the third person, he passes im- 
mediately to the first. Cf. Plat. Euthyphr. 
5 A : o-iiSc T(j) av Sia<{>cpoi EvO'u4>puv tcov 
TroXXwv avBpciTrojv, el (*t| to TOiavra 
iravTa aKpiPws ciS£it)v. Soph. Aj., 864- 
65. The construction is found in loose 
English ; cf. Thackeray, Barry Lyndon, 
chap, xviii. : " I was a man who never 
deserved that so much prosperity should 
fall to my share". Iv dXTjOeCa (see note 
on I John i. 8) defines the Elder's love for 

Kyria as fellowship in Christian know- 
ledge and faith, in view perhaps of 
heathen accusations of licentiousness. 
His affection for her and her family was 
not merely personal ; it was inspired by 
her devotion to the common cause and 
was shared by all the Christians in his 
extensive 8ioikt)o-is> Cf. 2 Cor. viii. 18: 
ov 6 eiroivos ev tu> stia-yY^Xiu 810 irao-wv 
Tuv ckkXtjo-iwv. tt)v dXtfdciav, " the 
Truth just mentioned". 

Ver. 2. ji,e'vov(rav Iv 'n|xiv, not merely 
apprehended by the intellect but wel- 
comed by the heart. (acB' .i^piuv, nobiscum, 
bet uns, as our guest and companion. 

Ver. 3. eo-rai (Ji«6* 'nC''^^> "O^ a wish 
(i Peter i. 2 ; 2 Peter i. 2) but a confident 
assurance. x<'^P*'^> ^^^ well-spring in the 
heart of God ; eXcos* its outpourings ; 
elpi^vT), its blessed effect. They are 
evangelical blessings: (i) not merely 
"from God" but "from God the Father 
and from Jesus Christ the Son of the 
Father" who has interpreted Him and 
brought Him near, made Him accessible; 
(2) not merely " in Truth," enlightening 
the intellect, but " in love," engaging the 

4— b. 



"Xeo?, €ipr\vr] Trapd 0eou Trarpos, Kai irapa Kupiou ^ 'lT]<roG Xpicrrou '^o^.^Mark 

TOO uloC Tou Trarpos, ei' aXujOeia Kai aydini. Luke ' ' 

4. ' 'Exaprjc \iav on €upT]Ka ^k twi/ tckkuc ctou * TrepnraToCi'Tas ci* |'''"- ^! 

d\ir)06ia, Ka9«s ci'ToXtji' eXajSoixcc ^ irapd tou irarpos. 5. Kai vvv -°- . 

e'pcjTw ere, Kupi'a,^ "* oux ws efTo\T)v ypd<^u}* aroi Ka{,vr]y,^ dXXd fji' 6, 7. ii. 6, 

ciX^M'^" *' ^'f' °^PX^5) iVa dYairuip.Ei' dXXT)Xous. 6. Kai ' aoTT) co-tic h i John 

r\ ciYdiTT), ica * TrepnTaTwuef Kara rds efToXds aoTou. '' auTtj eaTlk r\ 11,23. 

i I John V 
3 reff. k I John iii. 23. 

' Kvpiov ^KLP, Syrph, Cop., Arm. ; om. AB, several minusc, Syrbo, Vg. (a 
Christo Jesn), Aeth., edd. 

- e\a(3ov J^. 3 Kvpia Tisch. 

* ypa^fii several minusc, x\eth.. Arm. ; ypa^atv ^ABKLP, Vg., edd. 

5 ■ypa<j>o)v o-ot KaivT]v BKLP, WH, Nest. ; koivtjv yp«i<J><«»v «roi ^A, Tisch. 

'' eixopev BKLP ; eix'^^P'^t' ^A, edd. 

Observe the high tribute which the 
Elder pays toKyria: (i) He testifies to 
the esteem in which she is held; (2) he 
recognises her as a fellow - worker as 
though she were a fellow-apostle — the 
three-fold "us," not "you"; (3) he is 
about to speak of the danger from here- 
tical teaching, but he has no fear of her 
being led astray : "You and I are secure 
from the deceiver. The Truth abideth in 
us ; with us it shall be for ever ; yea, there 
shall be with us grace, mercy, peace." 

Ver. A The Occasion of the Epistle. 
" I was exceedingly glad because I have 
found some of thy children walking in 
Truth, even as we received command- 
ment from the Father." 

€XdpT|v, of a glad surprise {cf. Mark 
xiv. 11). He had been too often disap- 
pointed in lads like these (see Introd., p. 
155). They had profited by the nurture 
of their godly home, the best equipment 
for the battle of life. " No man should 
ever leave money to his children. It is a 
curse to them. What we should do for 
our children, if we would do them the 
best service we can, is to give them the 
uest training we can procure for them, 
and then turn them loose in the world 
without a sixpence to fend for them- 
selves" (Cecil John Rhodes). cvp-qKa, 
" I have found ". He sits down at once 
and writes to Kyria. How glad she 
would be that her lads, far away in the 
great city were true to their early faith ! 
€K Ttov TCKvojv, " somc of thy children " 
(a tenderer word than " sons," vlStv), 
"members of thy family," not implying 
that others had done ill ; the lads who 
had come to Ephesus. irepiTraTovvTas, 
K.T.X., ambulantes in veritate, die in der 
Wahrheit wandeln, "ordering their lives 

according to the precepts of the Gospel ". 
See note on i John i. 6. 

Vv. 5-6. The Comprehensive Com- 
mandment. " And now I ask thee, Kyria, 
not as writing a new commandment to 
thee but the one which we had from the 
beginning, that we love one another. 
And this is love — that we walk according 
to His commandments ; this is the com- 
mandment, even as ye heard from the 
beginnmg — that we should walk in love," 

These counsels are just a summary of 
the doctrines expounded at large in the 
first Epistle. There is here a sort of 
reasoning in a circle : The commandment 
is Love ; Love is walking according to 
His commandments ; His commandments 
are summed up in one — Love. 

Ver. 5. dir' dpx'HS, " from the begin- 
ning of our Christian life". See note on 
I John ii. 7. 

Ver. 6. r\ Ly6Lift\, " the love just re- 
ferred to", irepiir. Kara rds «t. avT., 
regulating our lives by their require- 
ments; irepiTT. €v aXT]6€i<;f, (ver. 4), keep- 
ing within the limits ot the Christian 
revelation and not straying beyond them 
— not TTpodYOVTes (ver. g). aiPT-fj, i.e., 
" love," not " the commandment " (Vulg.: 
Hoc est mandatum, ut . . . in eo ambu- 
letis). irepiiraTciv ev dYdiTY) is synony- 
mous with TTcpi-iraTeiv ev dXT)6£^iji, since 
Love is Truth in practice. Cf. the story , 
of R. Hillel : A mocking Gentile pro- 
mised to become a proselyte if he would 
teach him the whole Law while he stood 
on one foot — a gibe at the multitudLious 
precepts, reckoned at 613. " What is 
hateful to thyself," said the Rabbi, " do 
r.ot to thy neighbour. This is the whole 
Law ; the rest is commentary." Yalk. 
Chad., lix. 2 ; " qui justum cibat frusto, 




m i'john'iv! ^^"^'I'^ KttOws T|K0u(TaT€ ott' otpxTlS, iftt iv auTT) TTCpnraTTJTC " 7. 

' j^^- . OTi TToXXoi ' irXdt'Oi ™ cioTJXOoi' ^ €is TOfc' Koafioc, 01 pi] " ofAoXoyourrcs 

2- .. lT]aouv XpiaTOc ip\6ii.evov iv aapKi ' outos iari.v 6 ' TrXd>'os Kal 6 

M "^1^ ••• '^ ^^''''^-XP'-f^TOS- 8. ^ pXcTreTC eauT0U9, iva \tr] airoKiaufxev a ilpyacrd- 

9- fieOa, dXXa "*'Bot' irXripT] diroXdpwfACk'.^ 9. irds 6 "^ irapa^aiyuv,* 

41, 42, XX. Kal |XT| ' p,£»'(i)i' ci* T3 StSaxi] '''°" XpiaroG, 0c6c ouk e\ei ' 6 u.eVwk' 
8; James ,..«.„'. 5 V ^j, , ,,,,, 

V. 4. €►' TTi otoaYT] Tou XpiCTTOu,'' ouTos Ktti Toc TTaTepa tcai T0>' oioi' evei. 

rMatt. ii.9, J aj r ' r a 

xiv. 22 ; Mark x. 32 ; i Tim. v. 24 [wpoayav). s i Tim. ii. 15 ; 2 Tim. iii. 14. t i John ii. 

22, 23. 

^ €<mv Tj evToXrj ^LP ; tj evToXt] eariv ^BK, edd. 

2€io-T,\eov KLP; e|T)X0ov ^AB, Syrbo, Vg., Sah., Arm., Iren. (III. xvii. 8), edd. 
(-av A, Tisch., WH). 

^ airoX€0-w|i€v aTTo\a^<i)p.ev KLP; airoX£<rr]T£ airoXa^TiTC ^* (airoX-rjerOt) AB, 
Syrvgph, Vg., Cop., Sah., Aeth., Arm., Iren., edd. ; tipya(Ta\i.t6a BKLP, Syrph 
(marg.), Sah. ; Tjpy-B*, WH, Nest. ; eipyatraaOe ^A, Syrbo ph, Vg., Cop., Aeth., 
Arm., Iren., Tisch. 

* irapa^aivwv KLP, Syrbo ph, Vg. {qui recedit). Cop., Arm. ; -irpoayuv ^AB, Sah., 
Aeth., edd. 

5 Tov, xpKTTOv KLP, Cop., Aeth. ; om. i^AB, Syrph, Vg., Sah., Arm., edd. 

perinde est acsi totum Pentateuchum 
servasset ". 

Vv. 7-S. A Warning against Heretical 
Teaching. " Because many deceivers 
went forth into the world — even they 
that confess not Jesus as Christ coming 
in flesh. This is the deceiver and the 
Antichrist. Look to yourselves, that ye 
may not lose what we wrought, but re- 
ceive a full wage." 

Ver. 7. oTi explaining Ipuru «t€ : "I 
ask you to obey the old commandment 
because seducers are at work ". e|r)X6ov 
ei9 Tov KO(rp,ov, see note on i John iv. i. 
oi p,T) opoXo-yovvTCS. a definite and well- 
known sect. See note on i John ii. 4. 
cXriXvOoTtt (i John iv. 2) of the Advent, 
€pXO|J.€vov of the continous manifestation 
ot the i 'carnate Christ. Cf. John i. 14, 
where o-apl €7£V€to corresponds to eXtj- 
Xvdora and lcrKT]vci><r£V kv -ripiv to kp\6^- 

Ver. 8. p,io-0<5v, cf. Matt. xx. 8 ; James 
V. 4. St. John here addresses not only 
Kyria but her family and " the Church in 
her house ". He views them as his 
fellow-labourers in the Lord's vineyard : 
" We have worked together (rfp-yaorap.- 
eOa) : see that you do not forfeit the 
reward of your labour. Get a full wage. 
Be not like workmen who toward the 
close of the day fall off, doing their work 
badly or losing time, and get less than 
a fill) day's pay." diroXeo-rjTe . . . 
■i\pya.a-a.p.i9a . . . oiroXdpTjTe ; ' ' We have 
been fellow-workers thus far, and I mean 
to be faithful to the last ; see that you 
also be so". Their danger lay in taking 
"jp with false teaching and losing the 

comfort of the Gospel in its simplicity 
and fulness. 

Ver. 9. Progress in Theological 
Thought. " Every one that ' progress- 
eth' and abideth not in the caching of 
the Christ hath not God ; he that abideth 
in the teaching — this man hath both the 
Father and the Son," 

d irpodytov : the Cerinthians (sec 
Introd. pp. 156 f. ) boasted of their en- 
lightenment. They were " progressives," 
"advanced thinkers", tq SiSax'Q tov 
XptoTov, the teaching which recognises 
Jesus as the Christ (see note on i John iv. 
1-2), i.e. the Messiah, the Saviour. Qtov 
ovK exeij i.e. according to His true nature 
as the Father manilested in the Son (Kal 
TOV riaTcpa Kal tov Ylov). It is neces- 
sary not merely to bel eve in God but 
to believe in Him "through Christ" 
(i Peter i. 21). 

St. John does not here condemn theo- 
logical progress, which is a neces.sity of 
living and growing faith. A doctrine is 
a statement of Christian experience, and 
since there is always more in Christ than 
we have ever experienced, our doctrines 
can never be adequate or final. Theology 
is to God's revelation in Grace as Science 
is to His revelation in Nature ; and just 
as Science is always discovering more of 
the wonders of the First Creation, so 
Theology is always entering more deepiy 
into the glory of the New Creation and 
appropriating more of the treasures which 
are hidden in Christ. Even the inspired 
Apostles did not comprehend all His ful- 
ness. Each saw only so much as was 
revealed to him, and declared only so 



20 ■ 


ycip X^ywi' ^ auT(o )(aipeii'. 

Ae'pei, " ?.T^"«- 
^ ~ ' 111. 6. 

II. 6^1 John i. 

, - - . 3.6.7; 

KOivojfci " Tois 4'pYOis auTOu T015 iroinrjpois. ^ ^™- ^• 

w I John iii. 12. 

10. " ei Tis epxcTtti irpos u|id9, Kai TauTY)!/ ttj;/ SiSaxv]>' 
|i,T) XaprPdrere auxoi' els oiKiai', Kai x'^^P^'''' <^utw fiT] Xeyere " 

1 o yip Xeywv KLP, Iren. (I. ix. 3) ; o Xeyuv yap J«^AB, edd. 

much as he saw. Each approached the 
itifinite wonder along the lines of his 
temperament and experience. St. John 
saw in it a revelation of Eternal Life; St. 
Paul the Reconciliation ot sinners to God, 
the satisfaction of humanity's long desire 
and the completion of its long discipline 
under the Law ; tb.e author of t e Epistle 
to the Hebrews the rending of the Vt-il 
and the o, ening of Cree Access to God. 
St. John does rot condemn theological 
progress; he defines its limits: "abide 
in the teaching ot the Christ ". (i) We 
must never break with the past ; the new 
truth is always an outgrowth of the old. 
A theology which is simply old is dead ; 
a theology which is simply new is false 
{cf. Matt. xiii. 52). (2) VVe must main- 
tain " the teaching of the Christ ". Jesus 
is the Saviour, and no interpretation of 
Christianity is true which eliminates 
Redemption or obscures the glory of the 

Vv. lo-ii. Treatment of Heretical 
Teachers. " If any one cometh unto you 
and bringeth not this teaching, receive 
him not into your house, and bid him not 
farewell. For he that biddeth him faie- 
well hath fellowship with his works, his 
evil works." 

Ver. I.J. <{>£p£i, not " endureth " {cf. 
Rom. ix. 22; Heb. xii. 20), but "bring- 
eth " as a precious boon {cf. Rev. xxi. 24, 
26). CIS olKiav (cf. Mark ii. i ; iii. ig), 
zu Hause ; cf. "to church," "to town," 
•' to market," " to bed ". See Moulton's 
Winer, pp. 148 ff. x*^P«' 'il^^ ave, salve. 
was used of both the salutation at meet- 
ing and the farewell at yarting. The 
former is its prevailing use in N.T., but 
here, as in 2 Cor. xiii. :i, the latter. 
" Z'.im Abschied, wenn der Abgewiesene 
weiter ziehen muss" (Holtzmann). 

Ver. II. Koivuvci, cf. 1 John i. 3. An 
unholy Koivwvia. tois cpy. atir. toii; 
irov., cf. 1 John i. 2 : ttjk 5<dt)v tt)v 
aluviov. The adjective is an emphatic 

This counsel recalls the story of St. 
J ohn's behaviour to Cerinthus (see Introd. 
p. 157), and it was cited by Irenasus (1. 
ix. 3) as inculcating intolerance of here- 
tics. If so, It is certainly an unChristian 
counsel, contrary to the spirit and teach- 
ing of our Lord (cf. Mark ix. 38-39 ; 

Luke ix. 51-56 ; Matt. xiii. 28-29). 
Heretics are our fell w-creatures ; Jesus 
died for them also, and our office is to 
win them. If we close our doors and 
our hearts against them, we lose our 
opportunity of winning them and harden 
them in their opposition. There are two 
thoughts which maj' well teach us for- 
bearance and humility : (i) The patience 
of the Lord. A Jewish fable tells how 
Abraham thrust an aged wayfarer rom 
his tent because he asked no blessing on 
his food and avow d himself a fire-wor- 
shipper. And the Lord said : " I have 
suffered him these hundred years, al- 
though he dishonoured Me ; and couldst 
not thou endure him for one night ? " 
(2) The mystery of the things of God 
and the blindness of our intellects. 
" Illi," says St. Augustine {Contra Epis- 
tolam ManichcBi, 2), " in vos sasviant, qui 
nesciunt cum quo labore vtrum invenia- 
tur, et quam dit^cile caveantur errores". 
This counsel of the Apostle must be 
read in the light of local circumstances. 
There was need of caution and discrimin- 
ation in receiving the itinerant " apostles 
and prophets " who went from church 
to church, lest they should prove " false 
apostles " (tl/evSairoffToXoi) and " false 
prophets " (\|;ev8oirpo<})TJTai). See Di- 
dache, xi.-xii., where the test is given : 
ov Iras o XaXciiv ev irvev|xaTi. '7rpo<|>t]TT)s 
iorriv, aXX' lav ex'Q tovs Tpotrovs Kvpiov. 
It is not until the second century that 
there is anv appearance of buildings set 
apart for worship. The primitive IkkXti- 
criai met in private houses {cf. Rom. 
xvi. 5 ; I Cor. xvi. ig ; Col. iv. 15 ; 
Philem. 2) ; and when St. John warns 
Kyria against " receiving into her house " 
a heretical teacher, it is not showing him 
hospitality that he forbids, but at^or ing 
him an opportunity to unsettle the faith 
Of the brethren. She must neither let 
him pervert " the church in her house", 
nor send him on his way to a neighbour- 
ing church ith ;he recommendation of 
her confidence and goodwill. This is 
expressed, though somewhat vaguely, by 
Clem. Alex. : " Hoc in hujusmodi noji 
est inhumanum, sed nee conijuirere vel 
condisputare cum talibus admonet qui 
non valent intelligibiliter divina tractare, 
ne per eos traducantur a doctrina veri- 




t 3 John 14. 
/ I John i. 

z Ver. I. 

12. rioXXd €\(j)v ufjiii' Yp(i(|>ci»', ouK T|Po'j\i]0T)t' ^ 8ia )(dpTOu Kai 
fieXat'os ■ aXXa eXirtl^ci) eX9eif " irpos ujids, Kal ^ orofia Trpoj oTOfia 
XaXT](Tai, Iva ^ X'^P°'^ Tjp.uc^ tj ^TreirXifjpwp.ei'Tj.* 13. dairi^erai <r€ 
rd TCKfa rfjs d8eX<j)T)s <tou tt)? 'eKXcKxtis. dixi^c.^ 

1 cPovXtiOtjv i^ ABKLP, edd. 2 Y£v«o-eai ^AB, Syrph, Vg., edd. 

STjfiojv ^KLP, Tisch., WH (marg.), Nest. ; v|ioiv AB, Vg., WH. 
*r\ ir€Tr\T|poj|Ji«VTj AKLP ; -TTCTrXTipuficvT) -q ^B, edd. 
^a\i.-r\v om. ^ABP, Vg., Cop., Sah., Aeth., Arm., edd. 

tatis, verisimilibus inducti rationib is. 
Arbitror autem, quia et orare cum talibus 
non oportet, quoniam in oratione quae fit 
in domo, postquam ab orando surgitur, 
salutatio gaudii est et pacis indicium." 

Vv. 12-13. The Conclusion. "Though 
I have many things to write to you, I 
w ould not by paper and ink ; but I hope 
to get to you, and talk face to face, thai 
our joy may be lulfilled. The children of 
thine elect sister salute thee." 

Ver. 12. Explanation of the brevity of 
the letter. vjiXv, i.e., Kyria, her children, 
and the church in her house. 7pd4>€iv 
connected diro koivov with extov and 
sPovXiiOtjv. x*^P''^5> ^ sheet of papyrus, 
like those exhumed at Oxyrhynchus (see 
Deissmann, New Light on the New Test., 
pp. 12 ff.), the tommon material for 
letter-writing. |xcXav, atramentum ; in 
N. T. only here, 3 John 13, 2 Cor. iii. 3. 
Y€V£<r6ai irpos vfxds (cf. John x. 35 ; Acts 
X. 13 ; I Cor. ii. 3, xvi. 10) : he was plan- 
ning a visitation (see Introd. p. 155). 
o-Tojia irpos o-T<5|jia, " mouth answering 
mouth " ; cf. LXX. Num. xii. 8 ; Jer. 
xxxii. (xxxix.), 4. 

Why would he not write all that was 
in his mind? It was a deliberate deci- 
sion ere he took pen in hand: this is the 
force of oiiK cPovXiiOtjv. His heart was 
lull, and writing was a poor medium of 
communication (Beng. : " Ipsa scribendi 
opera non juvat semper cor affectu sacro 
plenum ") ; he was an old man, and writ- 
ing was fatiguing to him (Plummer). 

The reason is deeper. The "many 
things " which he had in his mind, were 
hard things like his warning against in- 
tercourse with heretics, and he would 
not write them at a distance but would 
wait till he was on the spot and had 
personal knowledge. It is easy to lay 
down general principles, but their ap- 
plication to particular cases is a delicate 
task, demanding knowledge, sympathy, 
charity, (i) The sight of people's faces 
appeals to one's heart and softens one's 
speech. (2) When one meets with 
people and talks with them, one's judg- 
ment of them and their opinions is 
often modified. Writing from Ephesus, 
St. John might have condemned a teacher 
in a neighbouring town whose teaching 
he knew only by report ; but perhaps, 'f 
he met the man and heard what he had 
to say, he might discover that there was 
nothing amiss, at all events nothing 
which called for excommunication. Dr. 
Dale of Birmingham was at first inclined 
to look with disfavour on Mr. Moody. 
He went to hear him, and his opinion 
was altered. He regarded him ever after 
with profound respect, and considered* 
that he had a right to preach the Gospel, 
"because he could never speak of a lost 
soul without tears in his eyes ". St. 
John shrank from hasty condemnation 
that there might be no after-regret — 
Xva. T] X*'^P^ Ti|x<i)V "ireirXTipufi.evn tJ- 
Ver. 13, See Introd. pp. 162 f. 



1. "O nPEIBYTEPOZ ratu tw ayaiTTiTw, ov eyw ayairio^iy a\r]Qeia. ^ « John 

2. 'AyaTTifiTc, irept irdi'Ta)!' euxofi-ai <re "euoSooaOai Kai uyiaiVeii', '' * John 

Kttdws " euoSourai trou r\ 4'"X^' 3* "^ ^X^PT' Y°^P ^ Xtai', ^p)(0)X€Voji": i Cor. xvi. 

a8e\(J>wk' Ktti ixapTupoufTUi/ trou ttj aXtjOeia, Kadus au * iv aXridEia d 2 John 4. 

/ ' 3 >' ' > 'i a > ' ^ 2 John 4. 

TrepiTrareis. 4. jACi^OTepai' tootui' ouk cxw x«ip<i*'> '•►'tt oikouoj tA i i John i. 4. 

^ iwavvov 7 ^ ; twavov y B ; iwavvov enria-roXy] y C, many minusc. ; imovvov 
ciTKrToXTi KaOoXiKT) y loi, 106 ; eirio-ToXt] rpiTTj tov a^iov ottocttoXov luavvov L ; 
rov a-uTov ayiov icoavvov tou OeoXoYov tiritrroKy] rpiTTj 95 ; cTrKTroX-rj tov ayiov 
■airo<rToXot) Kai njYair'qp.cvov irpos yatov itoavvov 4. 

2 yap ABCKLP, Syrboph, Cop., WH, Nest.; om. ^, Vg., Sah., Aeth., Arm., 

^xopov ^ACKLP, Tisch., WH (marg.), Nest. ; x^piv B, Vg., Cop., WH. 

The Third Epistle. 

Vv. 1-4. Address and Commendation. 
" The Elder to Gaius the beloved, whom 
I love in Truth. Beloved, in all respects 
I pray that thou mayest prosper and be 
in health, even as thy soul prospereth. 
For I was exceedingly glad when breth- 
ren would come and testify to thy Truth, 
€ven as thou walkest in Truth. A 
greater gladness than this I have not — 
that I should hear of my children walking 
in the Truth." 

Ver. I. 6 irpco-pvTcpos, see Introd. 
pp. 159 ff. eyco, see note on 2 John i. ev 
^XT)9€(a, see note on 2 John i. 

Ver. 2. Cf. Law, Ser. Call, chap. vii. : 
" Flavia would be a miracle of piety, if 
she was but half as careful of her soul as 
she is of her body. The rising of a 
pimple on her face, the sting of a gnat, 
will make her keep her room for two or 
three days, and she thinks they are very 
rash people that do not take care of 
things in time." Penn, Fruits of Soli- 
tude : " He is curious to wash, dress and 
perfume his Body, but careless of his 
Soul. The one shall have many Hours, 
the other not so many Minutes." ir«pi 
TrdvTwv, de omnibus, with cvoSovcrOai. Kai 
iiyiaiveiv, not prce omnil'us, " above all 

things". The latter use is epic {e.g., 
Hom. //. i. 287 : ircpl itovtwv lp.p.€vai 
aXXo)v), and prosperity and health were 
not the sumnia bona in the Apostle's 
estimation. cvoSovo-Oai, " prosper " in 
worldly matters. Trouble tests char- 
acter. " A good knight is best known 
in battle, and a Christian in the time of 
trouble and adversity " ; and Gaius had 
stood the test. The hostility of Dio- 
trephes, probably a well-to-do member of 
the Church, had lessened his maintenance 
(e{io8ovcr0ai) and affected his health 
(vyiaiveiv), yet St. John has only ad- 
miration for the spirit he has manifested 
and commendation for the part he has 

Ver. 3. Ix^PI"' see note on 2 John 4. 
cpxop.6v<i>v, repeatedly, not on one par- 
ticular occasion (IXOovtwv). The itiner- 
ant brethren (die reisenden Bruder) were < 
always at work, going out from Ephesus 
on their missions and returning with 
their reports. Cf. vv. 5-6. See Introd. 

p. 155. 

Ver. 4. Cf. Senec. Ep. xxxiv. : " Si 
agricolam arbor ad fructum perducta de- 
lectat, si pastor ex foetu gregis sui capit 
voluptatem, si alumnum suum nemo 
aliter intuetur quam adulescentiam illius 




^ai^i'c'or. ^^l'-°- TeK^'a iv^ cik-qQeia TrcpnraToui'Ta. 5. 'AyaTTr]Te, maxoi' troieis 
Philem ^°'^ 'PY'**'T1 " ^'■5 Tous aoe\<pous Kai €is TOU9 ^ fefous, o. 01 cfiap- 
10; Gal. Tup-qadi' CTOu tt) aydTTj) ^ ivdinov eKKXt^aias ' ous ' KaXws iroii^CTets 

h Matt. "' TTpoTrefJuj/as ° d^i'us Tou 0€ou. 7. uirep yap ° TOO oi/ofj-axos e^TiXGoc ■* 

* ^"^i"- xiii.i. k I John iii. 22 reff. 1 2 Peter i. 19. m Acts xv. 3, xx. 38, xxi. 5 : Rom. xv. 24 ; 
I Cor. xvi. 6, II ; 2 Cor. i. 16. n i Thess. ii. 12 ; Col. i. 10. o Acts v. 40, 41 ; 1 Peter iv. 14, 16.. 

^ €v ^C^KLP ; 6v Tt) ABC*, edd. 

^cpyao-t) ^BCKLP, edd. ; epya^ri A, Vg. {quidquid opcraris). 

2 €is To-us KLP ; TovTo ^ABC, Vg., Syrbo ph, Vg., Cop., Sah., Aeth., Arm., edd. 

^ «|T)Xeav ^B, edd. 

Suam judicet : quid evenire credis his qui 
ingenia educaverunt, et quae tenera for- 
maverunt adulta subito vident ? " Ev. 
sec. Heb. (quoted by Jerome on Eph. v. 
4) : " Et numquam, inquit (Dominus), 
laeti sitis nisi cum fratrem vestrum vide- 
ritis in caritate". p.€i£oTcpav, a double 
compar. ; cf. eXaxi«rTOT€p(j) (Eph. iii. 8) ; 
our "lesser"; G&tm. mehrere. tovtcov : 
this use of the plur. (TavTa) rather than 
the sing, (tovto) is common. See Moul- 
ton's Winer, p. 201. tva, epexegetic of 
TovTcov. Cf. Luke i. 43 and see note on i 
John iii. 11. tekvu implies that Gaius 
was a convert of St. John. Cf. marg. note. 

Vv. 5-8. The Duty of Entertaining 
Itinerant Preachers. " Beloved, it is a 
work of faith that thou art doing in thy 
treatment of the brethren, strangers 
withal. They testified to thy love before 
the Church; and thou wilt do well in 
speeding them on their way worthily of 
God. For it was for the sake of the 
Name that they went forth, taking no- 
thing from the Gentiles. We therefore 
are bound to undertake for such, that 
we may prove fellow-workers with the 

A company of reisende Briider had 
returned to Ephesus, and in reporting 
of their mission at a meeting of the 
Church had made special mention oi 
the hospitality' of Gaius. The Apostle 
commends him and bids him continue his 
good offices. 

Ver. 5. The adjective -ttio-t^s is either 
act., "believing" (cf. John xx. 27), or 
passive, " worthy to be believed," " trust- 
worthy " [cf. 2 Tim. ii. 2). It is passive 
here, and it is well explained by CEcu- 
menius as equivalent to a|iov -irio-Tot; 
avSpds. The peculiarity is that, by a sort 
of hypallage, the adjective is transierred 
Irom the subjective to the objective. 
Transitive : ' Thou makest whatever thou 
workest on the brethren a believing act, 
a work of faith ". It was not mere hos- 
pitality but a religious service. West- 
cott's rendering : " thou makest sure 

whatsoever thou doest " gives ithttov an 
unexampled and indeed impossible mean- 
ing, iroicis, aor. of habitual and con- 
stant hospitality ; ipy6.a-r\, aor. of each 
particular act. Kai tovto, " and that 
to " ; more commonly kui TovTa (cf. 
Heb. xi. 12). 

ver. 6. On the anarthrous cKKXT)o-ias, 
see note on 2 John 10. KaXus ironio-ets 
has the sense of " please " in the CKv- 
rhynchus Papyri ; e.g., 300, 3-6 : ?ir€p,\J/a 
<roi 8ia Tov KafXT|XciTOv Tavpcivo-u to- 
iravapiov, ircpl ov KaXcos iroiijaeis av- 
Ti(|><i>vi](rao'd |xoi, oti cKopicrov, " I sent 
you the bread-basket by the cameleer 
Taurinus ; please let me have word again 
that you got it ". irpoir€p,v|/as : when a 
Rabbi visited a town, it was customary 
on his departure to escort him on his 
way (Lightfoot, Hor. Heb., on Matt. v. 
41). The gracious usage was observed 
in the primitive Church, and it appears 
to have included the lurnishmg of p o- 
vision for the journey (cf. Tit. iii i^). 
Cf. Hom. Od. XV., 74 : \p-r\ i^dvov uapcovTo- 
4)iXeiv, cOcXovTa 8e ■Kt^jtf.w . " welcome 
the coming, speed the parting guest ". 
d|ius TOV 6eov, " in a manner wort.iy of 
God," i.e. (i) " Since they are God's 
representatives (John xiii. 20), weil ihr 
' vangelistenwerk Gottes Werk ist 
(Holtzm.), treat them as you would treat 
God " ; (2) " Since you are God's re- 
presentatives, treat them as God would 
treat them ". 

Ver. 7. TOV 'Ov(5)AaTos, sc. of Jesufr 
((/. Acts V. 40, 41). There is perhaps a 
reference to this verse in Ignat. ad Eph. 
vii. i: cluOao'i "ydp Tives SoXu trovr\pih to 
ovo|jia ■ircpi(|>Ep€iv, aXXa Tivd irpdo-aovxes 
dvd^ia ©€ov. Cf. iii. i: Iv tw^ 
6v6p,aTi. Ili^XOav, SC. from Ephesus, the 
seat of the Apostle and therefore the 
headquarters of the Church in Asia 
Minor. Cf. Introd. p. 155. p.t)8ev. see 
note on i John ii. 4. Winer (Moulton's- 
Winer, p. 463, note i) draws a distinction, 
perhaps too fine, betwe».i XapPdvciv 
■Trapa Tivos and Xap,pdvciv d-To tivos. 




fATjSei' \a)x(3aco>'Tes " diro twc eOcwi'.^ 8. i^fxeis our ' 64)ei\o|uiec diro- 

XafApdi'en' -^ Tous T010UT0U9, IVa ^ cruvepyol ^ yLvdi[iiBa t^ dXirjOcta. 9. 

"Eypail/a ^ ttj cKKXirjaia • dXX' 6 " 4)iXoirpuTeuwi' auTwc AioTp6<|)T]s oi)K 

eiriSe'xeTai i^fids. lo. 8id tooto, ed** eX9w, " uTTOfivT^CTw auTOu rd 

Ipya d iroici, Xoyois iroi'Tjpois * 4>Xuapuf t)p.ds * Kol fitj dpRoupci^os 

cttI TouTois, oore aoTos eiriSexeTai tous d8eX(})0us> K-oX tous j3ooXo- 

p.€Vou$ " KwXu'ci, Kal CK T^s eKKXT)<rias ^ cKPdXXet. 1 1 . 'AyaiTTjTe, '^ fiT) 

u Cf. Matt. XX. 27. V John xiv. 26 ; 2 Tim. ii. 14 ; Tit. iii. i. w 1 Tim. v. 13. 

38t 39- y John ix. 34. z Rom. xii. 9 ; Ps. xxxvii. 27. 

1 eOvcov KLP ; eeviKcov ^.^ABC, edd. 

2 airoXafxPavciv KLP ; viroXaii^aveiv ^ABC*, edd. 
ScYpaxj/a: add ti ^ABC, Cop., Sah., Arm., edd. 

p .\ctS XX. 

35 : I Cor. 
ix. 12-15. 
q I John V. 

r I John 11. 

6 reff. 
s Rom. xvi. 

3. 9. 21 ; 

I Cor. iii. 

9; 2 Cor. 

viii. 23. 
t Matt. V. 


X Mark ix. 

The former would have been used here 
had the Gentiles '' proferred an acknow- 
ledgment ; the latter implies exaction. 
The missionaries might have accepted 
maintenance (Matt. x. 10), but like St. 
Paul they waived their right, " that they 
might cause no hindrance to the Gospel 
of Christ" (i Cor. ix.). 

Ver. 8. i^jxcis, emphatic in contrast to 
the Gentiles. 6<|>eiXofj.ev, of moral obli- 
gation. See note on i John ii. 6. (iiroXaiA- 
pdveiv, suscipere, " receive hospitably " 
{cf. viroSexeo'Oai), " take under one's 
protection ". Observe the Wortspiel — 
Xafx^dvovTCS, vxoXa^Pdveiv. o-vvepyoi 
r% aXT]9£ia : a division of labour. If we 
cannot preach the Gospel ourselves, we 
may help others to do it. William Carey, 
comparing his missionary enterprise to 
the exploration of a mine, said : " I will 
go down if you will hold the ropes ". 

Vv. 9-10. Churlishness of Diotrephes. 
" I wrote something to the Church, but 
Diotrephes, who loveth pre-eminence 
over them, doth not receive us. There- 
fore, if I come, I shall call to remem- 
brance his works which he doeth, prating 
about us with evil words ; and, not con- 
tent therewith, neither doth he himself 
receive the brethren and them that would 
he preventeth and casteth out of the 

" Der Zweck des 3. Briefes Hegt in der 
Empfehlung der Gastfreundschaft gegen 
wandernde Glaubensboten " (Holtzm.). 

Ver. 9. €Ypa\j/a ti, a brief letter of 
commendation, <rv<rTaTiKT) iit\.tTTo\r\ (2 
Cor. iii. i), introducing and authorising 
a company of itinerant brethren, probably 
those referred to in v. 5. <j>iXo'irpu- 
TCTJciv, "'love to be first, to be chief ' (aira^ 
X€Y6p.evov). The noun is <|>iXo7rp(dT€ia 
and the adj. (^iXdirpcoros (Polyb., Plut ), 
irpoayeiv (2 John 9) and (^iXoTTpuTcveiv 
denote two tempers which disturbed the 
Christian life of Asia Minor — intellectual 

arrogance and personal aggrandisement. 
avTwv refers Kara crvveiruv to IkkXtio-io.. 
ovK iTriSt'xeTai, " doth not receive 
me in the person of my delegates " {cf. 
Matt. X. 40), i.e., " disowneth my autho- 
rity ". 

Ver. 10. edv eXOw : the aged Apostle 
with his failing strength can only "hope" 
{cf. ver. 14) to undertake the journey. 
iiiro|AVii<ra) avToO to. cpya, not " remind 
him of his works " (contrast the "work " 
of Gaius in ver. 5), but " bring his works 
to remembrance," by reciting them at a 
meeting of the Church. St. John does 
not threaten excommunication or any 
sort of discipline, but simply that he will 
state the facts and let them speak for 
themselves. A terrible reckoning, like 
that of the Day of Judgment {cf. Rev. 
XX. 12) — to hear a recital of all one's 
passionate speeches and inconsiderate 
actions. Contrast St. Paul's threats 
(i Cor. iv. 21 ; 2 Cor. x. 11, xiii, 1-3). 
St. John deserved to be called " the 
Apostle of Love". «|)Xvap€iv {nugari, 
verschwatsen), of foolish chattering. 
Suid. : ({>Xvapos • <f>Xi]va4)os Kal Xvipos 
Kal ftaVoios \070s. The chatter of Dio- 
trephes was not only foolish but male- 
volent (Xoyois irovT|pois). |xt) dpK., see 
note on i John ii. 4. ovt£ . . . Kai, cf. 
John iv. II. K(dXv6i, tKpo'XXei, ipres. 
implying not that he actually did it but 
that he tried to do it. iKPa'XXei, here 
not of literal ejection {cf. John ii. 115 = 
Matt. xxi. 12= Mark xi. 15) but of ex- 
communication from the fellowship of 
the congregation. 

Vv. II, 12. Testimony to Demetrius. 
"Beloved, do not imitate what is bad but 
what is good. He that doeth what is 
good is of God ; he that doeth what is 
bad hath not seen God. To Demetrius 
testimony hath been borne by all and by 
the Truth itself; yea, and we testify, and 
thou knowest that our testimony is true," 



12 15. 

a Heb. xiii. a jxtficC to KaKOk*, dXXa to dyaSok'. 6 iyaQoiroiiav, ck tou 0eou ecrrii' • 

'' ^.J"*^" ** 6 8e ^ KaKOTTOlWl', OUX 6oSpaK€ TOl' ©COK, 12. AT)p.1f]Tpi(>) "^ p,Efiap- 

c Heb. XI. 2, .,.jp^^(j^ uTTo irdi'Twv, KOI uir' auTTjs Tt]s dXijOeias * ** Kal T)|i.ets 8e 

djohnxix. ji.apTupoufiei', Kal oiSare^ on t] {xaprupia rjfAWK dXTjOi^s eori. 

24- It. rioXXd eiYOi' Ypdieii',^ dXX' ou deXcj Sid ixeXai'os Kal KaXduou 

e 2 John 12. '^ ,»,,,- >i V > V / 

f Matt. X. (701 Ypt'^^^'t'' ' * I4' cXiri^u §€ euOe'ws iScti' ae, Kai * OTop-a irpos orop-a 

xxiv. 36; XaXiitrou.ei'. 15. Eipiii'Ti ctoi. doTrdl^orrai <re 01 * 4>iXoi. dcnrd^ou 

John XX. V 7x h » » 

19, 21, 36 ; Tous ^ 4>iXou9 Kar ocou.a. 

I Peter v. 

g John xi. II ; Acts xxvii. 3. h John x. 3. 


1 o 8€ L, Cop., Aeth., Arm. ; o ^.^ABCKP, Syrph, Vg,, Sah., edA . 
2oi8aTe KLP, Syrbo ph, Aeth. ; oiSas i^ABC, Vg., Cop., Sah., Arm. 
3 YpO'4>^''^ KLP ; Ypai|/at <roi jf^ABC, edd. 
* Ypa\|/ai KLP ; ypacficiv ^ABC, edd. 
« i8«iv o-e i^KLP ; o-€ i8€iv ABC, edd. 

Ver. II. A warning against evil ex- 
ample. The pres. participles dYadoiroiwv, 
KaKOTTOkuv denote conttnuance in and 
practice of good or bad. See note on 
I John iii. 6. Ik tov ©eov, " a child of 
God" (cf. I John iii. 10). Observe the 
gentleness of the Apostle; the natural 
antithesis of Ik tov ©eov would be Ik 
TOV Sia^oXov (i John iii. 8), but he says 
ovx ewpaKev tov Qe6v. 

Ver. 12. Application of the warning 
against evil example: Do not imitate 
Diotrephes, but imitate Demetrius. De- 
metrius was probably the bearer ( Ueber- 
bringer) of the epistle. There is no 
reason for identifying him with Deme- 
trius the silversmith of Ephesus (Acts 
xix. 24). B. Weiss (Einleit.), supporting 
the ecclesiastical interpretation of 2 John 
(see Introd. p. 162) and finding a refer- 
ence to it in 3 John 9, regards Deme- 
trius as the recipient [Empfdnger) of the 
former — a member of the Church and a 
striking contrast to his fellow-member 
Diotrephes. But evidently he was a 
stranger to Gaius and needed introduc- 
tion and commendation. St. John gives 
him a threefold testimony: (i) that of 
the whole community at Ephesus (viro 
iravTuv); (2) that of "the Truth" (see 
note on i John i. 8) : he fulfilled the re- 
quirements of the Gospel and exemplified 
its saving power ; (3) that of the Apostle 
and his colleagues at Ephesus (rfp-eis) : 
he has long been honoured by his com- 
munity as an embodiment of the Truth 
(fi€p,apTvpT]Tai), and the Apostle testifies 
this when he is going among strangers 
Tgnorant of his past (papTvpovp.€v). Kal 
. . . 8€, see note on i John i. 3. olSas 
8ti, k.t.X. : because St. John knew him 

so well, Demetrius belonged to the 
Church of Ephesus and was probably a 
convert of the Apostle. 

Vv. 13-15. The Conclusion. " I had 
many things to write to thee, but I am 
not minded to be writing to thee by pen 
and ink. However, I hope presently to 
see thee, and we shall talk face to face. 
Peace to thee ! The friends salute thee. 
Salute the friends by name." 

Cf. 2 John, 12-13. The similarity of 
the conclusions suggests that the two 
epistles were written at the same time. 
The Apostle meditated a visitational 
circuit (see Introd. p. 155) in the course of 
which he would see both Kyria and 

Ver. 13. 7pa\);ai, aor. of the complete 
composition in the Apostle's mind ; ypa- 
4)£iv, pres. of the process of putting it on 
paper. KaXap,os (in full KaXapo; YP*" 
<|)evs), a reed-pen, as distinguished from 
7pa4)eiov, a sharp-pointed stilus for writ- 
ing on waxed tablets. Plutarch {Dent., 
29, 3) says that Demosthenes, when 
meditating and %vriting, was accustomed 
to bite his KaXap,os. 

Ver. 15. elpi^vT) aoi, iax tibi, the 

Jewish 'greeting, TJ/ D"! /tl? (Jud. vi. 

23, xix. 20), 01 (f>iXoi, those at Ephesus; 
tovs ({>iXovs, those with Gaius. St. John 
knew all "by name," and would have 
named them had space permitted. He 
had the true shepherd's heart {cf. John 
X. 3, the only other place where Kar' 
ovop.a occurs in N.T.). Ignat., ad 
Smyrn., xiii. 2 : ao-ira£o|iai "AXktjv, to 
iraOTjTov |xo(, ovopa, Kal Aa<|>vov, tov 
do-vyKpiTov Kal evTeKVOV, Kal iravTas 
KaT* ovo|xa. 






Relation of the Second Epistle of Peter to the Epistle of ^ude.^ 

The general resemblance between the two Epistles will be apparent 
from the marginal references to my text. I propose here to com- 
pare them throughout, stating the reasons which have led me to 
believe that the epistle of Jude was known to the author of 2 Peter, 
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 to Jesus Christ, desiring that peace might be multiplied upon 
them. We notice here certain differences occasioned by the differ- 
ence of the writers. J. marks his identity by naming his brother 
James; P. claims apostleship. J. adds the prayer for mercy and 
and love to that for peace ; P. who is about to speak more fully of 
love immediately, omits it here, and changes eXeos into the wider 
xdpts. 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 third and tenth verses, and dwells here on 
God's free gift of faith (tois \axouo-ii' ■nlfrriv) as characteristic of his 
readers. He adds two remarkable phrases (1) that, through the 
justice of our God and of our Saviour Jesus Christ, this faith is 
(2) equally privileged with that of the writer (whether we are to 
regard him as representing the Apostles, or the Jews, as seems to 
me more probable), and he emphasises 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 sym- ' 
pathies embrace both. We may compare with this the friendly re- 
ference to St. Paul in iii. 15, and the association of Silvanus with 
the writer in 1 Peter. 

' For the justification of the readings and interpretations adopted in the follow- 
ing chapters, see critical and explanatory notes. 

^ In what follows P. stands for 2 Peter, J. for Jude. 


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, viz., 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 hinr 
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 (ver. 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. 

After speaking generally of the blessings in store for man through 
the goodness of God, P. goes on (i. 5) 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. ver. 20), eTroiKoSofioCn-es 
cauTous TTJ dyiuTdrr) u|xaji' iricrTei . . . cauTous iv dydirT) 0cou tt|- 
p-rjaaxe. The phrase ctttouStii' irafrav of P. i. 5 occurs also in J. ver. 3. 
The mention of euore'Peia in P. i. 3, 6, 7 may be due to the prevalence 
of dCTc'Pcia so often deplored by J. The verses which follow (i. 8-11) 
dwell on the importance of the cultivation of these virtues or graces, 
" Their continued growth will tend to make us not unfruitful (cf. J. 
ver. 12) in regard to that knowledge of God, out of which they grow. 
Their absence causes blindness, or at least limits us to narrow 
earthly 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 baptised. 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 toe 
we find connecting links with the later verses of J. " Eternal life' 
is the goal in J. ver. 21, "the eternal kingdom," in P. i. 11. The 
ou JIT) irraio-TjTe and the -irXouo-iws c-rrixopTjYTjG^o-eTat of P. remind us of J.'s 
summing up in ver. 24, " God our Saviour is able to keep us without 

*The word koivtiv here may have suggested to P. his phrase Io-otijiov -irto-Tiv. 


stumbling and to set us before His glory without blemish in ex- 
ceeding joy ". 

P. continues (i, 12-15), " 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 earthly 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. ver. 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 judgment contained in the 
O.T., including the punishment of the angels who sinned. P. ad- 
dressing 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. 

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. ver. 4, P. ii, 1-3), describing in general terms the 
innovators against whom the readers are warned. They steal into 
the Church, they deny the only Master (Scottotth'), their lives are im- 
pure, 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. ii. 15, 16, and J. ver. 11). Corresponding to this in 
the new dispensation' will be the abuse of teaching (cf. James iii. 1- 
12) ; and these false teachers will introduce destructive heresies and 
bring on themselves swift destruction. [The word dirwXeia does not 
occur in J., but in the next verse he says that the Lord tous jitj 
TTio-TCutrai'Tas airdiKeaey.] P. adds the Pauline epithet dyopdiCTacTa be- 
fore ScCTiroTTji'. He foretells that many will follow the loose living of 
these teachers and that thus the way of truth (Ps. cxix. 30) will be 
evil spoken of (Isa. Hi. 5). He speaks of their covetousness (cf. J.: 
ver. 1 1 on Balaam) and of their glozing words. While J. denounces 01. 
irdXai irpoYeYpafifiefoi eis tooto to Kpifxa (where the reference in toGto is 
obscure), P. has the fine phrase ols to npijia ouk dpyei Kal -q d-n-wXeia 
auTcii' ou i/uCTTd^ei. On the Other hand we lose J.'s ttjc toC ©eoO xapiTa 
fieTaTtSeVres eis dor^yeiai', for which perhaps eKeuOepiav auToIs ciraYyeX- 
Xofiecoi, auTol SouXoi uTrdpxofTes Tr]s <()0opas (P- ii. 19) was intended as 
an equivalent, cf Gal. v. 13, eir' cXeuOepia eKXi^drjTe- jioi'ok fjiTj ttj»^ 
eXeuOepiai' els d<|>opp.T]i' rrj aapKi. 

VOL, V. ' 14 


Then follow (J. vv. 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. ii. 4-9, 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 recognised types of 
Divine vengeance (Lk. xvii. 26-29), and also because P. is about to 
speak of the Deluge below (iii. 5-7) to show that there is nothing 
incredible in the destruction of the existing universe by fire. More- 
over he had already referred to the case of Israel (iv 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 
SeuTcpoi' 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. i. 9, \i^0Tjf XajSu^ toG Ka6apiap,ou twc TrdXai auTou dfxap- 
Tiwc as well as in P. ii. 20. 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, ei yap 6 0eos ouk i<^ei(TaTo k.t.X. Of the 
anggls P. says merely that they sinned, J. dwells on their pristine 
dignity, 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 aapKos erepas, as the men of Sodom did afterwards Tot- op,otov 
rpoTTOf TouTois, J. ver. 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, in both epistles, for judgment 
under darkness in chains. 

It is interesting to compare what is said in the two Epistles about 
the two missionaries of the antediluvian world. In J. ver. 14 Enoch* 
the seventh from Adam, appears simply as the denouncer of ven- 
geance to come : in P. Noah is a preacher of righteousness and he 
is the eighth saved. In my edition of 2 Peter I have suggested that 
the writer 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. iii. 20 (Ki^uirov) cis tj** dXiyoi, tout* 
Icrric OKTU) «|/uxai, 8ie<Tci0r]o-a>' 8i' oSaTos. 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 ? JVlust he not have in- 


tended 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 (1 P. iii. 19) ? In the account of Sodom P. (ii. 6) differs 
from J. in laying stress on Lot's protest against surrounding wicked- 
ness, and on the mercy shown towards him, just as he had done 
Defore 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 judg- 
ment". P. alone gives details as to the destruction of Sodom 
(T€<|)pw<Tas KaTaaTpo<|>^ KaTeKpii/ef), while J. speaks of its present state 
as a warning to future ages. As regards this warning P.'s uiroSeiyfAa 
ficXXorroji' d<7€(3€(nj' is better expressed than J.'s rather confused irpo- 
Keirrai Seiyfict irupo; aiufiou Sikt)!' uTrixov(Tai,. In ver. 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 of Sodom did towards the angels), 
and this they do because they are still buried in a carnal sleep {cf. 
Eph. V. 14). These men (ver. 10, oijToi 8e) 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 destruc- 
tion. ^ P. (ii. 10) combines part of J.'s description of the men of 
Sodom, who went ottiotcj irapKos Ircpas (for which he substitutes oirtao) 
aapK^s iv ^-n-i6up,ia ftiacrixou iropcuofieVous) with J.'s condemnation of the 
libertines as despising authority, 2 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 (ToXfXTjTai, cf. eroXfATjaei', J. ver. 9) men 
that shrink not from railing at glories" (ii. 10). In ii. 12 he goes on, 
as J. does in ver. 10, with a outoi 8^, "these are like brute beasts ". 
Apparently he wants to bring out more fully the force of J.'s oaa 
(fiucriKus ciriarat'Tai, €i' toutois 4>0eipoi'Tai by the periphrasis y£y€vvi]iiiva 
^uaiKol CIS aXoxric Kal ^Bopdv and iv rg (j>dopa auTu^ (t>9api](T0i'Tai. That , 
is, while J. simply states that the libertines are destroyed through 

1 For the connexion between the darkened heart which refuses to know God, 
and the indulgence in the vilest lusts, see Rom. i. 21-28. 

2 It will be noticed that, while J. couples KvpuJi-qTa and S(S|a« as belonging 
to the same category, P. only names the abstract word Kvpi<iTT]Ta here, and 
introduces S<S|as later on as a concrete example. 


their indulgence in their animal instincts, P. draws out the compari- 
son to the brute beasts, " which are born mere creatures of instinct, 
with a view to capture and slaughter," and then adds that the liber- 
tines 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 pos- 
sible that P., writing with an imperfect recollection of J., understood 
cK TouTois <|>Oeipoi'Tai to mean "perish among them," i.e., among the 

We have now to consider the very curious verse interposed be- 
tween J. vv. 8 and 10, P. ii. 10 and 12. 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 Assumptio Mosis we can understand that, if the 
chief of the archangels abstained from using any contemptuous ex- 
pression 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 in 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 ii. 4, and the reference to the preaching of 
Enoch below. He objects, that is, to make use of these apocryphal 
writings, and generalises the story by dropping the proper names 
and by twice changing a singular into a plural (ayyeXoi, auTwf). So, 
too, a vague -irapci Kupiw takes the place of cTriTijaiiorai ctoi ICupios, and 
the vagueness is increased by the use of the indeterminate aurwc and 
by the omission of the object of the comparative jAeil^oi'es. In fact 
the sentence is meaningless except to one who was already ac- 
quainted with its parallel in J., though it may perhaps be true, as 
Dr. Bigg suggests, that P. felt himself justified in his generalisation 
by the remembrance of an obscure passage in the Book of Enoch. 

I go on to J. ver. 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 enjoy- 
ment. 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. ii. 13-17, but, in the latter, the order is con- 
siderably altered and there are various additions and omissions. 
Balaam (who is also prominent in the Apocalypse ii. 14) is the only one 
of the old haeresiarchs referred to, but his story is given at more length 
in ii. 15 16: "They (the libertines) have wandered from the straight 
path, following the path of Balaam, who loved the wages of un- 
righteousness 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 (ii. 1) 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 ii. 3 and ii. 15). 
Has he any special reason for introducing the story of the ass re- 
buking 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. i. 27, Ps. viii. 2), or in which men are 
called upon to learn a lesson from animals, as Isa. i. 3, Jer. viii. 7, 
Prov. vi. 6, Job xii. 7. Possibly P. may be thinking of the scorn 
entertained for simple believers by those who called themselves 
Gnostics (see below ii. 18). 

J. ver. 12 appears with some remarkable alterations in P. ii. 13, 
oTTiXoi Kal ^^.C)^lOL en'pu4>o>i'Tes iv xals d-n'dTais auTwi' (Tuveuwyoujiivoi ufjili'. 
Here tnriXot and dirdiTais are substituted for airiXciSes and dyd-n-ais in J. 
Some editors read dydirais with B, but the addition of aurwi' suits 
much better with dirdrais. J. speaks of dydTrais ufxw»'. 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 
dydirais to dirdrais by a copyist is hardly conceivable, while the re- 
verse 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 — dydirr] ? In my edition of 2 P., p. cxcv., I have 
suggested that dydirTic was the original reading, instead of i^8o»'i]f, in 
the earlier part of this verse (i^Soi'Tif riyoujuiek'oi tt)i' iv rijiipa Tpu4>T)»') ; 
where my explanatory note shows how hard it is to make a satis- 


factory distinction between r\hovr\v and Tpu<j>iic. On the other hand 
dydiTTH' gives exactly the sense required "thinking that revelling in 
the daytime makes an dyd-irTj," as may be seen from the quotations 
from Clement given in the passage referred to {cf. too Rom. xiii. 13). 
I account for ^Sof^c by supposing that it was a marginal gloss on 
Tpu<t>Tiv. The word dirdTTj is often joined with Tpu4>yi, 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 amXdSes should have been changed to a-iriXoi. 
The former word is a daring metaphor even among the metaphors 
which accompany it in J., but quite out of place here, and P. sub- 
stitutes for it the similar sounding o-iriXos found in Eph. v. 27, of 
which the derivatives damXos and ottiXou occur 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 ii. 17, where he splits up i'e<|>£Xai 
afuSpoi OTTO &vi\i<av Trapa<|>ep6jui€»'ai into two, -irriYal di'uSpoi and 6p,ixXai 
uTTo XaiXairos cXaukofici'ai, 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 unsuited to his purpose, but inappropriately appends to his last 
metaphor, the clause in which J, describes the doom of the wander- 
ing stars, ots 6 t,6^os toC axorous TcriiprjTai. 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 ver. 6, but it loses the aptness which it has in J. ver. 13, and thus 
supplies another convincing 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 vv. 12, 13 ? 
We have still to consider the insertion in P. (ii. 13), dSiKoujACKoi fiiaQov 
dSiKias, which commences the loose series of participles ending in ii. 
15. If the participle is omitted, this phrase recalls J. ver. 11, ttj TrXdn] 
Tou BaXadp, fiiaOou ii€x6Qr]<Tav, and is repeated again in ii. 15; but dSi-'oi is difficult. Apparently P. intends his paradoxical phrase to 
correspond to J.'s ooai : the libertines are miserable, because they 
are, as they think, " robbed of (or ' robbed as ') the reward of their 
iniquity ". The following participles gave a striking and powerful 
description of the evil influence which these men exercise over 


unstable souls, o4>6a\|iou$ cx°^'''^5 |X€a-T0us jjLoixaXiSos Kai aKaTairauo-TOos 
dp,apTia9, SeXed^ocTcs ^j/uxas do-rripiKTOus {cf. y€yf.vvt]\i.iva, €is fiXwtni', ii. 12), 
KapSiaf yeyufJii'acrfAecTjv irXeove|ias Ixocres, KOfrdpas TCKt/a. Perhaps P. 
may intend this partly to take the place of J.'s fine figure kujxoto 
aypta flaXdcroTjs €iTa<j)pti^oi'Ta rds eauTwi' aioxucas. 

In vv. 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 ver. 16 (perhaps taken from the Assumption of 
Moses) J. goes on to describe the libertines as "murmuring and dis- 
contented, walking after their own lusts, whose mouth XaXei u-n-^poyKa, 
and who flatter others for the sake of advantage ". To the same 
effect P. (ii. 18) speaks of them as uttering uir^poyKa /xaTaioTTjTos, by 
which they seduce through the lusts of the flesh those who were 
just escaping from heathen error. In ii. 19-22 P. is mostly indepen- 
dent of J., but I have already noticed that eXeuOcpiaf eTrayyeXXojxci'oi 
may be an echo of J. ver. 4, x^piTa fieTaTtOccTcs eis daeXyetai'. He con- 
tinues, €1 ydp diro<|)uy6»'T6S rd fjLida/iaTa tou Koafxou ef ciriyj'ojcrci tou Kupiou 
Kttl <ruTT]pos 'ItjctoC XptCTToO, words which recall what he had said in i. 4, 
diro<j>uy6j'T6s tt]5 iv tw KoajULO) iv eiriOu/iia 4>0opds, . . . 8id ttj? eiriyj'cjacws 
. . . TOU 06OU Kttl 'Itjctou TOU Kupiou iq/iwc, and goes on to give an impressive 
warning against the dangers of backsliding, in which he borrows from 
J. ver. 3, uiroo-Tpe'iJ/ai €k ttjs Trapa8o0€i(rrjs auTois dyias crroX^s, concluding 
with the proverb of the dog and the sow returning to their foulness 
after being cleansed from it. 

In the third chapter of P. we go back again to J. The readers are 
addressed as dyainjToi in P. iii. 1 as in J. ver. 17. In both, they are 
bidden to remember the words of the Apostles, warning them against 
mockers who should come in the last days, walking after their own 
lusts. To this P. adds (iii. 1, 2) "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 i. 16, he had used the phrase eyj'' 
ufitv Tr\v TOU Kupiou r\]LQ)v Trapouaiaf, it would seem that P. must himself 
be included among "your Apostles". He further bids them "re- 
member the words which were spoken before by the holy prophets,'" 
recurring in this to what he had said in i. 19. 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. ver. 18, were 


included in P.'s reference to an earlier Epistle. J. there says, on 
eXeyoi' 6/jiik' 'Eir' ia^f^drou xpoi'ou eo-ocrai efiTraiKxai 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 separa- 
tion between iii. 2 and iii. 3 by inserting the phrase toGto irpQiTov 
yii/worKoi'T€s, which he had previously used in i. 20, not to introduce a 
particular prophecy, but to lay down how prophecy was to be under- 
stood. The reference to a former letter is therefore restricted by • 
P. to iii. 2, bidding the readers pay heed to the words of the 
prophets and the apostles. If we turn now to 1 P. i. 10-12, irepi tJs 
erwTTjpias i^€'[,r\Tr\<Tav . . . irpo <j>Ti rai oi irepl ttjs ets ujxas X'^P'^''"**^ 
■irpo<f)T]Teuaa>'Tes . . . ols cnTeKaXu<j)0T] on ou^ eaurois, u|xi»' 8e 8it|k6i'oo»' 
ouTct, d yuv a.vy]yyi\i] ufitf 8ia T(av edayyeXitr a\iiy<ii v ufids 
iri/eu)iaTi dyiw {ff- 1 P- i- 16), we shall find an exact correspond- 
ence to what is stated here. The words tui' -n-poeipTjueVuv' pTjfj.dTwt' 
(J. ver. 17, P. iii. 2) remind us of J. ver. 4, ol irdXai TrpoyeypajjiiJieVoi eis 
TouTo TO Kpifia (though no doubt the immediate reference there is to 
the prophecy of Enoch) and of P. ii. 3, ols to Kpip,a iKiraXai ouk apyei. 
In citing the prophecy, P. adds the emphatic iv epnraiyfioi/Y], which 
may be compared with i.v ttj (|)0opa airCjy Kal (j>9apricro»'Tai of ii. 12, and 
with the reiterated ao-ePeis of J. ver. 15 and icaTa xas eiriGufAias iropeu6p.efOL 
of J. vv. 16 and 18. 

In iii. 4, P., omitting J.'s somewhat obscure ver. 19, oStoi elcrii' ol 
aTToStopt^oKTes, \|/uxi.Koi, TTi'eufi.a jat) IxofTcs, goes on to specify in what 
the mockery of the ejuiiraiKTai consisted. They said that the promise 
of the coming of Christ (to which P. had borne witness in i. 16) re- 
mained unfulfilled, and that the world was not liable to the catastro- 
phic changes predicted as accompaniments of the final judgment. 
There is a little awkwardness in P.'s wording, dir' dpxris ktio-cws fol- 
lowing d<j>' ^9 cKotfjLiidTjaai', but it IS a very natural blending of two ob- 
jections. 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 iii. 5-10 : (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. Jude vv. 6, 7, P. ii. 3, 4, 
9) ; (b) 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 (ii. 5, 7), in contrast with the severer tone of J. w. 5-7. In iii. 10 

' Reading 8i' ov, for which see my edition of 2 P. 


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 re- 
ference 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. ver. 20 and P. iii- 
14, both commencing a new section with dYaTrrjTou 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 i. 5-7. His reference to the Spirit's help in prayer may be 
compared with P. i. 20 on the inspiration of the prophets. His 
phrase in ver. 21, ■irpo(r8e)(6fx,e>'oi to eXeos toG Kupiou r^iiav '|t]ctou Xpiorou 
els j^wTjc aiutvLov is taken up in the irpocrSoKoicTas of P. iii. 12 and -n-poa- 
SoKwixec of iii. 13, and again in iii. 14, while the goal cis lotrfv aiwfioi/ may 
be compared with eis rrii/ aiwi'ioi' ^avCKeiav in P. i. 11. P. inserts 
aairiXoi Kal dp.fajp,T)Toi, {cf. 1 P. i. 19) from J.'s djui(iSp,ou9 in ver, 24, and 
in contrast to his own o-iriXoi Kal fAwjioi in ii. 13, and to J.'s eamXw- 
fidvov in ver. 23. iy eip^i'T] looks back to J. ver. 2 and P. i. 2. While 
in vv. 22, 23 we have J.'s stern rule for the treatment of backsliders, 
P. gives utterance again (iii. 15) to the more hopeful view of iii. 9, 
and claims for it the inspired support of Paul. "Yet Paul's letters, 
Avise and good as they are, offer some difficulties, which have been 
misunderstood and perverted, like the rest of the Bible, ^ by the un- 
learned and unstable to their own destruction." The word o-uTrjpio 
in iii. 15 reminds us that J. had originally intended to write irepl ttjs 
Koii'Tis <r(iJTT]pias (ver. 3) and that his purpose is apparently carried 
out to a certain extent in these last verses from 20 onwards. In 
ver. 24 J. begins an Ascription partly borrowed from St. Paul, ad- 
dressed "to Him who is able to keep His people free from stumbling 
(cf. P. i. 10) and present them before His glory in exceeding joy" 
(c/. P. i. 11). P. bids his readers, "knowing these things before- 
hand (see above i. 12, iii. 2) to be on their guard, that they may not 
be led away by the error (J. ver. 11, P. ii. 18) of the wicked (P. ii. 
7, cf. J. ver. 23, cXedre iv <^6^(^), and so fall from their own steadfast- 
ness " (cf. P. i. 12, ii. 14, iii. 16). J.'s iv dyaXXidCTci soars higher 
than the lesson which P. here inculcates : it may be compared, as 
we have seen, with the irXouo-ius i-nixopy]yr]dr\cr€TaL of i. 11. P. con- 
tinues his exhortation in iii. 18, ao^di-eTe ei' x^pi-Tt Kal yk-wo-ci, for which 

^ For the justification of this rendering see explanatory notes in my edition of 

2 P. 


we may compare x<ipis TrXTjSui'OciT) in i. 2 and TaCra irXeocdl^ofTa in i. 8, 
also J. ver. 4. The Ascription in P. is much simpler than that in J., 
being addressed to our Saviour Jesus Christ, while J.'s is addressed 
jxofb) eew (rwrfjpt rnxCty 8ia 'irjcrou Xpio-ToO tou Kupiou iqp.uf. P. has 86|a 
only, while J. has the full liturgical form, So^a, ixeyaXcoaucri, Kpdros, Kai 
e^oucTia. P. has Kal vuv Kal els i^fiipai' aiojcos, while J. has irpo rrawTos 
TOO aiucos Kal vuv xai els irdj'Tas toos aiwcas, concluding with a.\i-f]v, 
which is omitted in P. by W.H. after Cod. B. C/. A. J. Wilson, 
jf. of Theol. Stud. vol. viii. 75 on Emphasis in N.T. 

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. i. 1, 
XaxoOaic TricrrLv), the foundation of the Christian life (J. w. 3, 20, 
P. i. 1, 5): both agree that its commencement lies in the divine 
call (J. ver. 1, P. i. 3, 10). The call was sealed in baptism for the 
forgiveness of sin (J. ver. 5 in connexion with 1 Cor. x. 1,2, P. i. 9), 
but we have to make our calling sure through good works (P. i. 10), to 
build ourselves up on the foundation of the faith (J. ver. 20, P. i. 5- 
7), to keep ourselves in the love of God by praying with the help of the 
Holy Spirit (J. ver. 20), looking for the mercy of our Lord Jesus Christ 
(which shall be fully revealed) in the life eternal (J. ver. 21). God our 
Saviour is able to keep us without stumbling and to present us before 
His glory unblemished in joy (J. vv. 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" iii. 14, " beware lest ye fall from your 
steadfastness, grow in grace" iii. 17, 18. So in i. 5-8 he bids his 
readers add all diligence to supply "in your faith energy, in your 
energy knowledge," etc., and goes on in ver. 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 Him 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. 3, 4). 

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 ii., and that the latter 
dwells more upon the mercy of God as shown even in his punish- 


The conclusion I have drawn from the ahove 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, Hilgen- 
feld, 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' D. 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 Dollinger, who, in his First Age of the 
Church, had maintained the priority of 2 P., wrote to Dr. Plum- 
mer in the year 1879 that he could no longer hold this opinion 
(Plummer's St. James and St. jfiide 1891, p. 400). See also Plum- 
mer's St. Jude, p. 268: "While 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 working 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 Einleitung in das N.T., ed. 3, 1906, have 
no hesitation 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 ver. 4 
ol irdXai irpoYcyP^'^KH'^''^'' ^^^ toGto to Kpijxa . . . tok fjiofof Seair^TT]!' 
dpfoufici'ot. and in vv. 17, 18 p.j'i^aOifjTe tS)v ptiftdrcji' tw»' irpo€ipr]p.iv<t}v utto 
Twf diroCTToXwi' TOO Kupiou 'qp.uv 'Irjaou Xpiorou, on ekeyov u\ilv 'Eir' i(T\dTOu 
Xpok'ou £aoi/Tai efi-iraiKTat. Kara rds eauroii' CTriOufiia; Tropcuoixcfoi, the 
former verse being regarded as an allusion to P.'s ii. 3 iv ujiit' caocrai 
\)»Eu8oSiS(iaKa\oi . . . tok aYopdaacTa auTOus Sco-itott]*' dpcou^cfoi . . . ois 
TO Kpip,a cKTTaXai ouk dpyei, the latter to P. iii. 2, 3 fivr\(Tdr\vai, rStv irpoei- 
pTjficVuc ^T]|i(iT(i>K UTTO Tuiv ayLtav 7rpo4>T]T(I>i' Kttl TTJ5 TUK aTrocrT(5X(«)K up,w»' 


iayoLTitiv tC)V ■futipdy iv ift,Taiy\i,ov'^ cp-iraiKTai KaTot Tols iSias ciridufxias auTuf 

^ I agree with Dr. Bigg that it is superfluous to consider theories which sup- 
pose 2 P. to be made up of two independent epistles. Its unity, as shown in the 
earlier part of this chapter, forces itself on the mind of any careful reader. 


(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 
or the present ; cf. P. ii. 1 cCTOfxai, irapeio-cilouo-ii', ii. 2 e^aKoXouOi^CTouaif, 
PXa<T<})T)(Jiif)0ii(r€Tai, ii. 3 ep.iropeucroi'Tat, with J. ver. 4 irapeio-eSuTjaai', ver. 
8 ^\.a.\.vo\i<j\.v, ver. 10 p\ao-4)T)|jiouCTii' and the aorists in ver. 11. 

Dealing with these objections in order, we may concede that, if 
both Epistles are genuine, we should rather have expected the borrow- 
ing 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 that 2 
P. was not written by the Apostle, the objection only amounts to 
this, that, though St. Peter himself 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 
T<£\ai in J. ver. 4 cannot refer to P., but must be understood of the 
prophecy of Enoch, quoted in J. ver. 15, in which the word aacPcis 
(which sums up the judgment in ver. 4), occurs no less than four times 
(if we include the cognate verb and abstract noun). I have also 
pointed out that J. in ver. 17 refers not to any one writer, but to the 
oral teaching of the Apostles, and that P. in iii. 2 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 re- 
gards obj. (3), the difference of tense, P. is not consistent in his use of 
the future. We have the pres. in ii. 10 rp^fjiouaif, ii. 17 eiCTic, ii. 18 
SeXedl^oucni', iii. 5 Xai'Odcci, 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 re- 
ference to him, as he does to Paul ? It might be enough to ask in 
reply, "Why, if J. borrows from P., does he make no definite acknow- 
ledgment 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 for the mention of Paul 
in 2 P. is quite distinct from the acknowledgment of a debt. The 
libertines claimed his authority in behalf of their own views (c/. J. 
ver. 4), and it was necessary for P. to protest against this. 


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 said 
all that I think need be said about them in the earlier part of this 
chapter and in the explanatory notes of my edition of 2 P. The im- 
pression 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 Epistle of ^ude, Author, Style, Authenticity , Circumstances of 
Writing. — The name Judas ('louSas) 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. xiv. 22), who is also called Judas son of James (6 'laKw^ou, Lk. 
vi. 16, Acts i. 13) and Thaddaeus (Mt. ix. 3, Mk. iii. 18, where some 
MSS. add Aeppalos). Besides these we meet with a Judas among 
the Brethren of the Lord (Mt. xiii. 55, Mk. vi. 3), Judas of Galilee 
{Acts V. 37), Judas surnamed Barsabbas (Acts xv. 22), Judas of 
Damascus (Acts ix. 11). It is therefore not surprising that the writer 
should have added a note of identification, SouXos 'Itjctou Xpiorou, 
d8eX(j)6s Se 'laKuJPou. The most famous James in the middle 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 
SouXos (06OU Ktti Kuptou) 'Itjo-oC Xpio-Tou. Hence it seems probable that 
the addition was made, not merely for the purpose of identification, 
but, like the addition of dirooroXos 8c in Tit. i. 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 en- 
deavoured 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.^ 

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. xiii. 55 ot 
aS6X(|>ol auTou 'idKOD^o; Kal 'laxrfjs Kal Ii)j.ojv Kal 'louSas, and last but one 
in Mk. vi. 3 dS6X({>6$ Sc 'laKw^ou Kai Muot] Kal 'louSa Kal Ii^ui'os ', (2) 
that the Brethren of the Lord (of course exclusive of James, who 

^ See ver. 17, where the writer appears to distinguish between the Apostles 
and himself. 


remained stationary at Jerusalem) were engaged in missionary 
Journeys like St. Paul (1 Cor. ix. 5), 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. ii. 9, Mt. x. 23, 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 warn- 
ings which he felt bound to utter under the perilous circumstances 
of the new age. His cousin Symeon, the son of his uncle Clopas, 
had succeeded to the bishopric of Jerusalem (Eus., H.E., 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 ap. Euseb., H.E., 
iii., 32, airo TouTwc Twi/ alpcTiKCJi' KaTTJYopouai Tivk<i Zufxeucos . . . ws octos 
airo AaPlS Kai XpicrTiafOu. Kai outws fJiapTupei Iriav ttv eKaroi' cikoo-ik cirl 
TpaiacoG Kataapos Kai uirariKOo 'Attikoo). 

Eusebius {H.E., iii., 19) quotes again from Hegesippus an interest- 
ing story of the grandsons of Judas, " who were seized and carried 
to Rome by order of Domitian, whose fears had been excited by the 
report he heard of them as descendants of David, and akin to the 
Messiah. When they were brought before him, he quickly ascertained 
that they were poor men, and that the kingdom they looked forward 
to was not of this world, and accordingly dismissed them as men 
of no importance, and ceased from his persecution of the Church. 
When they returned home, they received special honours, as having 
witnessed to the truth, and also as being kinsmen of the Lord. They 
lived till the time of Trajan." 

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 some re- 
semblances and differences between the Epistles of the 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 
•:oming, as the righteous Judge, they look forward, whose power still 
manifests itself in works of mercy (James i. 1, ii. 1, v. 8, 9, 14); of 
Jesus Christ, who keeps His people safe to the end, through whom 

^ More probably under 95. 


they hope for eternal life, to deny whom is the climax of impiety, in 
whom the Father is glorified for ever (Jude vv. 1, 4, 21, 25). They are 
sharers of a common salvation (Jude ver. 3), they need forgiveness of 
sin like other men (James iii. 2). 

(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 stv^le in the words "energy, vivacity, and as 
conducive to both, vividness of representation, 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. C/. Jude ver. 8, where the innovators are spoken of as 
dreamers polluting the flesh ; ver. 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 ver. 20 the faithful are bidden to build them- 
selves up on their most holy faith; in ver. 23, to save sinners, snatch- 
ing 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 refer- 
ence to the Israelites who perished in the wilderness for their unbelief 
after being saved rrom Egypt ; to the fallen angels who are reserved 
for the judgment in everlasting chains ; to Sodom and the neighbour- 
ing cities, which sinned in the same way as the angels, and now 
suffer the penalty of eternal fire (w. 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 committed the case 
to God (w. 8, 9). Cain and Balaam and Korah are cited as the 
predecessors of the present disturbers of the Church (ver. 11). Enoch 
the seventh from Adam has left us his warning against such men (vv. 1 4, 
15). "You have yourselves heard the same warning from the 
Apostles" (ver. 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 ii. 19, iii. 15, iv, 1-v. 6. For noble and weighty expression we 
may compare vv. 20, 21, u|i.6is 8e, ayaTTTjToi, eTroiKoSojo.oGi'Tes eaoTous TT] 


dywoTa-n) ujiwv ttio-tci, iv irceufAaTi, ayito irpoo-euxofAei'Oi, eauToog eV aY^irif) 

ecOU TY)pT)0-aTe, 1TpO(r8€XOp.€l'Ol TO e\609 ToG KUpiOU rHlU)V '|T]0-0U XpiCTTOU €IS 

twV aiwi'ioi' and the final doxology, with the passages which I have 
selected from St. James in p. ccxxviii. The appealing ayaTTTiToi, which 
is thrice found in St. James, is also thrice repeated in Jude. The 
warning against Respect of Persons is found in James ii. 1-9 and in 
Jude ver. 16 : that against a murmuring discontented spirit in James i. 
13, iv. 1, V.9, in Judew. 15, 16; that against the misuse of the tongue in 
James iii. 1 - 1 0, in J ude ver. 16: the charge to labour for the salvation of 
others in James v. 19, 20, in Jude w. 22, 23. 

For special details of the style of St. Jude see my larger edition, 
pp. xxvi-lxvi : one point which may be noticed here is his fondness for 
triplets. Thus in ver. 2 we find eXeos Kal eipVii'r] Kal aydivy] TrXT^Gui/fleiTj. In 

1 2 3 

ver. 4 " the men who were designed for this judgment " are described 

as aaEJScis, TT);''' toO ©eou ^^dpna (xexaTiOcVTCS ciS daeXyeiat', TOf \i6vov 

1 2 

Seo-TTOTTji' dpfoufxeKoi. In vv. 3-7 three examples of punishment are ad- 

3 _ 

duced, Israel in the wilderness, the angels who sinned, the overthrow 
of Sodom. In ver. 8 the libertines, aapxa }i.kv fjLtaivouaii/, Kupio-njxa 8e 
aQeroucriv, 8o|as Be p\aa<j)T]fAou<7i»'. [In w. 9, 10 we have two couplets ouK 
cToXfiTjaei/ — ctWol eiTrec : oaa fxec ouk oiSaortc — pXa(r<|>T)p,ou(ni', otra 8e — 
4)e6ipofTai.] In ver. 11 we return to the triplet, Cain, Balaam, Korah. 
[In vv. 12, 13 we have a quintet of metaphors, hidden rocks, rainless 
clouds, dead trees, turbid waves, falling stars. In ver. 15 again two 
couplets iroiTJ<Tai Kpio-ii' — eXe'ylai, Trepl irdi'Twi' wk j\<Ti^y]aav — S)v iKdX-ncravA 
In ver. 16 we return to the triplet iropeuo/xei'ot — XaXoCi/Tes (disguised in 
the form Kal to o-TOfxa XaXei uTrc'poyKa) — Oaup.d^oi'Tes. So in ver. 17 the 
word — the Apostles — the Lord. Ver. 18 does not admit of sub- 
division. Ver. 19 has the triplet diroSiopi'^ocTes, »j/uxiKoi, weG/ia jat) 
Ixoi'Tes. Vv. 20 and 21 have a double triplet, eiroiKoSofioui'Tes — irpoaeo- 
XO|JL6i'oi — Trpoo-8exofji.€i'oi and irceCfxa dyioi' — 0e6s — 'Itjctous XpiaTos. Ver. 
22 has the marked triplet oSs [lev — oSs 8e — 089 hi. Ver. 24 has a 
couplet, <|)oXd^ai — aTTJo-ai. Ver. 25 has a quartet 8o|a, ficyaXwauVti, 
KpuTos, iioucria, followed by the triplet irpo irai'Tos TOO aiCJvos, KOI vuu, 
Kal eis irdvTas tous aiwcas, thus closing with a septet. Compare the^ 
stress laid on the fact that Enoch was seventh from Adam, ver. 14. 

There are some traces of the triplet in St. James, as in i. 14, Ikco-tos 
Treipd^cTai utto rfjs i8ias CTriOufiias — €iTa r\ cTriGofiia tiktci djiapTiar, ■n Be 
dfA,apTia diroKUEi Qdvaroy, ver. 1 9 eo-Tw Be iras dcQpwTrog Taxus eis to dKoGaai 
|3paSu$ CIS TO XaXtjaai, PpaSus cis 6pyr\v, ii. 23 emaTCUffec 'AjSpadp. tw ©ew, 
Koi eXoyiaOv) aoTw cis SiKaioaoi'Tji', Kal 4>iXos ©eoG eKXi]0if), iii. 6, •^ yXai<To-a 
VOL. V. 15 


1^ cririXouCTa, Kal ^Xoyi^ouo-a — Kal <})XoYi!io|Ji,eVT], iv.- 8, iyyiaaTe T« 6ew — 
Ka0apiCTaT£ x^ipas — dyvio-aTc KapSias, SO iv. 9, v. 17, 18. Perhaps we 
may find a septet in the beautiful description of heavenly wisdom (iii. 
17) TrpcjTOf ixec ayt"f\, lireira e.lpr\viKr\, cirieiKi^s, cuireiOi^s, jicottj eXeous Kal 
Kapiroir a.Yaflut', aSiaKpiTos, on'uTroKpiTos. But the distinctive mark of St. 
James's style is "paronomasia " passing at times into such a climax as 
we find in i. 14, 15 quoted above and in i. 3, 4, to Sokiixioc u\iC}v ttjs 
iriffTecjs KaTcpydl^eTai VTTOii.ovr\v, t] 8c u7rop,o^'T] cpyoc reXcioi' cxeTW, i^a ^re 
Te'Xeioi. See pp. ccxxii f. of my edition. 

Another characteristic which may be noted is the love of forcible 
antithesis as in J. ver. 10, oaa ^l€v ouk ol'Saati' pXaa4)i]|j.ouo-ii', oaa 8e <t>uariKa)9 
ws Ta aXoya ^wa eirioracTai, Iv tootois <|)0eipoi'TOi. As regards vocabulary, 
the most striking resemblance is the occurrence of «j/oxik6s as opposed 
to •n'i'eufji,anK<5s, of which the earliest biblical example is in James iii. 
15, but this had been adopted by Paul (1 Cor. ii. 10 foil.) before it 
was made use of by Jude. 

B. (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 Intro- 
duction 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 o-wrrip and orw-njpia (w. 3 and 25) : in w. 20, 21 he 
brings together the three Persons of the Trinity ; he addresses those 
to whom he writes in Pauline language as kXtjtoi (ver. 1) and fiyioi 
(ver. 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" (vv. 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 " (ver. 4). Many of the features which he dis- 
tinguishes 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. 2 of 
my Introduction to his Epistle ; but my notes on i. 8 (Siij/uxos) and 
iv. 8, 9 ayvi(TaT€ KapSias, 8t«j/uxoi- raXanrupiiaaTe, suggest a connexion 
with an apocryphal writing quoted in Clem. Rom. i. 23 i^ ypa<^y] au-n], 
oTTCTu Xe'yei TaXatTTwpoi d<nv ol 8i>uxoi ^ and identified by Lightfoot and 
Spitta with Eldad and Modad (on which see Herm., Vis., ii., 3), by 
Hilgenfeld with the Assumption of Moses. The phrase in iv. 14, 
ciT|ils Y<ip e<^« "^pos oXiyoi' <|)ai»'oncVTj, has been traced by some to 
another apocryphal quotation found in Clem. i. 17 eyw S^ ei|xi axfils 
OTTO Ku9pas, which Hilgenfeld also supposes to be taken from the 
Assumption of Moses. The phrase koo-jxos aSiKiag in James iii. 6 is 
found in Enoch xlviii. 7. The Testaments of the Patriarchs, which 
also contain quotations from Enoch (such as Sim. 5 ^wpaKo iv x^pa- 
Krqpi Ypa<j>T]9 'Ev'cjx, Levi 10 jSi^Xos 'Eewx toG Sikoiou, ib. 14, iyvuy diro 
Ypa<|>ris 'Evwx oti cm TcXei aae^-qveTc, ib. 16, ^uda 18, Benj. 9, Zab. 3, 
Nepht. 4. iv YP'*4>i) O'Y^*? 'Ei'wx on . . . iroii]o-eT€ Kara rcavav avofiiav 
XoSdjxwi'), furnish several parallels quoted in my note on James iv. 7 
di'Ti(rTTjT6 Tw SiapoXo) Kttl <|)eo'|eTai a(|»* u/awv. The words which im- 
mediately precede {iyylaare tw 0€w koI cyyio"" »iuv) are not unlike 
another quotation which occurs in Herm. Vis. ii. 3, cyyus ©eos tois 
eTri<rrpe<j>o|jieVoi5, ws yeypaiTTai iv tu 'EXScit Kal MuSdr tois irpo(f>r]TeuCTao-ii' 
iv TQ ipr\ii.(a tw Xaw. James has also been credited with a knowledge 
of the Sibylline writings on the ground of the phrase loO 6a»'aTY]<^opoo 
which occurs in iii. 8 and also in Sib. Prooem. 71. 

ci<ri 0€ol fxepoTTWi' 8T)Xi]Top6s ^ ■< ouTOt > d^ouXuK, 
TWJ' 8t) KttK OTOfiaTOs x^^Toi 0a>'aTT)^6pos lOS- 

But if there is borrowing, it is just as likely to be on the other 
side. The strange expression Tpoxos -fcviareoxs in iii. 6 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 metem- 

(3) Another difference which strikes one on reading the twq 
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 

^ The quotation, as given more fully in Clem. Rom. ii. n, contains the some- 
what rare word dKaraa-Tao-fa, which is also used by James iii. i6. 
^ MS. SoXoi]Topes. Geffcken reads 8<5Xcp ■^ytiTtjpes. 


than edifying, with the exception of the beginning and end (vv. 1, 2 
and 20-25). This is no doubt to be explained by what is stated of 
the purport of the letter in ver. 3. It was called out by a sudden 
emergency, to guard against an immediate pressing danger, and was 
substituted for a treatise irepl ttjs Kon'fjs o-u-nipias which Jude had 
hoped to send (ver. 3), and which would probably have been more in 
the tone and spirit of w. 20 f. 

The Epistle of Jude was recognised 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 (De Doctr. 
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 reicitur. 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 recognised by most, we class the Epistle 
circulated under the name of James and that of Jude." Cyril ot 
Jerusalem (d. 386 a.d.) acknowledged both Jude and 2 P. In Asia 
Minor both Jude and 2 P. were recognised as canonical by Gregory 
Naz. (d. c. 391). In Alexandria Didymus (d. 394) wrote comments 
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 
€Ypa\|;ef eirioroXi^i', okiyfoa-nypv fiec, TreTvXr^pwjxei'Tji' 8e tSiv t^% oupavi'ou 
XcipiTos Ippm^iviiiv Xoycoi'. In the same treatise (xvii. 30) he quotes Jude 
6, adding words which signify that it was not universally received, et 
8e Kttl rr\v 'louSa irpoo-oiTo tis iTtiaro\r\v. Clement of Alexandria com- 
mented on Jude in his Hypotyposes (Eus. H.E. vi. 14) — the comment 
is still extant in the Latin translation — and quotes him by name [Paed. 
iii. 44, 45) with commendation, SiSao-KaXiKcixaTa eKTiOerai ras ciKoms twj' 
Kpivo\i.ivijiv. He quotes him again S/z-ow. 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 (c. 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 ver. 6, dyy^o"? tous p.T) TtipTJo-ai'Tas TT)c eauTwi' apxil»'. (Of the 
angels some) lixeimi' c<|)' ols aurous iivoiii](Tev Kal 8i^Ta|ei' 6 Oeos, ol 8c 
ivu^piaav Kal tt] ttjs ouaias uTTOordtCTei Kal ttj Apxfj) ^^^ 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 in Jude 2 eXeos koI 
ciprjcT) Kal dydirT] irXT]6ui'6eiTj is found in Mart. Polyc. Inscr. and Polyc. 
ad Phil. 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 Didache ii. 7, oo p.iaT)acis irdrra akOpwiroi', dXXd ous \i.f-v eXeyleis, irepl 
8e uiv irpoo-eu'lr], 089 8e dyairiio-cis, cf. Jude 22. Jude's epistle was 
included in the Old Latin Version, but not in the Peshitto. 

The most important passage in Jude bearing upon the circum- 
stances of its composition is ver. 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 that it was 
addressed to the Syrian churches) on IXcyoi' \>]uv 'Eir' coxdrou xpoi'ou 
€(Toi'Tai e|xiratKTat, the latter words showing that these communications 
of the Apostles had now ceased, either by their death or by their re- 
moval from Jerusalem. Jude recognises 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 ver. 3, irapaKaXdii' 
cTraywcij^eCTOai ttj aira^ irapa8o96io-if) roig dytois iriorei, as contrasted with 
such passages as Luke iv. 21 cn^jiepoi/ TreirXTJpwTai •q ypa<j)ii aurr], though 
we must not forget that the idea of a Christian tradition is familiar 
to St. Paul, and that there are other examples in the N.T. of the 
objective use of irtoris. 

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 
(ver. 5) ; but this difficulty is lessened if we suppose the date of the 
Epistle to be nearer 80 than 70. 


Use of Apocryphal Books by jfude. — Clement of Alexandria in 
his Adumbrationes (Dind. vol. iii. p. 483), after quoting Jude 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 ver. 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 recognised. The latest editor, R. H. Charles, 
who is my authority for what follows, divides it into five sections and 
recognises 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 import- 
ant influence on Jewish and Christian literature during the centuries 
which followed being used by the author of the Assumption of 
Moses (written about the Christian era), also by the writers of the 
Book of jubilees, the Apocalypse of Baruch, the Fourth 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 ; 
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 Epistle of Barnabas, is referred to, though 
not named, in Justin and Athenagoras, is cited by Irenseus, iv. 16. 2 : 
" Enoch . . . cum esset homo, legatione ad angelos fungebatur et trans- 
latus est et conservatur usque nunc testis judicii Dei, quoniam angeli 

^On which see Schurer, Hist, of Jewish People, vol. iii. pp. 54-73. 


quidem deciderunt in terram in judicium " (En. xiv. 7). 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 in 
the Deluge. He considers, however, that it should be received, be- 
cause of its witness to Christ, and because it has the testimony of the 
Apostle Jude. It is twice quoted in Clement's Eel. Proph. (Dind. iii. 
pp. 456, 474) as well as in Strom, iii. 9. Origen speaks doubtfully 
of the authority of Enoch : cf. C. Celsum, v. 54, Iv rais cKKXtjatais 06 
irdi'u <|>£peTai ws ©em to. i-nv>/^ypa\i\kivo. toO 'Ekwx PtPJ^ioi, and In jfohannem, 
vi. 25, d)s iv Tw 'Ei'wx y^YP'*''""***' " ''"H* 4'i^°'' ■n"apa8exeor9ai ws ayioi' to 
PipXioK, also In Num. Hom. xxviii. 2, De Princ. i. 3. 3. Hilary (Comm. 
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 apocryphal book as an authority {De Vir. III. iv), "quia de 
libro Enoch, qui apocryphus est, in ea assumit testimonia, a plerisque 
reicitur ". Cf. also Comm. in Ps. cxxxii. 3 and Comm. in Titum, i. 
12. Augustine {Civ. Dei, xv 23. 4) and Chrysostom {Horn, 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 ({>0opo-iroici Kai Ttjs dXtjOcias iy^po,. 

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 first cen- 
tury A.D. Of this only a few fragments have been preserved. The 
Greek version was translated into Latin not later than the fifth cen- 
tury" (pp. xiii., xiv.). "The book preserved in the incomplete 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 ver. 9 ^ is derived from the 

Cf. Schurer, pp. 73-83. 

''See note on this, and add to the illustrative passages there quoted a scholium 

printed for the first time in James' Test, of Abraham, p. 18: 6 Sid^oXos dvreixev 

Oe'Xcov airaTTJtrat, Xcywv 8ti 'Eftdv Io-tiv to o-w|ia, is ttjs vXt)S Seo-ird^uv • Kai 

TjKovtrev to 'EiriTinijo-ai <rou Kvpio;, tovt«o-tiv 6 Kvpio; 6 •ito.vrmv t«v irvevp.aTwv 


Assumption, J tide 16 from the Testament (p. Ixii.). On the latter 
Charles compares ouroi elai yoyyvarai, fi£|jiv|(ip,oipoi, Kal to crTojuia auTaif 
XaXei uirepoyKa, Gaufxaj^oi'Tcs TrpocruTra u<{>£Xias X^P'^*' with Ass. M. vii. 7, 
quaerulosi, vii. 9, et manus eorum et mentes immunda tractantes et 
OS eorum loquetur ingentia, v. 5, erunt illis temporihus miranfes 
personas . . . et accipientes mtmera (MS. acceptiones munerum). He 
identifies the efiiratKrai of Jude 18 with the homines pestilentiosl 
of Ass. M. vii. 3, and calls attention to the frequent recurrence of the 
word aaePeis in the former (vv. 4, 15, 18) and impii in the latter: see 
vi. 1, facient facientes impietatem, vii. 3, pestilentiosi et impii, ih. 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, tjXios Kal o-eXr^i'Y) Kal darepes ouk dXXoioucrt 
TTjc Ta^if auTWf . . . eOvr] TrXacrjOecTa Kai d<j>ei'Ta Kupioc TjXXoiuCTai' rdlir 
aoTwc . . . c^aKoXouGi^o-ai'Tes irfeofiacri irXdi'Tjs. Yfjieis fit] outcj; . . . iVa 
p,T] yeVYjaGc ws Z68op,a, tJtis Ik'^^XXalei' rd^iv ^6ae<j)s auTTJs- 'Ofioiws Kal 
'Eypi^Yopes efr]XXa|a»' rd^iv <J)U(T€ws auTwc, oSs Kan^pdaaTo Kupios cm tou 
KaTaKXu(T|i,ou, Test. Aser 7, p,T) ytveaOe ws loSojia tJtis r]yv6y](Te tous dyyeXous 
Kupiou Kai dircSXcTo lus aiwi'os. There seems to be more than a casual 
coincidence between these passages and Jude 6, 7 and 13, dyye'Xous 
TOUS H^^ TTjpi^crai'Tas Tr]v cauTwv dp^i^c . . . ws ZoSofia . . . Toi' o|jioioK 
TpoTTOi' eKTropKeucraCTai. Kal direXGoucrai otncro) aapKos cTe'pas irpoKeii'Tai SetyfAa 
TTupog aiwfiou . . . daTe'pes irXai'fJTai. 

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 contrary the prejudice 
against the Apocrypha and its " blasphemous fables " (Chrys. Hom. 
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 nonnuUa divina Enoch ilium septimum ab 

8£0-7r6£(i>v • aXXoi 8e, Sri PovXdjJievos 6 0e6s Seijai on (xera ttiv cvOevSe dTaX\aYi]v, 
Tttis -^lACTepais \|;vxais dvOio-Tajjievoi <^'^<rav^ 8aip,ove9 Tropcvojxcvais ttjv eiri to, 
avo) iropetav, tovto ovv (rvv€\iitp\]a'fv opacrOai eiri ttjs M<oo-€&)S Ta<}>fjs • €pXa(r<})'>]fi.ei 
yap Kai 6 SidPoXos Kara Muo'ews, <f>0VEa tovtov KaXuv Sia to 'TraTd^ai tov AlyvTr- 
Tiov 6 MixaT|X 6 apxayyeXos, p.T) IveyKuv ttjv aviToO pXaa-<(>r]piav, cipijKcv avToi 
0Ti*EiTiTiiAT]0"ai o-oi Kvpios 6 0eiis, SidpoXe. eXeye Se Kal tovto, oti Ixj/cvaaTo 6 Qtbi 
jlcayayuv tov M<i)(rf)V «vOa ipoctv oxitov p,T) clcreXOsiv. 
1 An edition has lately been brought out by Charles. 


Adam negare 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 inspired writer, in- 
dependently of the book from which he is supposed to quote, or that 
they were uttered by immediate inspiration without any human as- 
sistance, 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 irpoYeYP^FF^^'''°'' implying that he refers to a 
written prophecy. None of the early Fathers find a difficulty in 
supposing him to refer to a book which was not included in the Canon. 
Jews of that time were accustomed to accept rabbinical explanations 
or additions to Scripture as having authority. Thus St. Paul accepts 
the story of the Rock which followed the Israelites in their wanderings 
(1 Cor. X. 4), gives the names of the magicians who withstood Moses 
before Pharaoh (2 Tim. iii. 8), recognises the instrumentality of angels 
in the giving of the Law (Gal. iii. 19, cf. Heb. ii. 2, Acts vii. 53). So, 
too, Stephen speaks of Moses as learned in all the wisdom of the 
Egyptians (Acts vii. 2) ; the author of the epistle to the Hebrews (xi. 
37) alludes to the tradition as to the death of Isaiah (see Charles' 
Ascension of Isaiah, pp. xlv. foil.), and James (v. 17) limits the drought 
predicted by Elijah to 3^ years. 


The Story of the Fallen Angels. — St. Jude (vv. 5-8) introduces a& 
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 fleshy lusts, and are now kept in chains under darkness till 
the day of judgment ; (3) the people of Sodom, who inhabited a land 
like the garden of the Lord (Gen. xiii. 10), who were reecued from 
Chedorlaomer by Abraham (Gen. xiv. 16, 17), and yet sinned after the 
fashion of the angels, and are now a warning to all, sufTering the 
punishment of eternal fire. A similar account is given in 2 Pet. ii.4-9 
where it is said (1) that God spared not the angels who sinned, but. 
hurled them into Tartarus, to be detained there in chains (or 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. vi, 1-4: "It came to pass, when men began to 
multiply on the face of the ground and daughters were born 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.). eyeVero i^v-iKa r^plaiTO ot a^Spanroi iroWoi yiveaQai eirl 
TT^s yf\s Kal GuyaTepes iyevvr]Qy](jav auTOts, 18okt€s 8e ot ayyeXoi tou 0€oG 
Tas Ouyarepas T(t>v dv'OpwTrajv on KaXai elviv eXaPok cauTois yui/aiKas diro 
TraCTciv S)v e^eXe'larro . . . oi Se ytyarres riaav eiri tt]s yt)s iv Tai$ i^ficpais 
cKcivais, Kal \i€T cKEii'o, us OlV ciffeTTopeuoi'To ot utol Tou 0eou irpos rds 
6uyaTe'pas tS)V dfOpwirwi' Kal iyevviadav eauxois, cKeicoi rjaai/ ot ytyarres ot. 
dir' aiwcos, ot d^'6paJ^rol ot 6vo^).aa^oi (LXX). That the version dyyeXoi- 


gives the true force of the original is evident from the other passages 
in which the phrase "sons of God" occurs, Job i. 6, H. 1, xxxviii. 7, 
Dan. iii. 25, 28, Ps. xxix. 1, Ixxxix. 6. It has been suggested that the 
phrase fier ckcIko may be a marginal note having reference to Num. 
xiii. 33, 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<i implies 
not only superhuman size, but also superhuman insolence and impiety. 
According to Greek mythology 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. vi. is a fragment unconnected 
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 prehistoric 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 the 
intercourse between the angels and the daughters of men, and that 
they were destroyed in the Flood. 

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, 'Eyp^yopot as 
they are called in the Greek versions of Dan. iv. 13 by Aquila and 
Symmachus, conspired together under the leadership of Semjaza (else- 
where called Azazel, as in Enoch, chapters viii. and ix.) and descended 
on Mount Hermon in the days of Jared, father of Enoch (vi.). There 
they took to themselves human wives whom they instructed in magic 
and various arts, and begot giants, who afterwards begot the Nephilim :' 
cf. viii., 01 Be Ytyarrcs iTiKvucay NacJyrjXeip, . . . p.eTa §€ TaCra T]p|arro 
01 Yiyarres KaTcaGieiK ras adpKas Tois avQpunruv (like Polyphemus). Com- 
plaint 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 (x. 9) : 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 chap, xix., 
however, the demons are represented as existing before the fall of the 

The prevailing demonology of the Book of Enoch is thus summed 
up by Dr. Charles (Enoch, p. 52). The angelic watchers who fell 
from lusting after the daughters of men have been imprisoned in 
darkness from 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 judg- 
ment. 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. Ir 
portions however of the Book of Enoch there is no mention of f. 
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 
xviii. 3, "These are the Grigori, who with their prince Satanail re- 
jected the holy Lord, and in consequence of these things they are 
kept in great darkness''. 

In chap. liv. 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. xii. 9, nal ipK-qQri 6 SpdiKwj' 6 
jxeyas, 6 o<f>is 6 dpxalos, o'os Aid^oXo; Kal 6 Xaravas, 6 irXacuv Ti]v 
oiKoufieVifji' oXt]»' — €J3Xi]0T] ci5 Tr\v y^''^ f^^*- oi ayyeXoi auTou |j.ct' aoTou 
ePXriOtjaac ; or else was supposed to have made use of the Serpent 
as his instrument, as in the Assumption of Moses quoted by Orig. 
De Princip. iii. 2. 1 (Lomm. vol. xxi. p. 303) : " In Genesi serpens 
Evam seduxisse describitur, de quo in Asc. Mosis (cujus libelli meminit 
-apostolus Judas) Michael Archangelus cum diabolo disputans de cor- 

J See his note on pp. 36, 37. 


pore Mosis ait a diabolo inspiratum serpentem 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. Beside the attempt to harmonise the 
two Fall-stories by making Satan the cause of both, an attempt was 
made to arrive at the same result by ascribing to Satan or the 
Serpent the same motive which led to the fall of the angels. In 
Wisdom ii. 24 we read " By the envy of the devil death entered into 
the world". This envy is explained in rabbinical writings sometimes 
as occasioned by the dignity of Adam and his lordship over the 
creation, but more frequently by Satan's desire for Eve : ^ cf. 4 Mace, 
xviii. 8, ouSe e\up,i^caTo fiou toI dyca tt]S iTap9e>'ias Xuixewc diraTr); o<J)is. 
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. xiv. 13). 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. xiv.) 
and what appears to be an account of the punishment of guardian 
angels for their neglect of the nations committed to their charge 
(ch. xxiv. 21 f.), " 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, 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 recognise any con- 

' Cf. Tennant, The Fall and Original Sin, pp. 245, 246. 

^ See Tennant, pp. 152 foil. ; Thackeray, St. Paul and Jewish Thought, pp. 50 
foil. ; Edersheim, Life and Times of Jesus, 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 Liiith. 

^ See Tennant, pp. 199, 201, 206. 


nection between the Fallen Angels and Satan. The former arc 
suffering imprisonment in darkness till the final judgment : the latter 
was apparently able to confront the archangel on equal terms, when 
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 i. 6 and Zech. iii. 1, 2, and in the N.T. 
as in James iv. 7, 1 P. v. 8, Eph. 6, 11, 12 (we have to stand against 
the wiles of the devil, . . . our warfare is not against flesh and blood, 
but) irpos Tas dpxtisj irpos ras e|ouorias, irpos roils Koa|xoKp(iTOpas toG 
o-KOTOus Tou aiucos TouTOu, TTpos Toi TTk'eufji.aTiKa TT]S iroi'r]pias iv TOis eiroupa- 
yiois, see Lightfoot on Col. ii. 15. In 2 Cor. iv. 4 Satan is spoken 
of as the god, in John xii. 31 and xvi. 11 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. iv. 3). 

The above account of the Fall of the Angels was that usually ac- 
cepted, with slight variations, both among Jews and Christians till 
towards the close of the fourth century a.d. 

Julius Africanus is said to be the only one of the ante-Nicene 
Fathers who enunciated the view which afterwards 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, Rel. Sacr. 
ii. p. 241, where he also gives the alternative explanation d 8e cir' dyYc^wv' 
I'ooiTO TouTo, Tous TTepi fiaycias Kal yoTjrcias . . . eoxoXaKoras (jucievai xp^ 
Thiv p.ercupu))' rals Y"''**^^^^ "^^^ yvwaiv SeSuKccai. Eusebius {Pr. Ev. v. 4, 
11, 12) still keeps to the old view and compares 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 disperderet 
homines, quod in exordio rerum fecerat, misit angelos ad tutelam 
cultumque generis humani . . . Itaque illos cum hominibus com- 
morantes dominator ille terrae fallacissimus consuetudine ipsa paul- 
latim ad vitia pellexit et mulierum congressibus inquinavit ... sic eos 
diabolus ex angelis Dei suos fecit satellites," etc. So Sulpicius Severus 
{Chron. i. 2) : " Angeli quibus caelum sedes erat, speciosarum forma 
virginum capti . . . naturae suae originisque degeneres . . . matri- 
moniis se mortalibus miscuerunt." Julian, like Celsus, used this belief 
as a ground for attacking Christianity. Cyril of Alexandria, in his 
reply (ix. p. 296) repudiates the belief as altogether unworthy, and 
injurious to morality, since men plead the angels' sin as excuse for 
their own, and adopts the interpretation of " sons of God " previously 

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 Christ. Biog. i. 36 foil. 


given by Afrlcanus. Chrysostom deals at length with the subject in 
his 22nd homily on Genesis. He calls the old interpretation blas- 
phemous, and holds that it is precluded by the words of Christ, that 
" in the 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 
nullo modo sic labi potuisse crediderim, nee de his dixisse Apostolum 
Petrum . . . sed potius de illis qui primum apostatantes a Deo cum 
diabolo principe suo ceciderunt," unless we are rather to understand 
this of the children 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 sub- 
jective and arbitrary to be of any value in getting rid of moral diffi- 
culties. 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 Dispensation.^ 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. iii. 22, and in xi. 6, 7, we feel to be in- 
consistent with any true idea of the power and wisdom and love of 
God, and only suitable to a very low state of human development. 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 
. investigations 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 con- 
stains much which is unhistoric, though full of moral and spiritual 
^ Cf. Matt. V. 21-48, xi.x. 8 ; Luke ix. 54-56. 


teaching. The pre-Abrahamic narrative shows many resemblances 
to 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 polytheism, and to make them at once the founda- 
tion and the explanation of the long history that is to follow." Of 
the particular 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 ".^ 

^Tennant, 20, 21, 41. 

^ For further information on this subject see Suicer's Thesaurus under ayye\o<s, 
and 'E^priYopos, Hastmg's D. of B. under " Angel," " Demon," " Fall," " Flood " ; 
Encycl. of B. Lit. under " Angel," " Demon," " Deluge," " Nephilim," " Satan " ; 
Maitland's Eruvin (Essays iv.-vi.), where the literal interpretation is defended; 
Hagenbach, Hist. Doctr. § 52 and § 132. 


Notes on the Text of the Epistle of Jude. — The Epistle of Jude is 

contained in the uncials i^ABCKLP. It is omitted in the Peshitto, 
but included in the later Syriac versions,^ the Philoxenian and Hark- 
leian, here distinguished as syr^ and syr'*. In citing the Egyptian 
versions I have 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. In discussing the readings I 
start with that of WH. 

If we may judge from the number of "primitive errors" suspected 
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. I notice below some passages where the text 
presents special difficulties. 

Ver. 5. uTTOfj.i'TJo'ai 8e ujjias |3ou\ofxai, eiSoras aira^ irdi'Ta, on Kupiog 
Xaoi/ €K yfjs AiyuiTTou acSaas to Seurepov tous [at) TTio-Teuaai/Tas dircuXeaer. 
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 ac- 
cordance with more recent collations. 

€i8oTas add. "y3y.o.% J^^KL. 31 syrr., om. ABC^ 13 Vulg. Boh. Sah. Arm.," and 
so Tisch. 

In point of fact however B reads eiSoras ufjias, as any one may 
convince himself by looking at Cozza-Luzi's photographic reproduc- ' 
tion. 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 

^See Dr. Gwynn's LaU^ Syriac Versions, published in 1909, 
VOL. V. 16 


in favour of this latter reading. The repeated u/ias emphasises the 
contrast between the readers ("to remind you, you who know it 
already") and the libertines previously spoken of. The repetition 
here may be compared with the repeated \i\ of v. 3. 

airo| ante iravra ABCL. 13. 31. Vulg, Ante on K. Ante Xaov . (Syrr.) Arm. 
Ante kKyr\<i Aiy. Clem. 280 (and 997) Did. Cassiod. on Kvpios cwcras tov Xaov 
CK YTJs AI7. aTTal Sab., 8n aira| Kvpios o-cio-as Xaov atiToii Boh. Om. oiroj Lucif. 
28. [aira| is so placed in Syrr. as to be connected with auo-as "when he had once 
saved them," G.] 

iravra ABCb^ 13 Vulg. Syr>> . Boh, Arm. Aeth. Lucif. [In the App. to 
WH (Sel. Readings, p. 106) it is suggested that this may be a primitive error for 
irdvras {cf. I John ii. 20) found in Syr i], tovto 31 KL. Sah. 

8ti] add. 6 C.3 KL. 31. Arm. Clem. 280. Om. ABt^ 13. 

Kvpios] fc^CKL. Syri*. Gcos C^ Tol. Syr? Arm. Clem. Lucif. Mrjo-ovs 
AB 13 Vulg. Boh. Sah. Aeth. [In App. to WH. {Sel. Readings, p. 106) it is 
suggested that there may have been some primitive error, "apparently OTIJ^ 
(on Kvpios), and OTIIC (on' Itjo-ovs) for OTIO (on 6) ".] 

Yrjs] om. SyrP , 

It appears to me that the true reading of the passage is uiroiivrjo-ai 
Be ufids PouXofiai, ciSoras u/icls irdrra, on Kupios airal Xaoi' ck y^s AlyuTrrou 
acjaas to SeuTepoc [tous] |xt) irioreuaaiTas diroSXeo-ei/. I see no difficulty 
in irdi/Ta, which gives a reason for the use of the word uTrofArTJaai, " I 
need only remind you, because you already know all that I have 
to say". It was easy for the second ufxas to be omitted as un- 
necessary, and then the word aira| might be inserted in its place 
partly for rhythmical reasons ; but it is really unmeaning after eiSoras : 
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 ver. 3. On the other hand, aira| is very appropriate 
if taken with Xaoc o-ojaas (a people was saved out of Egypt once for 
all), and it prepares the way for t6 Seuxepoi'. For the reading Trdi'Tas 
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 Assumption of Moses, to which allusion is made in what fol- 
lows ? It is surely much more to the point for the writer to say, 
as he does again below (ver. 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 Ku'pios, that the original was 
oTi 6 (Xaoi/ aoSffas), I think the fact of the variants is better explained 
by Spitta, who considers that the abbreviations ic, ice, ec might 
easily be confused, if the first letter was faintly written, and that 

^ " This is an error : the two best MSS. oip represent iravTo." G. 


the mention of t6i' fi.6vov Sccrn-oTtn' xal Ku'pioc *l. X. in the preceding 
verse would naturally lead a later copyist to prefer ic, a supposition 
which is confirmed by Cramer's Catena, p. 158, cipTjrai yap irpd toutwi' 
ircpl auTou, ws cit) dXriGifos 0e6s oCtos 6 ^ocos Scctttottjs 6 Kupiog I. X., 6 
dmyaYwt' toc \abv e| AiYu'irrou 8iA Moxriots- Spitta himself however 
holds that 0? is the true reading, as it agrees with the corresponding 
passage in 2 Peter ii. 4, 6 ©eos dyyeXwi' dfxapTT] o-df twv ouk e<|>eio-aTO, 
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. X. 4, 9, 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 xlix. 10, says that it does not refer to Judah, but to Jesus, 
Toc Kttl Toiis irarepas uficoi' e| AiyuTTToo c^ayayofxa, and this use of the 
name was confirmed by the idea that the son of Nun was a per- 
sonification of Christ (see Justin, Dial. 75; Clem. Al. 183; Didymus, 
De Trin. 1. 19, 'louSas KaGoXiKws ypd<j>ei, aira^ ydp Kupios 'li(]aous Xaoi' ii, 
-AiyuTTTou CTwcras k.t.X. ; Jerome, C. ^ov. 1. 12; Lact. Inst. 4. 17, 
"Christi figuram gerebat ille Jesus, qui cum primum Auses vocaretur, 
Moyses futura praesentiens jussit eum Jesum vocari"). In the ex- 
planatory note I have stated my reasons for considering that the 
article before (at) did not belong to the original text. 

Ver. 12. oiJTOi ilcriv [ol] if rats dydirats u\i.(t)V ainXdSes (Tuv€V()i)(ou^L€vol 
d<j>dP(us lauToiis iroijiaiVoi'Tes. The article here is omitted by i«^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 ver. 5 above. There is not only the 
difficulty of construction (ol . . . <nriXd86s\ but the very bold assump- 
tion that the signification of airiXaSes will be at once apparent. If we 
omit the article, d(j>6Pws should be attached to o-uceuwx. as by Ti. In 
syrr. it is joined with Troiixaicoia-cs. 

Ver. 19. ouToi eioriv ol diroSiopil^orres, »|»uxtKOi iri'eup.a fiTj l^ot'Tes. 

diroSiopi^ovTES add. eavrovs C vulg. syrr. Om. i<iABKL 13, etc. 

Schott, B. Weiss, and Huther-KUhl suppose the words 4»uxtKol 
irceufia |xt] Ixorres to be spoken by, or at least to express the feeling of 
ol d-iroSiopitoi'Tcs : " welche Unterscheidungen machen, sc. zwischen 
Psychikern und Pneumatikern, wobei dann der Verfasser diese Un- 
terscheidungen 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, ot tA oxicfJ-aTa iroioGrres ; for one cause 
of the danger vi^hich threatens the Church is that the innovators do 
not separate themselves openly, but steal in unobserved (irapeio-eSuTqaa*', 
ver. 4), and take part in the love-feasts of the faithful, in which they 
are like sunken rocks (ver. 12) ; and, secondly, it is by no means cer- 
tain that the word diroSiopi^o* could bear this sense. d4)opij^(i) is used 
in Luke vi. 22 of excommunication 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 possibility of such a harsh construction as to 
put vJ/uxiKoi in inverted commas, as the utterance of the innovators 
(and should we not then have expected the contrast v|/uxikoi, iri'eufia- 
TiKoi ?), still we cannot 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 diroSiopi^oi'Tes : — 


\{/uxiKoi iri'eOfJia fJiTj exok'TCS. 

The opposition of v(»oxiKoi to irceufxaTiKoi 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 ad- 
herents as pneumatici from the psychici who composed the Church. 
These were also technical terms with the Naassenes and Heracleon 
(see my notes on James iii. 15), and were probably borrowed by the 
early heretics from St. Paul, who uses them to distinguish the natural 
from the heavenly body (1 Cor. xv. 44), and also to express the pre- 
sence or absence of spiritual insight (1 Cor. ii. 14 f.) «|/uxik6s acOpwiros 
ou Se'xeTai rd tou irv'eufiaTOS tou @eou, (Jicopia ydp auTw eoriK . . . 6 Se 
-rrceufiaTiKos draKpiKei irdi'Ta. 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 (ver. 4 rr\v tou ©eoo x^^P^^a fieTariGecTes cis 
daeXyeiaf), professing a knowledge of the pdQrj tou ©eoG (1 Cor. ii. 10), 
though it was really a knowledge only of Td pdGea toC laTavd (Apoc. ii. 
24), and claiming to be the true SuvaToi and irceuixaTiKoi, 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) Kal ous \t.kv iUyxere 
SiaKpifOfJieVous, ous Sc ctw^ctc Ik irupos dpTrd^orres» ous St eXedTe iv <J>6Pw, 
fiiaourres Kal toj* diro t^s aapKos eairiXwfi^coj' xitwj'o. (Text of WH. and 


B. Weiss) Kal ous [xkv eXeaTC SiaKpicoixcvous CTOj^ere eK irupos apird^ofTes, 
ous Se eXedre iv <^6^(jf fiio-oui'Tes Kac toi' diro Tr]s crapKos e(rn'i\a)|jieVok' )(iTwva. 
In App. to WH. it is added, " Some primitive error probable : perhaps 
the first eXeare an interpolation" {Sel. Readings, p. 107). 

22 e\4yx£T6 AC 13. Vulg. Boh. Arm. Aeth. (Eph. Theophyl. Oec. Comm. Cassiod.), 
eXeare ^.^BC^ Syrh. |\€€it€ KLP (Theophyl. Oec. txt.), Ik irvpos apTrd^cre 
(hie) Syrp. Clem. 773. 

8i,aKpivop.€vovs ABCb^. 13. Vulg. Syrr. Boh. Arm. Clem. 773, 8iaKpi,vdp.€vot 

KLP +. 
23. ovs 8J (ist) t^ACKLP 13 Vulg. Syrh. Boh. Arm. Om. B., 8J SyrP. Clem 
<T(ot,iTi js^ABC 13 Vulg. Boh. Arm. Aeth., ev ^6^(f o-w^eTe KLP + , eXeelre 

Clem. 773 (quoted below), eXearc Iv ^6^<a Syrp. U irupos b^ABCKLP 

13 Arm., CK Tov ir. Boh. Otn. crti^cre Ik irvpos apird^ovTes SyrP. 
apird^ovxes ovs 8e cXcdre ev <^6^u AB^^ 13. Vulg., Arm., om. apirdj^ovTES Boh., 

apTrd£ovT£S ev 4>dP(>> C. Syrh, apird^ovT£S KLP + . 

Tischendorf makes the matter clearer by giving the consecutive text 
of versions and quotations as follovt's : Vulg. Et hos quidem arguite 
judicatos, illos vero salvate de igne rapientes, aliis autem miseremini 
in timore. Ar*. Et quosdam corripite super peccatis eormn, et quor- 
undam miseremini cum fuerint victi, et quosdam salvate ex igne et 
liberate eos. Ar^. Et signate quosdam cum dubitaverint orbos (?) et 
salvate quosdam territione, abripite eos ex igne. Aeth. quoniam est 
quern redarguent per verbum quod dictum est (Aeth^-^-. propter pecca- 
tum eorum), et est qui et servabitur ex igne et rapient eum, et est qui 
servabitur timore et poenitentia. Arm. Et quosdam damnantes sitis 
reprehensione, et quosdatn salvate rapiendo ex igne, et quorundam 
miseremini timore judicando {? indicando). Cassiodor. 142 Ita ut 
quosdam dijudicatos arguant, quosdam de adustione aeterni ignis 
eripiant, nonnullis misereantur errantibus et conscientias maculatas 
emundent, sic tanien ut peccata eorum digna execratione refugiant. 
Mr. Horner states that vv. 22, 23 are omitted in Sah. He translates 
Boh. as follows : Kal ous f^ef cXeyxeTC 8iaKpivo|ji,eVous, ous 8c aw^ere ck toO 
irupos {al. om. toO), ous Se eXeare (a/. <|>ep€Te) iy 4)6j3w. Commentaries of 
Theophylact and Oecumenius, KdKeivous 8e', el p,€v diroSuCTTarrai ti]i.u)v — 
TOUTO ydp aT]p,aivei to SiaKpikcaOai — eKiyyere, TOureoTi 4)ai'epouTe toIs irdo-i 
TYji' daejSeiav auTwi' • cI'tc 8e irpos lacriv a^^opCtcrL, ^^.r] aTvuQelaQe, dXXd tw ttjs 
dydTriris ujiwi' cXew -n-poo-Xa|ji,j3dvecr0e, (Tci^ovTes etc tou rJTreiXYjfi^vou auTOis 
irupos • irpoo-Xap.pdi'corOe 8e fierd tou eXeeii' auTous Kal fiteTa ({xj^ou. 

In all these it will be observed that three classes are distinguished 
as in the text of Tregelles and Tischendorf, and in A, ous fiev eXcyxcTe 
8iaKpii'Ofj.6V'ous, ous 8e acu^cTe ck irupos dpTrd^ovTeSj ous Se eXedxe iv 4)oPw, 
and ^, ous /Aev eXedTc SiaKpivofJieVous, ous 8e o-oi^CTe CK Trupos dpird^orres, oiJc 


8e eXeare iv <|)oP<i). We should draw the same conclusion from the 
seeming quotation in Can. Apost. vi. 4 (ou fiKTYJaeig irdi'Ta ac0pa>iTOJ', 
dXXd) ous fxef eX^Y^eis, 08s 8e eXci^o-eis, irepl S>v 8c irpoo-eo^T) (089 8e dyaiTr|- 
reis uirep tt]v «|'"X^'' ""O")' which occurs also, with the omission of the 
cause 08s 8e eXerjo-ets in the Didache ii. 7. 

. Two classes only are distinguished in the following: SyrP. Et 
quosdam de illis qiiidem ex igne rapite ; cum autem resipuerint, 
miseremini super eis in timore, representing Kal 08s \Lkv ck iropos 
dpTrd^cTc, 8iaKpn'ojjieVous 8e eXcarc Iv ^6^(a. Syrh. et hos quidem misere- 
mini resipiscentes, hos autem servate de igne rapientes in timore, 
representing Kal 08s \t.iv eXedre 8iaKpivo)jici'ous, 08s 8e o-cj^cre ck irupos 
dpTrdj^oi/Tes iv 4)6^0). Clem. [Adunibr.) quosdam autem salvate de igne 
rapientes, quibusdam vero miseremini in timore,^ representing 08s 8e 
CTwi^eTe Ik irupos dpird^oi/res, 089 8e cXedre iv <|>6Pu. Clem. Strom, vi. 773, 
Kal 08s fiei' €K Trup69 dpirdi^eTe, 8taKpii'Of.ieVou9 8e eXeeire, implying that he 
was acquainted with two different recensions. With these we may 
compare the texts of B, followed by WH. and B. Weiss, Kal 089 \i.kv 
eXedre 8iaKpi>'OfjieVou9 o-w^ere ek TTupo9 dpiTd^o»'T69, 089 8e eXedre iv 4)6Pw, of 
C, Kttt 089 fAec eXeY)(€T6 8iaKpii'op.€fOU9, 089 8e crci^eTe ck Trup69 dpTrd^oi'Te9 
iv <|>6pa), and of KLP, Kal 089 jxek eXeelre SiaKpii'dfiecoi, 089 8e iv <j)oPa) 
awi^ere ck Trupo9 dpTrdj^ocTe9. 

St. Jude's predilection for triplets, as in w. 2, 4, 8, in the examples 
of judgment in vv. 5-7, and of sin in v. 11, is prima facie favourable 
to the triple division in this passage. Supposing we take A and ^? to 
represent the original, consisting of three members, a 6 c, we find B 
complete in a and c, but confused as to h. As it stands, it gives an 
impossible reading ; since it requires 089 )xeV to be taken as the rela- 
tive, introducing the subordinate verb eXedre, depending on the prin- 
cipal verb o-w^exe ; while 089 8e', 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 eXedre was written in error for eXe'yxeTe 
and 0U9 omitted in error after SiaKpii'OfieVoug. The latter phenomenon 
is exemplified in the readings of SyrP. and Clem. Str. 773. The 
texts of C and KLP are complete in a and b, but insert a phrase 
from c in b. The most natural explanation here seems to be that 
the duplication of eXedre in a and c (as in t^) caused the omission of 

^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 in- 
serted after rapientes.) Odientes, inquit, earn, quae carnalis est, maculatam tunicam ; 
animae videlicet tunica macula (read maculata) est, spiritus concupiscentiis pollutus 


the second eXcare, and therefore of the second ous Se. The reading 
8iaKpiv6|xek'oi in KLP was a natural assimilation to the following 
nominative dpTrd^orres, and seemed, to those were not aware of the 
difference in the meaning of the active and middle of StaKpirw, to 
supply a very appropriate thought, viz., that discrimination must be 
used ; treatment should dififer 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 divi- 
sion," says Hort {App. p. 107), "gives no satisfactory sense " ; and it 
certainly has been very diversely interpreted, some holding with Kuhl 
that the first case is the worst and the last the most hopeful : " Die 
dritte >Klasse . . . durch helfendes Erbarmen wieder hergestellt wer- 
den konnen, mit denen es also nicht so schlimm steht, wie mit denen, 
welchen gegentibernur i\iyy^eiv 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 : "adubi- 
tantibus 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 IXeos, any more than the Pharisees con- 
demned 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 : i&v rts ^v upc irXai'ifjOf] diro ttis dXr^Geias Kttl emoTT- 
p6v)rT) Tis auTOi', yii/uaKeTe on 6 eiritrTp^vj/as diiapTcoXoK eK TrXdcTjs oSou auTOu 
(Tdjo-ei «)/oxr}«' cK Qa.v6.Tou. The first class with which the believers are 
called upon to deal is that of doubters, SiaKpifopiei'oi, men still halting 
between two opinions [cf. James i. 6), or perhaps we should under- 
stand it of disputers, as in Jude 9. These they are to reprove and con- 
vince {cf. John xvi. 8, 9, eXtYlc- irepl ajxaprias on ou Trioreuoucnc eis ejAc)- 
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 communica- 
tion with the terrible infection of evil. We may compare with this 
St. Paul's judgment as to the case of incest in the Church of Corinth 
(1 Cor. v. 5), and the story told about Cerinthus and St. John. 


I. 'lOYAAZ 'lr]CTOu XpiaToG SouXos, d8eX(|)os 8e 'laKojjBou, tois ^ iv 
' Tois 6€u» . . . KOI ev li]aov conj. H (Set. Read. p. io6). 

Vv. I, 2. — Salutation. Jude a servant 
of Jesus Christ and brother of James, to 
those who have received the divine cal- 
ling, beloved of the Father, kept safe in 
Jesus Christ. May mercy, peace and 
love be richly poured out upon you 1 

I. 'l-qo-ov XpKTTov SovXos. The same 
phrase is used by St. James in the In- 
scription to his epistle, also by St. Paul 
in Rom. and Phil. In i Pet. the phrase 
used is onrdo-ToXos 'I. X., in 2 Pet. SovXos 
xal dirdcTToXog. It is, I think, a mistake 
to translate SoOXos by the word " slave," 
the modern connotation of which is so 
different from that of the Greek word {cf. 
2 Cor. iv. 5). There is no opposition 
between SouXeia and IXevOcpia in the 
Christian's willing service. It only be- 
comes a SovXeia in the opposed sense, 
when he ceases to love what is com- 
manded and feels it as an external yoke. 

dS£X<|)09 8c 'IttKiipov. Cf. Tit. i. I, 
8o£Xos 3eo-0, dirdo-roXos ik 'I. X. See 
Introduction on the Author. 

Tois Iv 0£o> irarpi iQY°''''"nH'''''°''S '**'■ 
'\rf(rov XpKTTb) TeTYjpTjp.€vois kXtjtois. 
On the readings see Introduction on the 
text. The easier reading of some MSS., 
■^Yia(r|ievois for riYair-qiicvois, is probably 
derived from i Cor. i. 2, ■^7La<rp.eVois Iv X. 
M. There is no precise parallel either for 
Iv 06(i iqy. or for XpioTu rer. The pre- 
position Iv 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, as the 
members in the body of which He is the 
head. So here, " beloved as members of 
Christ, reflecting back his glorious 
image " would be a natural und easy 
conception. Lightfoot, commenting on 
Col. iii. 12, IkXcktoi toO 0eov, £71.01 Ka'l 
TJ-yairTuxlvoi, says that in the N.T. the 
last word " seems to be used always of 
^Jie objects of God's love," but it is diffi- 

cult to see the propriety of the phrase, 
' Brethren beloved by God in God ". 
'Hyairriiievoi is used of the objects of 
man's love in Clem. Horn. ix. 5, toIv 
a-iiTOis r\yaTry]]i.ev<i)V tovs rdc^ovs vaois 
Tip.<I)<riv, and the cognate aYairifjToi is 
constantly used in the same sense (as 
below ver. 3), as well as in the sense of 
" beloved of God ". If, therefore, we 
are to retain the reading, I am disposed 
to interpret it as equivalent to d8EX4>oi, 
" beloved by us in the Father," i.e., " be- 
loved with (j>iXa8eX(j>ia as children of 
God," but I think that Hort is right in 
considering that Iv has shifted its place 
in the text. See his Select Readings, p. 
106, where it is suggested that Iv should 
be omitted before 0€w and inserted before 
Mtjo-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 v/hich others have 
succumbed," TjYaTnijievois being followed 
by a dative of the agent, as in Nehem. 
xiii. 26, aYairuiJicvos Toi 0£<I> tJv. 

kXt)tois is here the substantive of 
which TJYaTTTiiAlvois and T€TT)pTjp.£vois 
are predicated. We find the same use 
in Apoc. xvii. 14 (vikyio-ovciv) oi (ier* 
avToii kXtjtoI k. IkXcktoi k. irKTToi, in 
St. Paul's epistles, as in Rom. i. 6, Iv oI? 
lffT€ Kai vip.cis, kXtjtoI 'Itjo-ov XpiOTTOi), I 
Cor. i. 24, KTjp-uo-o-oiAev Xpicrrbv laravpw- 
(xe'vov, 'lo-uSaiois p.ev crKdv8aXov . . . 

aVTOlS 8J TOtS kXtJT019 XptCTTOV 0«ou 

8vva(i.iv. We have many examples of 
the Divine calling in the Gospels, as in 
the case of the Apostles (Matt. iv. 21, 
Mark i. 20) and in the parables of the 
Great Supper and the Labourers in the 
Vineyard. This idea of calling or elec- 
tion is derived from the O.T. See Hort's 
n. on I Pet. i. i Mtjo-ov Xpiarov IkXck- 
Tois : " Two great forms of election are 
spoken of in the O.T., the choosing of 
Israel, and the choosing of single 



©cw irarpl TJyaTrr)|Ji^>'ots ^ Kal 'It^ctou Xpiorw TC-njpTjfteVois kXtitoIs- 
2. IXcos ofiii' Ktti ciprji'T) Kal dyciTTT] ttXtjOu^Ocit). 

3. 'AycnTTjToi, iraaa*' ottouStji/ iroioufiCJ'os YpdtjjeiK ufiit' Trepl ttJ$ 

' TjYaiTTjfitvois AB ^ ; Tj-yiacrfxevois KLP. 

Israelites, or bodies of Israelites, to 
perform certain functions for Israel. 
. . . The calling and the choosing imply 
each other, the calling being the outward 
expression of the antecedent choosing, 
the act by which it begins to take effect. 
Both words emphatically mark the pre- 
sent state of the persons addressed as 
being due to the free agency of God. . . . 
In Deuteronomy (iv. 37) 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, cf. ch. xlviii. 12, xliii. 
I, 7. The chief distinction between the 
the "calling" of the old and of the new 
'dispensation is that the former is rather 
expressive of dignity ("called by the 
name of Gcd"), the latter of invitation ; 
but the former appears also in the N.T. 
in such phrases as James ii. 7, to KaXov 
ovofxa TO eiriKXriG^v €4>' ufxas, and i Pet. 
ii. 9, vfieis Se -yEvos ckXckt^v, ^aaiXeiov 
iepdT6V|xa . . . Xaos cis ircpi7roiT]ariv. 
The reason for St. jude's here character- 
ising 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. 

Ver, 2. For the Salutation see my 
note on xo^^pc>'*'> James i. i, and Hort's 
excellent note on i Pet. i. 2, x^'^P''^ • • • 
•irXi]6\Jv9«i'ij. We find eXcos and elprjvTj 
joined in Gal. vi. 16, and with the addi- 
tion of x^pis in I Tim. i. 2, 2 Tim. i. 2, 
2 John 3. The mercy of God is the 
ground of peace, which is perfected in 
the feeling of God's love towards them. 
The verb irXTjOvvOeiTi occurs in the Saluta- 
tion both of I Peter and 2 Peter and in 
Dan. VI. 25 (in the letter of Darius), 
clpifVT) •iip.iv'rrX'»)e\)v0€iTi, cf. i Thess. iii. 
12, 8e 6 Kvpiog 'jT-X€ovao"ai Kai ire- 
picro'€i3o'au t^j dydiTT) els dXXiiXovs. 
'AYaiTT) ( = the love of God) occurs also 
in the final salutation of 2 Cor. r\ x^P"-? 
T. KvpCov 'lr]«roi) Kal t| dYdirTj tov ©eov, 

and in Eph. eipi^vij tois a8cX<|>oi9 Kal 
aYairtj |X€Ta TrLtn€«s diro Ocov iraTpos 
Kul Kvpiov 'I. X. Cf. I John iii. i, iStTe 
'jroTa'7rT)v o.ya.'i!t\v ScScokcv T||i.iv 6 "rraTtjp 
iva TCKva 0€oi; KXT]6(i>, where West- 
cott's n. is "The Divine love is infused into 
them, so that it is their own, and be- 
comes in them the source of a divine 
life (Rom. xiii. 10). 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, i John iv. 7, 
19." The same salutation is used in 
the letter of the Smyrnaeans (c. 156 a.d.) 
giving an account of the martyrdom of 
Polycarp, eXeos Kal elptivrj Kal o.>(a.'try\ 
Geoii iraTpos Kal Kvpiov •qp.tliv'l. X. tpXt)- 
ewOeiii. The thought of cXcos and 
dYaiTT) recurs again in ver. 21. 

Vv. 3, 4. — Reasons for Writing. He 
had been intending to write to them on 
that which is the common interest of all 
Christians, salvation through Christ, but 
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 ta 
defend their faith against insidious as- 
saults, long ago foretold in ancient pro- 
phecy, of impious men who should 
change the doctrine of God's firee grace 
into an excuse for licentiousness, and 
deny the only Master and our Lord 
Jesus Christ. 

Ver. 3. dvaiTTiToi occurs in w. 17 and 
20, also in 2 Pet. iii. i, 8, 14, 17, i Pet. 
ii. II, iv. 12 and James. It is common 
in the Epistles of John and of Paul, 
sometimes with \t.ov attached, as in i 
Cor. X. 14, Phil. ii. 12, and is often joined 
to d8€X4)oi, especially in James. The 
dYdirTj of ver. 2 leads on to the kyatri^Toi 
here. They are themselves dyaTrTjTOi 
because the love of God is shed abroad 
in their hearts. 

ardcav ottodStiv iroiovp.evos. For 
irdo-av, see my n. on James i. 2, and cf. 
2 Pet. i. 5, jtttovStjv -Trdaav iropeiaev^- 
KavT€S, i. 15, o~irov8do-<ii ^X*''*' '"P-ds 
p,viipT)v iroi£i<r6ai, also Isocr. Orat. v. p. 
gi b, irdaav ttjv trirovS-qv irepl tovtov 

For this see the Introduction on Early Heresies. 



CTraywci^eaGai Tjj aira^ irapaSoSciaT) tois dyiois iriaTet. 

^ KoivT)s Tjftojv] K. vfAidv boh. j oni. T){*ci>v KLP + ; awTTjpios] add. Kai £o)t)s ^. 
^YpavJ/ai] Ypa4>£iv ^, 

Troi€io-6ai, Plato, Euthyd. 304 e, irepl 
oiiSevos a^icov dva^iav o'ttovStiv iroioiJvTai. 
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 Peter 
iii. I to an earlier letter nov/ lost. Com- 
pare Barn. iv. g, iroWa 8e Oe'Xwv 7pd<|>eiv 
. . . 7pd(f>eiv etnro-uSaaa. 

KOiVTJs o-wTTjpias- Cf. Tit. i. 4, Kara 
KoivT)v irio-Tiv, Ign. Eph. i., tiirtp tov 
Koivov ovdparos Kai cXirCSo; with Light- 
foot's n., Jos. Ant. 10. i. 3 (Hezekiah 
besought Isaiah to offer sacrifice) virep 
T'Jjs Koivr)s o-ii>TT]pias. Bede explains as 
follows: " omnium electorum communis 
est salus, fides, et dilectio Christi ". Jude 
puts on one side the address he was pre- 
paring on the main principles of Chris- 
tianity (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. 

dvaYKTjv €crxov Ypd\(;ai. Cf. Luke 
xiv. 18, ex** dvd7KT)v ISeiv ovtov, Heb. 
vii. 27, al., also Plut. Cato Mi. 24, 
avaYKTjv ecrx^v cK^aXcIv d<rx-r)p.ovo{iaav 
ry\v Yi'vaiKa. There is a similar com- 
bination of ypa-^iiv and yP^^"''' i^ 3 
John 13. The aor. ypi^ai, contrasted 
with the precedmg pres. yP*<I>^''''' i''^" 
plies that the new epistle had to be writ- 
ten at once and could not be prepared 
for at leisure, like the one he had pre- 
viously contemplated. It was no wel- 
come task: "necessity was laid upon 

eiraYCdVi^co'Oai t'q airal TrapaSoOciaif) 
Tois dyiois iricTTei. " To contend for the 
faith," almost equivalent to the aYuvio-ai 
■irept TTjs dX-rjOeias in Sir. iv. 28, see 1 
Tim. vi. 12, ayuiviXov tov KaXov LyS>va. 
TTjs irfo-Tews, and €is 8 KOTricli dY(i>vi.^dp,e- 
vos, Col. i. 29. We may compare e-n-a- 
(ivveiv, liravaira'ueiv vdp.(p, Rom. ii, 17 
and Clem. Strom, iii., p. 553, €7raYwvi£d- 
fxevo; T^j dOc'o) Z6^n. 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. 
rfj dira| TrapaSoOcicrg toIs oiyiois 
TTio-Tti. The word tticttis 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. i. 23, 6 Siukuv '^p.ds froTc 
vvv eviaYY^Xi^cTai tt)v tticttiv t)v ttotc 
lirdpOei, also Gal. iii. 23, Phil. i. 27, 
o-uvaOXovvTts T-jj irio-Ttt tov 6viaYY«X(ov, 
where see Lightfoot, Acts vi. 7. In the 
same waj' IXttis is used in a concrete 
sense for the object or ground of hope (as 
in Col. i. 5, TT)v eXiriSa ttjv d7roK€tp.evT]v 
vpiv, I Tim. i I, 'JTjao-u XpicrToCi tt)s 
eXiriSos f|p.wv. Tit. ii. 13, Trpoo-SexofAtvoi 
TTjv fjiaKapiav eXiriSa), and ^6^0% for the 
object of fear, Rom. xiii. 3, i Pet. iii. 

dira^. Used here in its classical sense 
" once for all," as below ver. 5, and in 
Heb. vi. 4, Tovs d-ira^ <|>c<)Tio-8€VTas, ib. 
ix. 26, 27, X. 2, I Pet. iii. 18. This ex- 
cludes the novelties of the Libertines, 
cf. Gal. i. 9. The later sense " on one 
occasion " is found in 2 Cor. xi. 25. aira^ 
i\iQaa-Br]v, I Thess. ii. 18, Kai dTra| Kai 
8ls r\B€\r](Ta\J.€V IXOeiv. 

irapaSoOeioTT). Cf. Philo M. i. 387, 
TTiaTcvet TOis airal iropaSoOeto-t. The 
Christian tradition is constantly referred 
to by the Fathers, as by Clem. Al. Str. 
vii. where we read of ■n dXTjOr)? iropdSoo-is 
(p. 845), r\ cKKXTjo-iacrriKT) it. (p. 890). 
f| 6e(a IT. (p. 896), T| TrdvTwv Tuiv 
d-TTOCTT^XcdV IT. (p. Qoo), at ToO XpiaTOV 

IT. (p. goi), and even ini the N.T. as in 
I Cor. xi. 2. KdOcds irap^ScijKa vfilv to,? 
xapaSdo-Eis KaT€X€T€, 2 Thess. ii. 15, 
I Tim. vi. 20. TT)v irapafli] KTjv 4>vXa|ov. 
For an account of the gradual formation 
of the Creed, see A. E. Burn's Introduc- 
tion to the Creeds, ch. ii., 1899, and com- 
pare the comment in my larger edition, 
p. 61 f. 

Tois dyiois. Used generally of Chris- 
tians who were consecrated and called to 
be holy, as in i Cor. i. 2, Phil. i. i, v/here 
see Lightfoot. The word contains an 
appeal to the brethren to stand fast 
against the teaching and practice of the 



4. Trap€i(re8uTq(Taf ^ ycip Tices av-OpajTroi, 01 irdXai TrpoyeYP'^H'M-^'''^'' 
€15 TOUTO TO Kpip,a, dCTefBeis, TT]f tou 0eou .■qiJ.S)v xapiTa p.eTaTi.Oei'- 

' Trapeio-eSv-qo-av B, WH ; irapeio-cSvcrav ^ACKLP + Ti., Treg. 

Ver. 4. Nature of the Threatened 
Danger. It is stealthy ; it is serious 
enough to have been predicted long ago ; 
its characteristic is impiety, showing it- 
self in the antinomian misuse of the 
Gospel of God's free grace, and in the 
denial of God and Christ. 

Ver. 4. TrapcureSvTicrav ydp Tives 
dv9pwiroi. For this form which is found 
in B and adopted by WH, Veitch cites 
SieKSutivai in Hippocr. i. 601, and com- 
pares i^vr]v, IppvTjv. The aor. is here 
used with the perfect force, as in ver. 11 
€irop€\39T)o-av, etc. cf. Blass, Gr. p. 199, 
my edition of St. James, p. ccii., and Dr. 
Weymouth there cited. The verb occurs 
in Demades 178, aSiKo; irapcio-Sijvcjv 
\6yo% els Ta9 tu>v SiKacTtliv 'y^ ovk 
iq, cvvopav ttjv aXi]6€iav, Clem. Al. p. 
659, oirci)? €is TY)V TcDv aivi7p.aT0)v evvoiav 
■T] ^T^TTjcris irapeio-Svovo'a IttI tt)V evpecriv 
TTJs aX-qOeias ava8pa(i-[i, D. Laert. ii. 142, 
Xadpaioj9 irapeio-Siis el<s tt)v irarpiSa, 
Plut. M. p. 216 B, TO, apxaia vop.ipa 
eKXv(^p,Eva Itopa, aXXa Se irapcicrSvopeva 
p.ox6T]pa, other examples in Wetst. The 
noun irapcio-Svcris occurs in Barn. ii. 
10, iv. 9, dvTttrTio(A€v Xva p.T| fr\xt 
irap€icrSv<rtv 6 p.€Xas, Clem. Al. p. 189, 
aKpoo-<|>aXT]S r] tot) oivov irapeierSvo-tS. 
Similar compounds are •7rap€icr<}>£p<i) in 
2 Pet. i. 5, irapeio-aYu in 2 Pet. ii. i, 
irapcio-aKTos in Gal. ii. 4, 8101 tovs 
irapsitraKTovs \j/€-u8a8€'X4>ovs oiTives 
irapeio-'J^XOov KaToaKOirTJaai tt)v eXcv- 
0«piav -uiAcov, Rom. v. 20, 2 Mace. viii. i 
irapeio-iTopeviSp.evot XeXTjOoTWS eis tols 
Kb>p,as, so 'Traps icrepiro), TrapcKnrep.Trw, 
-n-apeio-iritrTcD. The earliest prophecy 
of such seducers comes from the lips of 
Jesus Himself, Matt. vii. 15, vpo<ri\eTt 
onrb Ttov •i|;«v8oirpo(j»'riT(i>v, oiTive? ep- 
XOVTat Trpos vfias ev ev8ijp.acri Trpopdrcov, 
i(T(3>Bev Bi clo-i Xvkoi dpiraYCSj cf. Acts 
XX. 29, 30, and Introduction on the Early 
Heresies in the larger edition. 

ot irdXai Trpo-ytYpap.p.evou els tovito to 
Kpipa. " Designated of old for this 
judgment." Cf. 2 Pet. ii. 3, ols to Kpip.a 
tKiraXai ovk dpyci. The word TraXai 

precludes the supposition that the second 
epistle of Peter can be referred to.* The 
allusion is to the book of Enoch quoted in 
vv. 14, 15. In ver. 18 below the same 
warning is said to have been given by 
the Apostles. The phrase oi irpoY. is in 
apposition to Tives dv9po)Troi, cf. Gal. 
i. 7 with Lightfoot's n., Luke x\'iii. 9, 
elirev Sk irpiJs Tivas Toiis ireiroiOdTas 
e^)' eavTois. For irpoY., cf. Rom. xv. 4, 
o<ra 7ap '7rpoe7pa<{>T] els tt)v T|p.eTepav 
8i8ao-KaXiav e7pd(|>T]. The word is in- 
tended 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 i Peter ii. 8, els 8 Kai tT€9r\(rav. 
By "this" Spitta understands "that 
judgment which I am now about to de- 
clare," i.e., the condemnation contained 
in the word do-e^eis used by some ancient 
writer. Zahn however remarks that 
oStos usually refers to what precedes, 
and he would take tovto here (with Hof- 
mann) as referring to irapeiaeSvrjaav. 
Better than this logical reference to some 
preceding or succeeding word is, I think, 
Bengel's explanation " the nov/ impend- 
ing judgment," Apostolo iam quasi cer- 
nente pcenam. 

dcrePeis. This word may be almost 
said to give the keynote to the Epistle 
{cf. w. 15, 18) as it does to the Book of 

tt)v tov 0eov T|p,(i>v xdpiTO |AeTa- 
Ti8e'vT€s «ls dcre'XYeiav. With this we 
may compare i Peter ii. 16, p,T) is 
e7riKdXT;p.p.a exovTes tt)S KaKias ttjv 
eXevOepiav, 2 Peter ii. 19, eXeuOepCav 
eira77eXXdp,evoi, iii. 16, 8vcrvdriTd Ttva, 
d oi d|Jt.a6eis aTpePXoveriv irposTTiv ISiav 
avT&iv dircoXeiav, Rom. iii. i, 2, 5-8 (If 
man is justified by free grace and not by 
works, then works are unnecessary), ih. 
vi. I, 15, viii. 21, I Cor. vi. 12, x. 23 f., 
John viii. 32-36, Gal. v. 13, ipeis eir' 
eXevOepiqt eKXi^GTiTe • p.dvov p,Tj tt)V 

* Zahn, it is true, following Schott and others, argues in favour of this reference, 
holding that wdXai 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, 
>nd is further confirmed and explained by e^Sofjios diro 'A8d)Ji in ver. 14. 



T6S koI tov jmofoe SeCTiroTrjv^ Kal Kupioi' ruilov ^\r]<Touv 

^ 8€o-TroTT]v] add. 6eov KLP, sjnrr. +. 

cXevOcpiav els a<|)op|iT)V rfj aapKi. For 
fjieTaTi6evT«s see Gal. i. 6, tor ao-«XY€iav 
2 Peter ii. 2, iroWol e|aKoXovdi](rovcriv 
avTbJv Tttis aa-eXytiai'i, ib. ii. 7, 18, 
I Peter iv. 3, and Lightfoot on Gal. 
V. 19, "A man may be aKaOapros and 
hide his sin : he does not become 
daeXY^s until he shocks public decency. 
In classical Greek the word do-cXyei-a 
generally signifies insolence or violence 
towards another. ... In the later lang- 
uage the prominent idea is sensuality 
. . . cf. Polyb. xxxvii. 2, itoXXti 8^ tis 
dereXYCia Kal Trept to,? o-(t>p,aTiKds 
eTTtOvfxias avTu «ruv£|i]KoXovO€t. Thus 
it has much the same range of meaning 
as SPpts ". On the meaning of X'^P''^ 
see Robinson, Ephes. p. 221 f. The 
form X'^P''^ is used elsewhere in the 
N.T., except in Acts xxiv. 27. 

TOV y.6vov SetnrdTirjv Kal Kvpiov 'qp.uv 
'Irjtrovv Xpio-Tov dpvoij|xevoi.. So 2 Peter 
ii. I, TOV aYopdo'avTa avTovis SeoTrdTTjv 
dpvovp,cvoi. On the denial of God and 
Christ see i John ii. 22, ovtos Icrriv 6 
avTixpitrros, 6 dpvov|jicvos tov iraT^pa 
KOI TOV viov, Tit. i. 16, ©eov ojioXoYOvcriv 
eiScvat, T019 8« epYois dpvoiivTai pSeXvK- 
Tol ovTcs Kal direiOeis koI irpos ttov 
epYov aYaObv dSoKifioi, Matt. x. 33, 
oaTisav dpv»]crT)Tai fie ejiirpoo-Oev tuv 
dv9pajir(i)v, dpVT], kclyu atiTOV 
efiirpocrOev toO iraTpos (aov, ib. xxvi. 70 
(Peter's denial). Such denial is one of 
the sins noticed in the book of Enoch, 
xxxviii. 2 : " 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. xli. 2, xlv. 2, 
xlvi. 7, xlviii. 10 : " 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, (i) is t. (xdvov 
8eo-Tr6T'rjv to be understood of the Son, 
(2) what is the force of dpveio-eai ? The 
objection to understanding 8eo-ir<JTt]s of 
our Lord is that in every other passage 
in the N.T., where Seo-iroTTjs occurs, 
except in 2 Peter ii. i (on which see n.), 
it is spoken of God the Father ; that, 
this being the case, it is difficult to under- 
stand how Christ can be called t^v |i<Jvov 
SeoTTrdTr^v. It seems to me a forced ex- 
planation to say that the phrase ftovog 
8eo-TroTr]s has reference only to other 
earthly masters. No Jew could use it in 

this connexion without thinking of the 
one Master in heaven. Again ^6vQ<i is 
elsewhere used of the FatheF onl)-, as in 
John V. 44, TT)v 8o^av tt]V Trapd tov 
|xdvov ©eov ov X,-t\TtlT(., xvii. 3, iva 
Yivcuo^Kcoo-iv <re tov ft,dvov dXT]9iv6v ©eov 
Rom. xvi. 27, fji<5vco (ro^ta 0ea> 8td *lT]<rov 
Xpio-Tov, I Tim. i. 17, TO) Pao-iXei twv 
aiuvfdV . . . |*dv(d ©eo) tijit) k. 8d^a, 
lb. vi. 15, 16, 6 (jtaKapios k. ^6vo% 
8uvdtrTT]S 6 fjidvos e'xcov dOavaaiav, and 
by Jude himself, below 25, fiovu) ©ew 

irtdTTJpi T||JIUV 8ia M. X., tov KVplOV TJlXbiv, 

Sd^a. Wetst. quotes several passages 
in which Josephus speaks of God as 
6 fjidvos 8ecnrdTT|s. 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 prefixed 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. ii. 13, Trpoo-Sexdnevoi 
TT)V fxaKapiav eX'n'iSa Kal eTri(t>dveiav ttjs 
86^-^9 tov [xeYaXov ©eov Kal o-coTTJpos 
T||xuv X. M. OS eSuKev eavTov virep riuciiv 
iva XvTpcioTfiTai. T||Jids, where also I 
should take tov jteYaXov ©eov to refer 
to the Father. Other examples of the 
same kind are Eph. v. 5, ovk exei 
KXrjpovofxiav ev T'fj ^ao-iXetqi tov XpicTOv 
Kal ©eov (where Alf. notes " We cannot 
safely say here that the same Person 
is intended by X. k. ©eov merely on 
account of the omission of the art. ; for 
(i) any introduction of such a prediction 
regarding Christ would here be mani- 
festly out of place, (2) ©eds is so fre- 
quently anarthrous that it is not safe to 
ground any such inference on its use 
here)," 2 Thess. i. 12, oira>s evSolaorei) to 
bvop.a tov Kvpiov "^fjiuv 'It]O"0v ev vu.iv 
Kai vfxeis ev avT<i> KaTa ttjv \a.()iv tov 
©eov vp.b>v Kal Kvpiov 'lT)<rov XpiaTOv ; 
I Tim. V. 21 (cf. 2 Tim. iv. i), Stojiap- 
Tvpopiai evoiiriov tov ©eov Kal XpiaTov 
M-rjerov Kal Tciv eKXeKTuv dYY^Xtov, which 
Chrysostom explains |xdpTvpa KaXu tov 
©eov Kal TOV vibv avTov ; 2 Peter i. i, 
ev SiKaioo-uvj) tov ©eov y\^C)V Kal o-coTTJpos 
'It|o-ov XpicTTOv, where see my n. The 
denial of the only Master and our Lord 
Jesus Christ may be implicit, shown by 
their co»^uct, though not asserted in 




XpioTOJ' dpt'oufid'oi. 5. 'YTTOfifTJaai 8c ufids PouXo|Jiai, eiSoxas 
Trdrra,^ on ^ Kupios ^ fiira^ Xaoc ■* ck y^JS AiyuirTou trwcras to Scutc- 

V|jLas iravra ^KL 31 syrr. Clem. Theoph. Oecon. + ; vfias aira| iravra B ;. 
airal iravra AC* 13 vulg. + Ti. Treg. WH ; a7ra| iravTas H. (Sel. Read. p. 106) 
oTi t^AB syrh ; add. 6 C^KL syrp. 

3 Ki;pios ^CKL syrh ; Ir^aovs AB + ; Oeos C^ syrp, Clem. 

* aiT-al Xaov ^, 68, tol., syrr., boh. (on airal Itjo-. Xaov) sah. arm. Did. Cassiod. 
Xaov airal Clem. ; Xaov ABCL, Ti., Treg., WH. 

word, as in Tit. i, 16 ; but it is more 
naturally taken as explicit, as in i John 
ii. 22, where Westcott notes that a com- 
mon 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 doc- 
trine 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 be- 
cause ... it is only in the Son that we 
have the [full] revelation of God as 
Father." The phrase rbv \t.6vov 8«o-iroT-rjv 
might also refer to the heresy attributed 
to Cerinthus by Hippolytus (Haer. vii. 
33, X. 21) ovx ■"'"■o Tov irpcoTov deov tov 
K(5<r(A0v yeyovivai i^OeXTjo-ev dXX' viro 
8vvd(jieoS9 Ttvos dyyeXiKiisj and Irenjeus 
Haer. i. 26. See Introduction on Early 
Heresies in the large edition. 

Vv. 5-13. Illustrations of Sin and 
yudgment Derived from History and 
from Nature. The judgment impending 
over these men is borne witness to by 
well-known facts of the past, and may be 
illustrated from the phenomena of nature. 
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 they 
were imprisoned in darkness, awaiting 
there the judgment of the great day. The 
men of Sodom (lived in alandof great fer- 
tility, they had received some knowledge 
of God through the presence and teaching 
of Lot, they had been lately rescued from 
captivity by Abraham, yet they) followed 
the sinful example of the angels, and 
their land is still a prey to the fire, bear- 
ing witness to the eternal punishment of 
sin. In spite of these warnings the 
heretics, who are now finding their way 
into the Church, persist in their wild 
hallucinations, 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 however 
rail at that which is beyond their know- 
ledge, while they surrender themselves 
like brute beasts to the guidance of their 
appetites, and thus bring about 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 wanton- 
ness 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. 

Ver. 5. -uirofivfjaai, 8e vftds, 
cl8<STas 'up.ds irdvTa.* Cf. 2 Pet. i. 12, 
Sio ^eXX'r]o-(i> vixds del virofxifivijo-KEiv 
Kaiirep clSoras, ib. i. 13, 8ie7Eipciv tifjids 
€V -inrofAvijo-ei, ib. iii. I, 8iEYeip(i> vjxwv ev 
virop.vT]o"€t TTjv eiXiKpivTJ 8i.dvoiav, Rom. 
XV. 14, ir€ir€ if. on Kal avTol p.Eo-Toi 
€o-T£ dYa6o)OT5vTjs, ir€TrX-np<i)H.£voi irdo-irjs 
TTJs yyuaEus • . . ToXiATjpoTe'pws 8e ey- 
pa\|/a vp-ividirb p,E'povs us Eirava|iip.v't]0-Kci>v 
tifids. The word Ei8oTas justifies viro- 
p-vijo-ai, : they only need to be rtminded 
of truths already known, so that it is un- 
necessary to write at length. The re- 
peated v)xds 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 

* On the readings see Introduction. 



-poi/ [tous] fAT) TTio-Tcoorai'Tas divcSXeaei', 6. dyY^ous re tou? fitj 
TTjpr^o-at'Ta? ttjc iauTutv ApxTlf dXXa diroXiiTOi'Tas to iSiof oiktjtti- 

the broad distinction maintained through- 
out the epistle between vificls and ovtoi 

(the Libertines) forbids such an inter- 
pretation. If we read aira| ■iravTa with 

some MSS,, 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 

aTra|. Instead of irovra some MSS. 

have TovTo. The former finds some sup- 
port in Enoch i. 2, " I heard everything 

from the angels," xxv. 2, " I should like 

to know about everything," Secrets of 

En. xl. I, 2, "I know all things from the 

lips of the Lord ... I know all things 

and have written all things in the books," 

Ixi. 2 (quoted by Chase in Diet, of the 

Bible). It should probably be under- 
stood 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 com- 

-monere ". Bede's note is " omnia vide- 
licet arcana fidei scientes et non opus 

habentes recentia quasi sanctiora a novis 

audire magi^ris ". In what follows he 

takes a7ra| with o-uo-as, " ita clamantes 

ad se de afflictione Aegyptia primo sal- 

vavit humiles, ut secundo murmurantes 

contra se in eremo prosterneret superbos. 

. . . Meminerimus ilium sic per aquas 

baptismi salvare credentes, ut etiam post 

baptismum humilem in nobis requirat 

oTi Kvpios, aira^ Xaov Ik ytjs Al"yvirTOt> 
(Tucras, T^ SevTcpov [tovs] prj iri<rT€vo'av- 
Tas onrtiXeo-ev.] For text, see Introduc- 
tion on Readings. Clement in his 
Adumbrationes gives the paraphrase 
" Quoniam Dominus Deus semel popu- 
lum de terra Aegypti liberans deinceps 
€0S qui non crediderunt perdidit ". 

TO SevTEpov has given rise to much 
discussion. According to the reading I 
have adopted, it contrasts the preceding 
saving with the following destruction. 
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. xiv. 27, 37). 
So in I Cor. x. we have the privileges of 
Israel allowed, and yet all was in vain 
because of their unbelief. There seems 
less force in the connection of airal with 

elSc^Tas : ■fjSrj would have been more 
suitable. For the opposition to t> 
SetJTepov, cf. Heb. ix. 28, 6 Xpio-Tos aira^ 
irpoo-evexOeiS ets to ttoWuv avcvc-yKCiv 
apapTias ek SevTcpov x<^P^^ ap,apTias 
6<|)6iio-eTai, Theoph. Autol. ii. 26, iva to 
p4v aTra^ -^ TreTrXripajpEvov ote lri9y\, to 
8^ SevTcpov pe'XX'Q irXrjpoiio-Oai ptTO, tt)v 
. . . Kpicriv, Liban. ap. Wetst. epol 8^ 
airal dpKEi -yeXcuTa oc^XeIv, 8£'UTcpov 8^ 


I am inclined to think that the article 
before pi] is an intrusion, as it seems to 
be before ev in ver. 12. Omitting it, we 
can take SeTJTcpov with pTj ■TriaTevcravTas, 
getting the sense: "In the ist case of 
unbelief (in Egypt) * salvation followed ; 
in the 2nd (in the wilderness) destruc- 
tion," lit. "when they, a second time 
failed to believe, He destroyed them ". 
If this was the original reading, it 
is easy to understand the insertion of 
Tovs as facilitating the plural construc- 
tion alter \a.6v. We may compare the 
solemn utterance in Heb. x. 26, Ikouo-icos 
apapTavdvTcov T|pa)V pcTo. to XaPeiv ttiv 
kifiyvuxTiv T'fjs dXrjOeias ovk eti ircpi 
dpapTiwv aTToXeiireTai dvaia, and the 
belief, apparently based upon it, in the 
early Church as to sin after baptism. 

Ver. 6. d77eXows t£ tovs pt) TTjpTJo-av- 
TaS TT]V cavTwv dpx,T)v . . , £15 Kpio-iv 
. . . T€TiipT]Kev.] Cf. Clem. Al. Adtimhr. 
"Angelosqui non servaverunt proprium 
principatum, scilicet quem 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, nechominibusparcet super- 
bientibus, sed et hos quoque cum suum 
principatum non servaverint. quo per 
gratiam adoptionis filii Dei effecti sunt, 
sed reliquerint suum domicilium, id est, 
Ecclesiae unitatem . . . damnabit". On 
the Fall of the Angels see Introduction 
and the parallel passages in 2 Pet. ii. 4, 
and in Enoch, chapters 6-10. 

dpxiiv.] Used of office and dignity, 
as in Gen. xl. 21 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 avw kXtjpov in Clem. AI, 
650 P. The term dpxii is used of the 
evil angels themselves in Eph. vi. 12. 
Cf. Enoch xii. 4, ot the Watchers (angels) 

* Cf. F-xod. ii. 14, iv. i, v. 21, vi. g, xiv. ii, 12. 



pioi' CIS Kpiorii' fitydXif]? i^p.£pas Seo-fiols diSiois u-n-o l,6^ov ^ Terrj- 
pTjKCi' • 7. <i»s Z68op.a Kal TofAoppa Kal at irepl aurds iroXeis, TOk' 
ojjioioi' TpoTTOC TOUTOis ^ cKiTopceuCTao-ai Kal aTreXGoOaai otriCTw 

1 5o<J)ov] add. ayi-uv oYYeXwv speculum, Luc, cf. H. (S. R. p. 106) ; aypiuv ayY* 
Clem. p. 280; add. " in Tartaro constrictos " Orig. 


who have abandoned the high heaven 
and the holy eternal place and defiled 
themselves with women, ib.xw. 3. Philo 
says of the fallen angels (M. i. p. 268), 
KaXov p,T) XnroTaKTTJo-ai pev Tijs tow Qeov 
Ta^ews, Iv -[) TOWS TeTaypevovs irdvTas 
dpio-T€ij«iv dvayKT], avTopoXrjo'oi 8J irpbs 
TT)v avavSpov iq8ovi]V. So Just. M. Apol. 
ii. 5, oi 8' ayYtXoi irapapdvTe? TiivSe ttjv 
Ta^LV -yvvaiKuv pi^Eo-iv T|TTi]9T|o-av with 
Otto's n. 

d'iro\nr<5vTas to iSiov oiKijTiipiov. Cf. 
2 Cor. V. 2, TO oIk. to i% oirpavow, and 
the quotation from Enoch in the last 
n. [For o'lKTjTiipiov, cf. Enoch xv. 7 
(the message of Enoch to the Watchers) 
"the spiritual have their dwelling in 
heaven " . . . -q KaTOiKT)o-is awTwv eoTai 
lirl Tr]s Y^s. Chase.] 

els Kpio-iv (jL£YdXi(]S ■^p^pas 8eo-p.ois 
diSiois uiri 5o4"''' TeT>]pT|Kev. Cf. 2 Pet. 
ii. 4 o-eipois 5o<l>0'" Taprapioo-as, ib. ii. 9, 
aSiKOvs els -qpepav Kpio-eus KoXa^ojxevovs 
TT)p£iv, ib. iii. 7, Ttjpovpevot eU T|p^pav 
KpiQ-ecdS . • . TOJV dae^cdv dvOptoirwv, 
Joel ii. 31, 6 TJXios peTacrTpa<J)iicr£Tai 
els o-KOTOs . . . TTplv eX06iv TTjv T|p^pav 
Kwpiov TT)v peYaXT|v Kal kv\.^ti.vr\, Apoc. 
vi. 17, TiXOev ■q 'Hpe'pa ■q peY<iXT| tt)S opYTIS 
aiiTov, ib. xvi. 14, o-uvaYo-Y^^'' a'^Toiis els 
Tov 'jrdXepov ttjs |j.eYaXt]S ■qpe'pas tou 
0€oO tov iravTOKpaTopos. Enoch x. 5, 
6TriKaXw\j/ov avTuj (Azazel) o-k(5tos, Kal 
oIktjo-oitw eKei els tov aluva, x. 12, 8r)o-ov 
awTOvs . . . pe'xpt ■qpepas Kpicews 
avrdv, ib. xxii. 11 (Gr. in Charles' App. 
C) fie'xpt TTJs peYaXilS -fipepas Tiis Kpi- 
o-ews, ib. liv. 6, note on xlv. i. So Tjpe'pa 
Toii Kupiou I Cor. i. 8, 2 Pet. iii. 10 a/., 
iKeivq r\ T|pe'pa 2 Th. i. 10. On 8e<rpois 
see En. liv. 3-5, " 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 
far the hosts of Azazel '." Cf. SeVpioi 
o-KOTovs (Wisd. xvii. 2) of the plague of 

diSiois. The chains are called " ever- 
lasting," but they are orJy used for a 
temporary purpose, to keep them for the 
final judgment. It seems to be here 
synonymous with aluvios in ver. 7. So 
too in the only other passages in which it 

occurs in the Bible, Wisdom vii. 26, 
diraiJYao'pd eo-Ti 4)ojt6s dtSiow, and Rom. 
i. 20, r\ dtSios avToO Svvapis Kal Oei^Tiis. 
Ver. 7. <os 2o8op.a Kal Tdpoppa Kal 
ai ircpl avTas xdXeis. The 3rd ex- 
ample 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 connexion aY- 
YeXous Te. . . . o) s 2d8opa. Cf. 2 Pet. ii. 
6, irdXets Zo8dpo)v Kal rop.dppas KaTacT- 
po<{>fj KaTCKpivev. The destruction was 
notlimited to these two cities, but extended 
to all the neighbouring country (Gen. xix. 
25, called nevTairoXis in Wisd. x. 6), in- 
cluding the towns of Admah and Zeboim 
(Deut. xxix. 23, Hos. xi. 8). Zoar was 
spared at the request of Lot. 


<rao-ai. For the adverbial ace, cf. 
Matt, xxiii. 37, ov Tpdirov eirio-uvdYet 
opvis TO. vocrvLa., 2 Mace. xv. 39, ov 
Tpdirov olvos • . . oTroTeXel, oStu Kal, 
Luc. Catapl. 6 Te6va<ri tov opoiov Tpdirov. 
" Like them," i.e. the fallen angels. 
The two judgments are similarly joined 
in Test. Nepht. 3, pr) yivr\(r9f. b)s2d8op.a, 
■qTis evqXXale Ta|iv 4)vo-e{i)S a{iTT)S. 
'OpoCcdS 8e Kal 01 'Eyp^Y^P'^ evi]XXa|av 
Ta^iv (|>v(reb>s avTwv, ovs KaTTjpderaTo 
Kvpios. Others understand tovtois of the 
libertines who are subsequently referred to 
as otiToi (w. 8, 10, 12, 16, 19) ; but the 
beginning of ver. 8 (pevToi Kal ovtoi) 
seems to distinguish between them and 
the preceding. The verb Ikit. occurs in 
Gen. xxxviii. 24 of Tamar, Exod. xxxiv. 
15, 16, (pi] iroTe) eKiropveijo'bxriv hiritru^ 
Twv Oewv avTwv, Lev. xvii. 7, Hos. iv. 12, 
Ezek. xvi. 26, 28, 33. 

direXOovcrai, oiritrw o-apKos eT^pos. In 
the case of the angels the forbidden 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. i. 27), what 
Philo calls dvdpovs Kal eKOeVfiovs pC^eis 
{de Gig. M i. p. 267), cf. Exod. xxx. 9, 
oxiK dvoio-eis Ovpiapa eTepov. For the 
post-classical phrase cf. 2 Pet. ii. 10, tovs 
oTiaco capKos Iv eiriOvpicj piocpoi) iropeu- 
ope'vovs, Deut. iv. 3, eiropewBrj dirio-oj- 
BeeX(|>eY(ip> Jei- ii- 2, 3. 




aapKos cTe'pas, irpOKeii'Tai Seiyfia irupos aiui'iou Sikt]!/ uire'xouaai. 
8. *0|yi.oi(i)s |jie'»Toi xai outoi cfuirkiaj^ofxecoi adpKa jaci' luaivouaiv. 

TTpoKcivTai, 8ciYp.a irvposaiwviov 8Ckt|V 
viTe\ov<rai. Cf. Enoch Ixvii. 12, *' this 
judgment wherewith the angels are 
judged is a testimony for the kings and 
the mighty," 2 Pet. ii. 6, tiirdSciYpa |ie\- 
XovTuv a<re^4<riv reOciKus, i Cor. x. 6, 
II TVTToi IycVovto, Heb. iv. 11 iva p.T| 
6v rij aiiTu Tis iiiroSeiYiAaTi ire<ri[) Ti]S 
airciOcias- 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. xix. 20, XX. 10, xxi. 8. It is ques- 
tioned whether irvp6s is governed by 
Sciypa or 8ikt)v. If by 8ikt]v, then the 
burning of Sodom is itself spoken of as 
still going on (eternal), and this is in 
accordance with Jewishbelief as recorded 
in Wisd. X. 7 (irvp FlevTaTrdXews) •qs en 
(xapTvpiov TTJs irovTipias Kairvi^opevr) 
Ka6e'(rTT)K£ \ipcro<i, Philo [De Abr. M. ii. 
xxi.), pexpi' vvv KaUrai. to yap K£pav- 

VtOV TTVp tJKKTTa (rP£VVT3p€VOV r\ V€p£Tat. 

T| lvTv4>€Toi.. iricTTis Sc <ra<|)«o-TaTi] ra 
SpcopEva, Tov yap avpPePT) kotos irdOovs 
o-Tjpeioj' ecTTiv o t6 avaSi.S6p£vos del 
Ka'TTvos Kal 8 peTaXXevovo-i Oeiov, ib. V. 

Mays. M. ii. p. 143. Some disallow this 
sense of aliovios and think that it can 
only be used of hell-fire, as in 4 Mace, 
xii. 12 (the words of the martyr contrast- 
ing the fires of present torture with the 
eternal flames awaiting the persecutor), 
TapiEVETai (Tt y\ Oeia 8ikt) irvKVOTEpu Kal 
al(i>vi(o irvpi, Kal pdcravoi C19 oXov rov 
aluva ouK dviicrov<ri tre. For an exami- 
nation of the word see Jukes, Restitution 
of all Things, p. 67 n, and cf. Jer, xxiii. 
3^, 40, Ezek. xvi. 53, 55 (on the restora- 
tion of Sodom), xlvii. 1-12 (a prophecy 
ot the removal of the curse of the Dead 
Sea and its borders), Enoch, x. 5 and 12, 
where the els aiuva of the former verse 
is equivalent to seventy generations in 
the latter, also ver. 10 where ^wt) aloivios 
is reckoned at 500 years. As the mean- 
ing of SeiYpa is made clear by the fol- 
lowing participial clause, it seems 
unnecessary to take it with Trvpds in the 
sense of " an example or type of eternal 
fire," which would escape the difficulty 
connected with aluviov, but leaves 8ikt|v 
■uire'xovcraL (for which cf. Xen. Mem. ii. 
I, 8, 2, Mace. iv. 48) a somewhat otiose 
appendage. In the book of Enoch (Ixvii. 
4 foil.) the angels who sinned are said to 
be imprisoned in a burning valley (Hin- 
nom, ch. 27) in which there was a great 

swelling of waters, accompanied 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 sub- 
terranean fire was believed to exist under 
the Gehenna valley." 

Ver. 8. 6p.oi(dS fxevToi Kal ovroi. 
Notwithstanding these warnings the 
libertines go on in similar courses. 

ev\ytrv\,a.t,6\L€vo\, trapKa p.iaivovo-i,v 
Compare Acts ii. 17 (a quotation from 
Joel ii. 28),ol'irpe<rPT5Tepou vjAwv evvTrviois 
lvvirvia<r6t]<rovToi, of those that see 
visions : and so Spitta (holding that Jude 
copied from 2 Peter), would render it 
here, prefixing the article to make it 
correspond with the \|/ev8o'irpo<|>TJTai and 
\)/cv8o8i8d(rKaXoi of 2 Peter ii. i. Those 
who take the opposite view {viz. that 
2 Peter was copied from Jude) will see 
nothing to justify the article. The word 
is used by Isa. Ivi. 10 in connexion with 
the words ovk CYVwcrav, ovk cl8dT€S (see 
ver. 10 below), Ivtm'via^dp.evoi koittjv 
<j>i,Xo{ivT€s woToloi, which Delitsch ex- 
plains " instead of watching and praying 
to see divine revelations for the benefit 
of the people, they are lovers of ease 
talkers in their sleep. 

Bengel explains " Hominum mere 
naturalium indoles graphice admodum 
descripta est. Somnians multa videre, 
audire, etc. sibi videtur." And so Chase 
" they live in an unreal world of their 
own inflated imaginations," comparing 
the conjectural reading of Col. ii. 18, 
d^pa Kevc|jiPaT£V(dV. This accords with 
ver. 10 : in their delusion and their blind- 
ness 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, Soinm. i. i, irdrcpov trv^^aivei. 
del Tois Ka0£-u8ovcriv evuTrvid^eiv, dXX 
oti pvT)pov£vov(riv ; Probl. 30, 14, 2, 01 iv 
Tw Ka6£v8£LV IvviTvia^opEvoi lo-Tape'vTis 
T'ijs 8i.avoias, Kal KaO' oorov t^pepei, 
dvcipuTTovcriv, cf. Artem. Oneir, i. 1. . 
Some interpret of polluting dreams {cf 
Lev. 15) ; but the word evvrrvta^dpevoi 
is evidently intended to have a larger 
scope, covering not merely piaivovcriv 
but dOeToiJeriv and pXa<r(J)T)povo^tv. We 
must also interpret piaivu here by the 
a(re\y£tav of ver. 4, the cK'rropvEvo'ao'aL 
and o-apKos Irepas of ver. 7. This 
wide sense appears in Tit. i. 15, tois 

\'0L. V. 




KupioTH]Ta ^ Sc dScToucTii', 86§a5 8e pXaw^ii^fiouo-ii'. 9. 'O Se 
1 Kvpiorr^xa] — TYjras J«^ Orig. 

fi€fiiao-|ievois ovSev KaOapdv, dXXa 
)ji€|;LiavTai avroiv kuI 6 vovs Kai r\ 

KvpioTr|Ta Se dOcTovo-iv, 8o|as ik 
3\acr(}>T)f/.oiJo-i.v. On first reading one is 
inclined to take the words KvptoxTjs and 
8d|ai simply as abstractions. The re- 
sult of indulgence in degrading lusts is 
the loss of reverence, the inability to 
recognise true greatness and due degrees 
of honour. This would agree with the 
description of the libertines as sharing 
in the dvTiXoYia of Korah, as KVfjiaTa 
a-ypia 6a\do-o-tjs, as Yoyvvo-Tai uttering 
hard speeches against God. When wc 
examine however the use of the word 
KvpioTTjs 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 o-dpKa ot ver. 8 is represented 
by o<ra cj>v<riK&)S lirio-TavTai, and the 
•phrase K-upioTTjxa dOcTovoriv, Sd^as 8e 
PXoo-(()Tip,oxi<riv by o<ro oiik o'iSao-iv 
PXa<r<j>t]p,ovo-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 Pet. ii. 
10, Eph. i. 21 (having raised him from 
the dead and set him on his right hand) 
■uirepdvo) irderrjs dpxrjs Kai c^ovcria; Kal 

St>vd|Jl€US Kttl KVplOTTJTOSj Col. i. l6, 

€v avTu) CKTiafiT) TO, irdvTa ev tois 
ovpavots Kal eiri tt^s y^s, rd opard Kai 
ra. ddpara, eire Opdvot €it€ KvpioTiiTes 
«iT€ dpxal €iTe elovo-tai, where Light- 
foot considers .that the words are in- 
tended to be taken in their widest sense, 
including bad and good angels, as well 
as earthly dignities. In our text, how- 
ever, it would seem that the word should 
be understood as expressing the attribute 
of the true Kvpios, cf. Didache, iv. i 
(honour him who speaks the word of 
God), '<Ls Kvpiov, oOev ^dp t| KvpidTT)s 
XaXcirai, Iksi Kijptds eo-riv, Herm. Sim, 
v. 6, I, €ls SovXov rpdirov ov Kcirai o 
vlos Tov ©60V, dXX" els c^overiav (i£YdXiiv 
KCiTai Ka.l K-upidTT]Ta. The verb d0£T€b) 
has God or Christ for its object in Luke 
X. 16, John xii. 48, i Thess. iv. 8, etc. 
We have then to consider how it can be 
said that the libertines (oiTOi) " despise 
authority " in like manner to the above- 

mentioned offenders. For the former 
we may refer to ver. 4, tov Kvpiov T|p.biv 
dpvovp.€voL, for the latter to tiie contempt 
shown by the Israelites towards the com- 
mandments of God. 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 to- 
wards God's representatives, the angels 
(Gen. XIX. 5). Cf. Joseph. Ant. i. 11. 2, 
els dvOptoTTovs ■qtrav -uPpio-Tal Kal Trpos 
TO Qtiov dcrtPeis, and Test. Aser. 7, where 
the sin of Sodom is expressly stated to 
have been their behaviour towards the 
angels, ^y\ ylvivif. ws ZdSofxa -q^Tis 
T)Yv6T)(r£ Toiis dyyeXoDS Kvpiov Kal 
dirtiXtTO ecus aiwvos. 

8d|as Se pXacr<|>T)fj.o{)trtv. Cf. 2 Pet. 
ii. 10, ToXp.'rjTal avOdScLS Sd^as ov Tpe- 
liovciv pXao-<t>T]p.ovvT€S. The only other 
passage in the N.T. in which the plural 
occurs is I Peter i. 11, where the sense 
is different. Dr. Bigg compares Exod. 
XV. II, Tis op-oids opoi ev Oeois, Kvpie ; 
Tis o^oids <roi ; 8e8o|.a(r|ievos cv aYLois, 
6avp,ao-Tbs Iv Sd^ois- Clement's inter- 
pretation of this and the preceding clause 
is as follows; (Adiinibr. 1008) "domi- 
nationem spernunt, hoc est solum domi- 
num qui vere dominus ncster est, Jesus 
Christus . . . majestatem blasphemant, 
hoc est angelos ". The word 8d|a in 
the singular is used lor the Shekinah, 
see my note on James ii. i. This sug- 
gests that Clement may be right in sup- 
posing 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 Xd-yoL for the angels as con- 
trasted with the divine Ad-yos. In Philc*, 
Monarch, ii. p. 18 the divine 8d|a, is 
said to consist of the host of angels, 
8d|av 8i o"r)v clvai vop.i^<i> Tas (r« 
8opv<j>opovo-as 8vvdp.€is. See Test, jfitd. 
25, Kvpios £vXd7Tjo-£ TOV Aevt, 6 ayveXos 
TOV irpoo-<oirov £|jl€, at 8vvd|Jicis ttjs 
8o^T)s tov Zv|ji£wv, also Luke ix. 26, 
where it is said that '• the Son of Man 
will come in His own glory and in 
the glory of the Father and ot the holy 
angels".* Ewald, Hist. Isr. tr. vol. 
viii. p. 142, explains t| KvpidT-ns of the 
true Deity, whom they practically deny 

* There is much said of the glory of the angels in Asc. Isaiae, pp. 47, 49 f 
«id. Charles. 

lOYAA E1112T0AH 


MtxarjX 6 dpxaYY^^°5' ^"""^ ^ ''"'? SiajBoXw 8iaKpt>'6)xe»'os SieXeyeTO 
irepl Tou Mwuae'ojs awfAaros, ouk €ToXfJiT]a€»' Kpicrif eirei'eYKeii' (SXac- 

' o Se MixaT)\ . . . ore ACKL, J>^ ; ore Mux- • • • tot€ B. 

by their dual God ; ai 86|ai as the 
angels, whom they blaspheme by sup- 
posing 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. John xiii. 20). 
There may also be some allusion to the 
teaching or practice of the libertines. If 
we compare the mysterious reference in 
I Cor. xi. 10, 81a. TOviTo d(t>eiX£t t| •yvvq 
^^ovo-iav ex*'-*' ^'^'*' '^'^^ Kt<^a\r[<i 8ia Tois 
oLYYcXovs, which is explained by Ter- 
tullian (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 
p\a(r(|>T]^ia, of which the libertines were 
guilty, to consist in a denial or non- 
recognition of the presence of good 
angels in their worship, or of the possi- 
bility of their own becoming koivuvoi 
Saip.oviii)v ; 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 verse. 

Ver. 9. 6 Se MixaTjX 6 dpxaYV<Xos. 
The term apx- occurs in the N.T. only 
here and in i Thess. iv. 16. The names 
of seven archangels are given in Enoch. 
The story here narrated is taken from the 
apocryphal Assmnptio Mosis, as we learn 
from Clem. Adumbr. in Ep. jfudae, 
and Orig. De Princ. iii. 2, i. Didymus 
(In Ejist. Judae Enarrafio) says that 
some doubted the canonicity of the 
Epistle because of this quotation from 
an apocryphal book. In Cramer's 
Catena on this passage (p. 163) we read 
TtXevT-qo-avTOS €v TO) 6p€i Mbivo-ews, o 
MixaT)X airotTTeXXeTai p.€Ta0ii<riov to 
crCi[i.a, eiTa tov Sia^oXov Kara tov 
Muvcrcios 3Xa(r4>'>ip.oi)VTos kqi (|>ovea 
dvaYopevovTOS 8id to iraToLlai tov 

AlY\5TrTlOV, OVK eViyKUtV TT)V KttT* allTOV 

PXao-(j)ir)p,iav 6 a.yyt\o<i, 'EiriTip,i](rai (rot 
6 0609, Trpos TOV 8idpoXov e<|)T). Charles 
in his edition of the Assumpiioii thus 
summarises the fragments dealing with 
the funeral of Moses: (i) 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, "Ihe 
Lord rebuke thee, for it was God's spirit 
which created the world and all man- 
kind ". [b) He brings the charge of 
murder against Moses (the answer to 
this is wanting). The story is based 
upon Deut. xxxiv. 6 (R.V.), " he buried 
him {mg. he was buried) in the valley 
. . . but no man knoweth of his sepul- 
chre unto this day ". Compare the vain 
search for Elijah (2 Kings ii. 16, 17). 
Further details in Josephus {Ant. iv. 
8, 48), v€'(f>ov9 al(|)vi8iov ■inrep avTOv 
CTavTOS d4>avi^6Tai kuto. tivos ^ 
705. YeYpo<j>€ Se aviTOv ev Tals tepals 
pi^Xois TtOveuTtt, 8€i<ra9 p.T) 81' 
v7r(.p^okr\v TTJs irepl avTov dp£T-f)S irpbs 
TO Oeiov atiTov dvaxt»>P'»io'ai ToXpi^aoMriv 
€iir«iv, Philo i. p. 165, and Clem. Al. 
{Str. 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. See comment in the larger 
edition, pp. 74-76. 

SiaKpivdpevos. Here used in the 
sense of " disputing," as in Jer. xv. 10, 
dvSpa 8iaKpivdp,evov irdo-fj T-jj Y-jj, Joel 
iii. 2, Acts xi. 2. See my note on James 
i. 6 and below ver. 22. 

8uX€7£TO. Cf. Mark ix. 34, irpos 
dXXi^Xovs 8i€X€x9T]<rav, tis p,ei£wv. 

OVK €TdX|iT)a€v Kpio-iv eTTeveyKetv 
PXaar(|>'npia9. I take pXao-4)T)pias to 
be gen. qiialitatis, expressed by the 
adjective pXdcr<})Tjp.ov in 2 Peter : see 
below on ver. 18, James i. 25, dKpoaTTjs 
CTTiXirjorp.ovTJs, ii. 4 KpiTai 8iaXoYio-p.a>v 
TTovTjpdiv, iii. 6, 6 K6(rp.o9 ttjs d8i,Kias> 
also 2 Peter ii. i, atpeVeis dTruXeias, 
ii. 10, cTTiSvp-ia jxiacrpov. For eirev- 
cyitsiv see Plat. Legg. ix. 856 irpo- 
8do-eo>9 aiTiav eiri.<{>ep(i>v, ib, g43,Tipb>piav 
iiTi^. The word occurs elsewhere in 
N.T. only in Rom. iii. 5. Field (On' 
Translation of N.T. p. 244) compares 
Acts XXV. 18 01 KttTiiYopoi ov8ep.iav 
aiTiav e4)epov iv eyat vTrevoovv, Diod. 
xvi. 29, 8iKT)v €inijv£YKav KaTa twv 
ZirapTittToiv, ib. xx. 10, Kpio-eis dSiKovs 
t'7ri<|)£povT€S, XX. 62, 4>oPT)6ei9 Tas ^iri- 
(|>epo|xeVa9 icpi<r£is, tom. x. p. r7i ed. 
Bip. iTrr)vtyKav Kpio-iv irepl v^pews, and 




4)T)|jiias, dWa €lTrei' 'ETTiTifiriaai <^0'- K^P^os.^ lo. Outoi 8e oaa 

fjiek ouK oiSacrti' pXaCT^JTifAoGo-ii', oaa 8e <j)U(nKws is ra aXoya X,G>a 

cirio-Tat'Tai, iv toutols (|)9eipo»'Tai. II. oual auTois, on ttj 68w 

' Kvpios] 6 Oeos J«^. 

translates " durst not bring against him 
an accusation oi 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 ab- 
stained from charging the devil with 
speaking evil of Moses. 

Kpio-is, hke Kpivoj, has the two mean- 
ings of judgment and of accusation, cf. 
Lycurg. 31 where 01 o-uKo4)avTOTJVT€S 
are distinguished from twv SiKaiws tols 
Kpiorcis evla^Ta^l.4vo>v. 

eirtTifJiTicrai. croi Kvpios. These words 
occur in the vision of Zechariah(iii. i-io) 
where the angel of the Lord replies 
to the charges of Satan against the high 
priest Joshua with the words £7riTi|Aijo-ai 
Kvpios €V o-oi, SidPoXc, Kai kirLTi\ir)<rai 
Kvpios £V o-oi, 6 6K\«|ap.€Vos TTjv 'lepov- 
o-aXiifi. They were no doubt inserted as 
appropriate by the author of the Ass. 
Mos. in his account of the controversy 
at the grave of Moses. We may com- 
pare Matt. xvii. 18, sireTifA-qo-ev avT&> 6 

Ver. 10. ovTOi Se oca p.£V ovk oiSao-iv 
pXa<r<j>T)fj.ovo-iv. The libertines do the 
contrary of what we are told of the re- 
spect shown by the angel even towards 
Satan : they speak evil of that spiritual 
world, those spiritual beings, of which 
they know nothing, cf. 2 Peter ii. 12. 
The common verb pXaa-<{>. shows that 
the 8o|ai of ver. 8 are identical with oo-a 
OVK oiSao-iv here. For the blindness of 
the carnal mind to all higher wisdom cf. 
I Cor. ii. 7-16, a passage linked with our 
epistle by the distinction between the 
\|/vxiKoi and TrvevjiaTiKoi and by the 
words XaXoi)|Ji.£v 06ov o-o<f)iav, ^v ovScis 


Ktv • €1 Yap eyvioa-av ovk av tov Kvpiov 
TTJs S6|t]s ecTTavpoicrav. See too John 
viii. 19, I Tim. vi, 4, rervi^oirai fATjSev 
eirio-Ta|Ji£vos. For the form o'iSao-iv see 
my ed. of St. James, p. clxxxiii. 

oo-a 8e 4>vo-iK(i)s us ra aXo^a ^oia 
eTTio-TavTai. This stands for arapKa in 
ver. 8 and is explained by ao-eXy^ia-v 
in ver. 4, eKiropvsvo-ao-ai in ver. 7, 

LLiaivovaiv in ver. 8, Kara ras €iri6vp.ias 
avToiv Trop€v6fA€Voi in ver. 16. 

<}>vo-iKus, " by instinct," so Dion. L. 
X. 137, (|>vo-iK(iJs Kat X'^P^^^ \6yov, 
Alford cites Xen. Cyrop. li. 3, g, p.dxiv 
opaj irdvTas dv6p<oTrovs <j>vo-€i eTTi- 
o-TafJieVovs, wairep yi Kai raXXa ^cLa 
ciriaTaTai Tiva (idxiiv (.K.a.<na. ovSe Trap' 
£vbs aXXov [AaOovTa rj irapa ttjs <|)vcr£0)S. 

kv TovTois <J)9£ipovTai. 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, 
iii. 19, where speaking of the enemies of 
the Cross the apostle says : <Lv to TtXos 
diroSX£ia, b>v 6 d£os t) KOiXia, Kai t| 8d|a 
kv rf) alax'wv'p avToiv, Eph. iv. 22, 
diro0£'o-6ai . . . tov iraXaiov dv6p<oTrov 

TOV (j>6£ip6(l£V0V KaTO. TttS £1Tl9v(JliaS. 

Ver. II. oval avTOis, oti Tfj 68<I) tov 
Kaiv £'irop£v6T)crav. For the use of he 
aorist see note on ver. 4, irap£ia£8vT)<rav : 
for the phrase cf. Blass, Gr. p. 119, and 
2 Peter ii. 15, llaKoXovOiio-avTfs T-ji oStj 
TOV BaXadp.. The phrase ovai, so com- 
mon in Enoch, especially in cc. 94 to 
100, and in the Gospels and Apocalypse, 
occurs in the epistles only here and in 
I Cor. ix. 16. The woe is grounded on 
the fate which awaits those who walk in 
the steps of Cain, Balaam and Korah. 
In 2 Peter Balaam is the only one re- 
ferred to of the three leaders of wicked- 
ness here named by Jude. Cain, with 
Philo, is the type of selfishnes- (M. 
I p. 206), irds <j)iXavTos IttikXtjo-iv Kaiv 
£vpT]K£v (quoted by Schneckenb. p. 221) ; 
he is named as a type of jealous hate 
in I John iii. 11, 12, iva a.yaT!ii>\i.e.v 
aXXi]Xovs ■ ov Ka9b>9 Kaiv Ik tov TrovT)pov 
TJv Kai ea4)a^£V tov d8€X<()ov avTOV • Kai 
xdpiv Tivos tfx^o.iif.v avTov ; oti to. f-pyo. 
avTOV irovT|pa tJv, Ta 8e tov d8EX(|>o{j 
avTov SiKaia, of unbelief in Heb. xi. 4, 
■7riaT£i irXfiiova Qvaria.v" k^eK irapd Kaiv 
'Trpoo-iiv£7K£v Tu ©£w> cf Philo, De Agric. 
I M. 300 f., and Targ. Jer. on Gen. iv. 7, 
cited by Schneckenburger, in which Cain 
is represented as saying "non est judicium, 
nee judex, nee est aliud saeculum, nee da- 
bitur merces bona justis, nee ultio sumetur 
de improbis," etc. There seems no reason 
why we should not regard Cain here as 
symbolising the absence both of faith 



ToG Kalf eiropeuOt]o-ac, Kal ttj irXdcT) too BaXaa|j. jjiiaOou e|€)(u0T)C7af, 

and of love, cf. i John iii. 23. Euthym. 
Zig. gives an allegorical explanation, 
Kai avToi a8eX.4)OKT6voi cltri, 81' aiv 
Si8d<rKOv<ri ras twv aTraTojjji€v<i)v xjfvxas 
diroKTeivovTes. 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 (Epi- 
phan. Pan. i. 3, 37, i, ot '0<f>iTai ras 
^po4)d<7£is €lX'»i<f>acrLV dirb ttjs NiKoXdov 


aip€<r€(ov). They held that the Creator 
was evil, that the serpent represented 
the divine Wisdom, that Cain and his 
successors were champions of right 
(Epiphan. ih. 38, i, ol Kaiavoi (f>ao-i tov 
Kalv Ik tt)s lo'X'upoTepas Avvdp.cb>9 
-inrdpxtiv Kal ttjs dvcoOev aviGcvrias, and 
boast themselves to be of kin to Cain, 
Kal T(ov !Zo8(^i.T(i>v Kal 'Hcrav Kal Kope, 
see too Iren. i. 51, Clem. Str. vii. § 108.) 
rfi irXdvT) TOV BaXadp. fj,io-0oO k%i.yji- 
BT^o-av. Every word in this clause is 
open to question. The passive ot ckxcw; 
to "pour out," is used to express either 
the onward sweeping movement of a 
great crowd, or the surrender to an over- 
powering motive on the part of an in- 
dividual = ejfxisi sunt* as in Sir. xxxvii. 29, 
fiT) €Kxv6fis «ir' €8ea-fj.dTfov, Test. Reiib. 
I, iropvEia £v Tj £|€xv6t]v, Clem. Ai. Str. 
ii. p. 491, els T|8ovii]v, Tpdywv 8iki]v, 
eKX^OcvTSS KaO-nSvi-n^Govcriv, Plut. V. 
Ant. 21, els TOV ^^SviraOrj Kal dKoXacTov 
piov EKKcxv^Evos. Such an interpreta- 
tion seems not quite consistent with 
(ii(rOov, which implies cool self-interest. 
That covetousness, alo-xpoKcpScia, 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 ? 
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 irXavx), ^""^ what 
is the reference in the word ? Should 
we take irXdv|f) as equivalent to els 
■T7\a.vy\v (Winer, p. 268) ? 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 irXdvjj by the preceding 68w 
(dative of the means or manner), which 
is used in the same collocation in 2 Peter 
ii. 15. What then are we to understand 
by " they were hurried along on the line 
of Balaam's error " ? What was his 
error ? From Num. xxii., xxv. 1-3, 
and xxxi. 16, Neh. xiii. 2, MuaPiTai 
efxio-Ouo-avTO eir' ovtov tov BaXadp. 
KaTapdcracrdai, 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 fornica- 
tion. This then is the error or seduction 
by which he leads them astray. f In rab- 
binical literature Balaam is a sort of type 
of false teachers (Pirke Aboth, v. 29, with 
Taylor's n.). Some suppose the name 
Nicolaitan (Apoc. ii. 6) to be formed 
from the Greek equivalent to Balaam 
= " corrupter of the people " ; see how- 
ever the passages quoted from Clem. 
Al. in the Introduction on Early Heresies. 
In Apoc. ii. 14 we read of some in Per- 
gamum that held the teaching of Balaam, 
OS eSiSao-Kev to) BaXaK ^aXelv o-kov- 
SaXov evojiriov twv vlwv 'Icrpa-r^X, <{>aYeir 
elSuXdOvTa Kal iropvevcrat. 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 the Apostolic Council as to the 
use of meats offered to idols (cf. i Cor. 
8), and perhaps in burning incense in 
honour of the Emperor, see Ramsay, 
Expositor for 1904, p. 409, and July, pp. 
43-60. On the other hand, Jude con- 
tinually charges them with moral laxity, 
and we may suppose that this was com- 
bined with claims to prophetic power, 
and with the covetousness which is often 
ascribed to the false teachers of the early 
Church, as in i Thess. ii. 3 f., where 

* I do not think the marginal reading in the R.V., " cast themselves away," is 

+ Zahn understands irXavT] in an active, not a passive sense, as the ruling prin- 
ciple of the irXdvos Balaam, not as the error into which others fell through his 
seductions. I do not think Jude discriminated between these meanings : irXavt) 
covers both. 


lOYAA EnirroAH 


Kai TTJ di'TiXoyia tou Kope dircuXoi'TO. 12. 

OUTOl CKnC ' [OtJ 

^ OUTOl eio-ivj add. (ex. v. i6) YOYYuo-rai — Troptvo\i.tvoi. ^ C^. 

Paul asserts of his own ministry that it 
was ovK cK TrXdvTis ouSe i^ dKadapcrias 
ouoe fv SdXo) . . . aire ya-p iv \6y(o 
KoXaK€ias fyev^]Qrf\, ovrt ev '7rpo(j>d<r€i 
TrXeov^ltas, aire ^•r]T0vvT€S l^ avQpwTToiv 
Sd^av, I Tim. iii. 8, g, SiaKovous fir) 
SiXoYovs, (AT] o'lvo) TToXXo) TTpoae'xovTas, 
fiv] alaxpoKcpScis, exovros to (xvo-nipiov 
TT^S irio^Ttcos ev KaOapd avveiirffrei. Tit. 
i. 7, II SiSdo-KovTcs d p,T) Sti K^pSovs 
xdpiv, I Peter v. 2. For the gen. fiicOov 
cf. Winer, p. 258, Plat. Rep. ix. 575 B, 
p.icrdoveTriKovpo'Dcri.v, I Cor. vii. 23,Ti|iT)S 

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 repu- 
tation as a prophet, to lead astray the 
Israelites by drawing them away from 
the holy worship of Jehovah to the im- 
pure worship of Baal Peor. So these 
false teachers use their prophetical gifts 
for purposes of self-aggrandisement, and 
endeavour to make their services attrac- 
tive by excluding from religion all that 
is strenuous and difficult, and opening 
the door to every kind of indulgence. 
See the notes and comments on the 
parallel passages of 2 Peter in my edi- 
tion of that Epistle. 

rfj dvTiXoYiqL tov Kopc dTrwXovTO. 
For Korah's sin see Num. xvi. i f. and 
compare, for the same rebellious spirit 
in the Christian Church, 3 John, 9, 10 
(of Diotrephes), Tit. i. 10, 11. tio-l 
■TroXXoi dvvTroTaKTOi . . . ovis 8ei 
eTrio-TO|ji,i^eiv, ib. i. 16; ib. iii. 10, 11, 
I Tim. i. 20 (among those who have 
made shipwreck of the faith mention is 
made of Hymenaeus and Alexander) ovs 
"TTapcSuKa TO) Zarav^ iva iraiScvOuoriv 
ftT) pXao-<j>T]fj.£iv, ib. vi. 3-6, 2 Tim. ii. 16- 
18, 6 Xdyos avTwv u)S YaYVP'*'''*'*'' vo|it)v 
e^ei, uv e(mv 'Yp-e'vaios Kai 4>iXif]T0S, 
oiTives irepl ttjv dX-rjOeiav r\<j~r6xr\<rav, 
ib. ii. 25, iv. 14, where the opposition of 
Alexander the coppersmith is noted ; but 
especially iii. 1-9, 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 dvTiXoYia see Heb. xii. 3, dvaXo- 
Yio"ao-9e Tov T0iaiJTT)v virofAeixevriKdTa iiirh 
Tu>v dfxapTioXtiiv els eavTOv dyTiXoYiiv. It 
is used as a translation of Meribah in 

Num. XX. 13 al. and (in relation to Korah) 
in Protcv. Jac. g. fivi^o-dTjTi oca tiroiTjatv 
6 0€os Tois AaOdv, Kupe, Kai 'A|3ELpd|x, 
TTiis €8ix.da9T] T) Y'l tai KaTeTriev avToiis 
8id TT|v dvTiXoYiav avTuv. 

Rampf draws attention to the climax 
contained in these examples. The sin of 
Cain is marked by the words eiropev- 
OTjcrav oSw, that of Balaam the gentile 
prophet bv e^fX'^^T''''^'' '"■XdvT), that of the 
Levite Korah by dirfoXovTo dvTiXoYta- 

Ver. 12. ovToi elaiv [oi] ev Tais a.ya.- 

irais vniiv o-mXdScs <ruvevi!«)X''''^K'*'''*''- 

Dr. Chase quotes Zech. i. 10 f., Apoc. 
vii. 14, Enoch xlvi. 3, Secrets of Enoch, 
vii. 3 xviii. 3, xix. 3, etc., for the phrase 
ovToi elcriv, adding that it was probably 
adopted by St. Jude from apocalyptic 
writings, for which he clearly had a 
special liking. On the early history of 
the Agape, see my Appendix C to Clem. 
Al. Strom, vii. The parallel passage in 
2 Peter (on which see n.) has two re- 
markable divergencies from the text 
here, reading dirdTais for aYdirais and 
o-iriXoi for o-TriXdSes. 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 under- 
btand it of a hidden rock, v({>aXos ireTpa, 
see Thomas Mag., o-iriXds, 'Attikws* 
v({>aXo; irtTpa, "EXXTjveSj Etymol. M., 
tnriXdSes . . • oi inrb OdXao-trav kc- 
Kpvfi.p.£vai TTCTpai, oOcv Kai v4>aXo$ 
dvOpu-iros Xeyctoi 6 KEKpv|jip.£'vos Kai 
TravovpYos, ib. KaTao-7riXd£ovT€s> KOTa- 

KpVTrTOVTCS, OTTO p.ETa4>0pds TtiJv V<|>dX(OV 

"ircTptov, aiTives vtto ijSoTOS koXvit- 


KivSvvov cTTK^epovo-i (both cited by 
Wetst.). The same explanation is given 
by the scholiast on Horn. Od. v. 401-405, 
Kai 8r] 8o\;Trov okovo-* ttoti <r'iriXd8€o-<rt 
OaXdo-o-Tis . . . dXX* aKTal irpopXTJTCS 
ecav o-'7riXd8€s Te iraYoi. Tt. See Plut. 
Mor. loi B, evSia o-iriXdSos, which 
Wytt. translates " tranquillitas maris 
caecam rupem tegentis," ib. 476 a, 
Oecumenius on this passage, at o-iriXdSes 
Tois irXc'ovaiv dXE'Opioi, dirpoaSoKiiTws 
eiriYevofievai (? -vois), and E|ai({>vT)s, 
wairep airiXdScs, lirdYOVTES ovtois tov 
oXtOpov Toiv xj/vx^v. Wetst. also quotes 
Heliod. V. 31, OaXdo-o-j) irpoaciKacras 
dv Tovs avSpas al<|>vi8i<i> o-irtXaSi 
KaTaaeicrSevTas. The compound KaTa- 
oTTiXd^u) joined with the parallel casp 





rais ^ 

dydirais ^ ufidf ^ ainXaSe?, crot'£uw)(ou|xe»'oi d^xipwSj* 

1 01 €v Tais] om. 01 ^ K vulg. Luc. Theophl. Oecon. +, Chase. 

-ayaiTai% ^ BKL syrr. sah. boh. + ; aTraTais AC. 

" vfiuv] avToiv A vulg. syrP + . 

■• <rwv£uuxov|Ji€voi, a<j)oPujs syrr., Treg., WH ; o-vvevtox- a<j>oP<os, Ti. 

of v<{>aX.os justifies, I think, this sense 
of o-TTiXas, which is rejected by most of 
the later commentators.* Cf. also the 
use o{ vavayia in i Tim. i. ig. Scopulus 
is used in a similar metaphoric sense, 
see Cic. in Pis. 41 where Piso and 
Gabinius are called " geminae voragines 
scopulique reipublicae ". Others take 
o-iriXdSes in the very rare sense of 
" spots," or " stains," like o-rriXoi in 
2 Peter. The only example of this sense 
seems to be in Orph. Lith. 614, but 
Hesych. s;ives the interpretation cnriXds, 
fxcpiiao-fxcvoi. I agree with Bp. Words- 
worth 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 ol . . . o-iriXaSes <ruv€v<i>x°'"'F''*''*"' ' 

a.4>o|3(i>9 cavTovs iroiy.aivovTt^. If 
we take o-TTiXaSts as complementary to 
o-uvevioxo-ufxevoi, it is better to take 
d<|>oP(os with TToiii. : if we omit the 
article and take enriXaSes to be the 
predicate, a^vvtv<lt\o■6^l.evol will be an 
epexegetic participle, which will require 
strengthening by a<}>6Pa>s. Generally 
d<}). is used in a good sense, but we find 
it used, as here, of the want of a right 
fear in Prov. xix. 23. ^6^o<i Kvpiov tls 
Eci)f)v dvSpi, 6 Se a<^o^os k.t.X., ib. xv. 
16, Kpeiercrov (xiKpo. |xcpi9 (lera 4>5Pov 
Kvpiov TJ Oi^o-avpol fitYaXoi fiera d<j>- 
o^ias. Sir. v. 5, irepl €|iXao-(xoiJ (itj 
a4>oPos yivov, irpocrOeivai dp,apTiav e4>' 
d|xapTiais. The phrase eavrovs iroifi. 
recalls Ezek. xxxiv. 8, jpdo-KTjcrav ol 
"iroi[i€V6s laviTouq, toi Se TvpoPaTa (xov 
oviK «p6o-KT]<rav, but there does not seem 
to be any reference to spiritual pastors 
in Jude ; and iroijAatviD has probably 
here the sense " to fatten, indulge," 
as in Prov. xxviii. 7, Ss Se troiiJiaivei 
dawTiay, dTi.p.d^£i iraTtpa, ib. xxix. 3, 
OS 81 -iroipiaivEi irdpvasj diroXet ttXovtov, 
Plut. Mor. 702 B, "ArraXov vir* dpyia? 
|xaKpds eKXvOe'vTa Ko^jLiS-ij ♦iXoTroip.Tjv 
eiroiixaivcv drex*'*^? TriaivdjJievov. We 
may compare i Cor. xi. 27 f., James v. 5, 
I Tim. v. 6. 

v£(j>eXai dvvSpoi ti-irb dve|xti>v irapa* 
(t>Epd|j.£vat,. The character of the inno- 
vators is illustrated by figures drawn 
from the four elements, air, earth, sea, 
heaven (aldijp). Spitta points out tlie 
resemblance to a passage in Enoch 
(chapters ii.-v.), which follows imme- 
diately 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 de- 
viate from their orbits, how they all 

Are we to suppose the gender of a-mXds 
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. 171, 648, 660, 672), cf. Apoc. xi. 4, 
ovToi eIo'iv at Svo Xvxviai at evu'Triov 
Tov Kvplov £<rTii»T€S aud B's reading 
iTapa(|>epdfjL€voi below ? Or may we 
take o-TTiXdSes as expressing a comple- 
mentary notion in apposition to o-vvev- 
b>xovp.cvot ? 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' Dictionary of the Bible, ii. p. 
7996. translating : " these are sunken 
rocks in your love-feasts while they feast 
with you ". 

(T\ivf.vfj>\ov^f.vo\.. Is used in the parallel 
passage of 2 Peter with a dat. as in Luc. 
Philops 4, Jos. Ant. iv. 8, 7. 

* Dr. Bigg denies this meaning on the strength mainlv of two quotations, Horn. 
Od. iii. 298, drdp VTJds y* 'toti irrriXaSecrcriv ea^av KUfxara, where, he says, the 
flrirtXdSts are identical with Xio-o-r) al-ireld tc els o,\a Tre'-rpij of 293 ; and Anthol. 
xi. 390, <{>a(ri 8s Kat vrjeo-criv dXnrXavt'co-cri x^P^^°^5 rds ■u<|>dXovs ireTpas twv 
4>avep<I>v oririXdSwv. In both of these 1 think the word refers to the breakers at 
the bottom of the cliffs : in the latter it is said that hidden rocks are more danger- 
ous than visible ree;s. Compare Diod. iii. 43, opos Se ravTij irapaKeiToi Kara \ 
TT]V KopvejJTjv irtrpas diroTOf/.dSas tX'"' "^"-^ tois v»j/eari. KaTa"irXT]KTiKds, viro 8e ras 
pi^as <nri.\d8as o^cias KOi TTVKvds ev9aXaTTOVS. 



12 — 

eauTous TTOifxaifOk'Tes, v64)eXai ai'uSpoi uiro avi^iav Trapa(|)ep6fxei'ai, 
' irapa(j>cpo(j[,£voi B. 

rise and set in order, each in its sea- 
son, 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 Iruit. . . . And behold how the 
seas 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 slan- 
derously spoken proud and hard words 
(below ver. 15, irepl TravTwv Tciv crKXt^puv 
S)v eXaXTjcrav kut' aiiTov) with your im- 
pure mouths against his greatness." 
For the metaphor cf. Eph. iv. 14. In 
the parallel passage of 2 Peter the first 
figure is broken into two, irT)7al avvSpoi, 
6p,ix\ai •iiiro XaiXairo; IXavv6fi.€vai. Per- 
haps 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. We find the 
same comparison in Prov. xxv. 14 : " As 
clouds and wind without rain, so is he 
that boasteth himself of his gifts falsely ". 
[The LXX is less like our text, suggest- 
ing that Jude was acquainted with the 
original Hebrew. C] For the use of 
■uTTo with ovc'fjiwv see my note on James 
iii. 4. 

SevSpa <{>9i,voiro>piva aKapira. (|>6ivo- 
irojpivds is an adjective derived from 
TO 4>0iv6'jr«pov, which is itself, I think, 
bes; explained as a compound of 
<j>Oivovo-a oTTolpa {cf <|>0ivovTO9 fAT)vos), 
meaning the concluding portion of the 
oTTiapa. This latter word is, according to 
Curtius, compounded of 6ir-, connected 
with 6iTi(r<d, oTTio-Oev, and wpa = " the 
later prime ". We find 5pa used by 
itself both for the spring with its flowers 
and, more rarely, for the summer with 
its fruits, as in Thuc. ii. 52, upa ctovs. 
Perhaps from this double use of the word 
may have come the ambiguity in the 
application of d-n-topa, 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 ao-TTjp oTrupLvos //. v. 5). 
In early times it would seem that 

the Greeks, like the Germans (Tac. 
Germ. 26), recognised only three sea- 
sons — winter, spring, summer, and 
that the last was indifferently named 
Oepos or oirupa : compare Arist. 
Aves 709, irpwTa jacv upas <j>aivop,cv 
T|^€i9 TJpos, x^i(Xb>vo;, oircopas, with 
Aesch. Prom. 453, ■^v 8' ovSev aviTois 
o(5t€ x*^H'''*'''°5 TSKfiap ovt' avOcfxaiSovs 
TJpos oxire Kapiri|j.ov Oipovs |3€|3aiov. 
But though oiriipa 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 com- 
mencement of winter. Thus Hesiod 
(Op. 674) }iT]8^ (Ae'veiv olvov re viov Kal 
oirojpivov ojxPpov Kal x*''}*'^*'* eiriovTa : 
and oTTupa appears as a definite season 
by the side of the others in a line ot 
Euripides, quoted by Plutarch (Mor. 
1028 f), from which it appears that he 
assigned four months each to summer 
and winter, and two to spring and 
itTupa : — 

(J>iXt)s t' o-n-upa; SiTrrtixovs TJpos t* 

(where the epithet <t>iXT]s deserves notice). 
It is said that the author of the treatise 
De Diaeta (c. 420 B.C.), which goes 
under the name of Hippocrates, was 
the first to introduce a definite term 
(4>9iv6iTa)pov or (AeTdirojpov) for the new 
season, the word oirwpa being reserved 
for the late summer, according to the 
definition of Eustath. on //. v. 5, oTrcopa 
wpa jji€Ta|-u KeifXEVT] Oe'povs Kal tov fteT* 
aiiTT)v (AeToircipov. And so we find it 
used by Aristotle (Meteor, ii. 5), al 
XaXa^ai yivovrai capo; fi,€V Kal fiero- 
Ttwpov p.dXio'Ta, eiTa Kal ttjs oirupas, 
XeifioJvos SJ 6Xi.7dKi9> and by Theo- 
phrastus (irepl ZT)|j,€iti>v, 44), ka.v to eap 
Kal TO Oe'pos i)/vxpa yivi^Tai., t\ oirupa 
YivsTai Kal to (leTOTTupov irviYijpdv. 

There is a good deal of inconsistency 
about the exact limits of the seasons, as 
is natural enough when we remember 
that they were first distinguished for pur- 
poses of agriculture and navigation, as 
we see in Hesiod's Works and Days. 
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 




SeVSpa <})9ii'0Trwpii'a aKapTra Sis airoQavovra eKpi^wGeVra, 13. Kup.- 
ara aypia OaXdacrTjs eTra<j>pi^0k7a ras eaurwi' ai<TX"*'c^S) aftepes 

the zodiac, the reappearance of the birds, 
etc. A more strictly accurate division 
was made by the astronomeis, who dis- 
tinguished 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 re- 
vised calendar, which assigned definite 
dates to the diiferent seasons. Thus 
spring begins a.d. vii. id. Feb. (Feb. 7), 
summer a.d. vii. id. Mai. (May 9), 
autumn a.d. Hi. id. Sext. (Aug. 11), 
winter a.d, iv. id. Nov. (Nov. 10). 

To turn now to the commentators, I 
may take Trench as representing their 
view in his Authorised Version, p. 186, 
ed. 2, where he says, " The <j>6ivd'7ra)pov 
is the late autumn . . . which succeeds 
the oirtopa (or the autumn contemplated 
as the time of the ripened fruits of the 
earth) and which has its name irapa rh 
<f)6iv€cr0ai tt)v oiraipav, 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 <j>6ivdir(i)pov. 
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 ap- 
pears to be a reference to the parable of 
the fig-tree. ... At all events the men- 
tion of the season when fruit might be 
expected is significant." He adds in a 
note, " Strange to say, the earliest ver- 
sions all rendered <|)9ivoTra)piva, 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 feel- 
ing after, though he has not grasped, the 
right translation,' and himself explains 
<f>Oivoiro>piva aKapira as ' mutually com- 
pleting one another, without leaves, with- 
out fruit '. Tyndale was followed by 
Coverdale and the Great Bible. Simi- 
larly Wycliffe has ' hervest trees with- 

out fruyt,' and the Rheims version 
' trees of autumne unfruiteful '. The 
earliest oftender is the Geneva Testa- 
ment, which gives ' corrupt trees and 
without frute '. . , . The Bishops' Bible 
strangely combines both renderings, 
' trees withtred (<j>9iv€iv) at fruite 
gathering (oTrcipa) and without fruite,' 
which is explained in the margin, ' Trees 
withered in autumne when the fruite har- 
vest is, and so the Greke woord im- 
porteth '. " 

The correctness of the interpretation, 
given by I.ightfoot alone among modern 
commentators, is confirmed by a con- 
sideration of the context. The writer has 
just been comparing the innovators, who 
have crept into other Churches, to water- 
less clouds driven past by the wind. Just 
as these disappoint the hope of the hus- 
bandman, so do fruitless trees in the 
proper season of fruit. If «j>Otvoirwpivd 
were equivalent to x^''H-^P*'^d, denoting 
the season when the trees are necessarily 
bare both of leaves and iruit, how could 
a tree be blamed for being aKap-irov ? It 
is because it might have been, and ought 
to have been a truit-bearing tree, that it 
is rooted up. 

Sis diroOavdvTa cKpi^wOevTa. Schneck- 
enburger explains, " He who is not born 
again is dead in his sins (Col. ii. 13), he 
who has apostatised is twice dead," cf. 
Apoc. xxi. 8, Heb. vi. 4-8, 2 Peter ii. 20- 
22. So the trees may be called doubly 
dead, when they are not only sapless, but 
are torn up by the root, which would have 
caused the death even of a living tree. 

Ver. 13. Kvp,aTa dYpta 6aXd<j-<rTjs 
iira^pl^ovra tols lavTwv olo-xvvas. 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 miser- 
able condition ; the fourth and fifth give a 
very fine description of their lawlessness 
and shamelessness, and their eventual 
fate. The phrase aYpia KVjjiaTa is found 
in Wisdom xiv. i. The rare word k-rra.- 
4>p^^(i> 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 


* This agreement is probably owing to their dependence on the Vulgate " arbores 
■auctumnales infructuosae ". 




irXavfiTat ^ ols 6 |^6(|>os too ctkotous cis aiwva T€Tr|pr]Tai. 14. 
EiTpo(|)rJT€uaet' ^ Be Kal toutois £p8o)i,os diro 'ASapi 'Ek-w^ \iyuty 

^ irXovrjTes ots £o(|>os o-kotows B. 

^ tTTpoi^ririva-ev B^ ; cirpoc<|i. B^; irpocirpo<|>. ^; irpoc^). ACKL al. 

compared the overflowings of ungvidli- 
ness (Ps. xvii. 4), the pvirapia Kal ire- 
picracia KaKia; condemned by James i. 
21, where see my note. The liberthies 
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 com- 
pare Phil. iii. 19, T| 8<5|a ev r^ ai<rxyv^ 

acTTcpts irXaviiTai. This is borrowed 
from Enoch (chapters xliii., xliv.) 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. xc. 24, 
"and judgment was held first upon the 
stars, and they were judged and found 
guilty and were cast into an abyss of 
fire " ; also xviii. 14 f. 

It would seem from these passages, 
which Jude certainly had before him, 
that irXavTJToi cannot here have its usual 
application, the propriety of which was 
repudiated by all the ancient astronomers 
from Plato downwards. Cf. Cic. A^. D. 
ii. 51, " maxime sunt admirabiles motus 
earum quinque stellarum quae falso vo- 
cantur errantes. Nihil enim errat quod 
in omni aeternitate conservat motus con- 
stantes et ratos," with the passages 
quoted in my notes on th^t book. 

Some commentators take it as applymg 
to comets; perhaps the quotations from 
Enoch 44 and 80 fit better with shooting- 
stars, do-T€pes 8iaTTovT€s (Arist. Meteor. 
i. 4, 7) which seem to rush from their 
sphere into darkness; compare Herrnes 
Trismegistus ap. Stob. Eel. i. 478, Ka-roj- 
9ev TTJs csXiivTjs tieriv trepoi dcrrepes 
<{>6a.pToi dpyol . . . ovg Kal -fifjieis opoifxev 
SiaXvo^e'vovs, tt)v 4)v<riv 6p.oiav tx*"''''*^ 
Tois axprjoTTOis Tciv €Trl yfjs £<i><ov, lirl 
€T€pov 8e ovSev •y^'Y*'*'''*'' 'H ^^"^ [i-ovov 
<})9opfi. For the close relationship sup- 
posed by the Jews to exist between the 

stars and the angels, see my note on James 
i. 17, ^wTiuv. 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 (u>s ^uxrTTJpcs 
ev KotrfJKi), Phil. ii. 15), but who are 
only blmd leaders of the blind, centres 
and propagators of irXdvtj (ver. 11), des- 
tined to be swallowed up in everlasting 
darkness. C/. Apoc. vi. 13, viii. 10, 12, 
ix. I, xii. 4. 

ols o ^0^09 Tov (TK^TOvs CIS alwvo- 
T€Ti]pT)Tai. See the parallel in 2 Pet. ii. 
17, and above ver. 6. 

Vv. 14-16. — The Prophecy of Enoch. 
The ancient prophecy, to which reference 
has been already made, was intended for 
these men as well as for the prophet's 
own contemporaries, where he says " The 
Lord appeared, encompassed by myriads 
of his holy ones, to execute justice upon 
all and to convict all the ungodly con- 
cerning all their ungodly works, and con- 
cerning all the hard things spoken against 
Him by ungodly sinners ". (Like them) 
these men are murmurers, complaining 
of the;r 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. 
Ver. 14. eirpocjjTiTcvorev 8e Kal tovtois 
^P8o^os dirb 'A8dp. 'Evu>x- " It was for 
these also (as well as for his own con- 
temporaries) that the prophecy of Enoch 
was intended, far as he is removed from 
our time, being actually the sixth (by 
Hebrew calculation, seventh) descendant 
from Adam." For Enoch compare the 
allusions in Sir. xliv. 16, xlix. 14, Heb. xi. 
5, Charles, Introduction to Book of Enoch. 
The prophecy is contained in En. i. 9 
(Greek in Charles, App. C. p. 327K on 
€px«Tai (Tvv TOIS (?Tais) |ivpido-iv 
a V T o Kal Tois d 7 I o t s ovtoO 
Troi-qcat. Kpi(riv Kara irdvTuv, 
Kal dTroXe<r£i tovs dcrePeis Kal 
eXc'Y^ct irdcrav crdpKa -ir e p l 
ir a V T <i) V <^T(iJv]>- epywv aiiTwv 
iv •«i<re6T|<rav Kar' avTov dp.- 
apTojXol do-cPcts. The phrase c^- 
8op,os d-To *A8dp. is also found in En. Ix. 
8, " My grandfather was taken up, the 
seventh from Adam," ib. xciii. 3, " And 
Enoch began to recount from the books 
and spake : I was born the seventh in the 


101(AA EllinOAH 


loou ^XGcf Kupios iv aylais jjiupidaij' ^ auTOu, 15. iroii^CTat Kpiaiv' 
Kara. irdi'Tui' Kal eXeylai irdi'Tas tous daePels'^ irepl iron'Tuiv rujv 
epyojc dacpeias aindv'^ S>v r]CTePr\(Tav Kal Trcpl irdi'Twv' TWf ctkXtjpwi' 
*i)v i\d\r]<Tav kot' auxou d)xapTwXoi daePeis- 16. Outoi eio-ii' 

^ ayiais fxvpiao-iv] p,vpiao-i.v o"yi<ov a^YeXcDV ^ syrP. sah. arm. +. 

'^TravTtts Tovs ao-ePeisJ add. avrwv KL, Ti. (incuria}); iraerav \|/vxtiv ^, syrP. 

^ ao-e^eias avrcuv] om. ^ sah. + ; [oatPcias] avrwv Treg, 
* o-kXtipuv] add. Xoyuv ^C, Ti. 

first week, while judgment and righteous- 
ness still tarried ; and after me there will 
arise in the second week great wicked- 
ness," where Charles refers to ynbilees, 
7. The genealogical order, as given in 
Gen. V. 4-20, is (i) Adam, (2) Seth, (3) 
Enos, (4) Cainan, (5) Mahalaleel, (6) 
Jared, (7) Enoch. It is probably the 
sacredness of the number 7 which led 
the Jewish writers to laj' stress upon it 
in Enoch s case. 

ISov -qXOcv Kvpios kv Lyio.1% p.vpi.daiv 
atiToO. Charles' translation from the 
Aethiopic is " And lo ! He comes with 
ten thousands of his holy ones to exe- 
cute 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 p,vpi.d(riv dyv^Xwv 
cf. Heb. xii. 22, Ps. Ixviii. 17, Deut. xxxiii. 
2. For the use of ev denoting accom- 
panying circumstances see Blass, Gr. 
N. T. tr. p. 118, and Luke xiv. 31, «i 
Swards ctTTiv ev 8«Ka xiXid<rtv d-iravTrj- 
<rai Tui p,ETd eikocti, xi'XidScov IpxofAf'vw 
e-ir' airdv. The aorist here is the pre- 
terite of prophetic vision, as when Mi- 
caiah says, " I saw all Israel scattered," 
cf. Apoc. X. 7, xiv. 8. 

Ver. 15. iroiT)<rai Kptciv Kara irdvTcov. 
Follows exactly the Greek translation of 
Enoch given above, cf. Ael. V. H. ii. 6, 
KpiTwv €Tr£i9€v avTov aTToSpavat Kal tt|v 
kot' ovto5 Kpicriv 8ta4>9Lipai. On the 
distinction between the active iroieiv 
Kpicriv " to execute judgment " (as in 
John V. 27) and the periphrastic middle 
= Kpiv£iv (as in Isocr. 48 d) see my notes 
on alxsiv and alTetcrSai, iSe and ISotj 
(James iv. 3, jb. iii. 3). 

eXeylai iravras tous dtreP^ts Trepl 
iravTuv T<ov epyiov dorcPeias avrdv iv 
TJo-e'PTjtrav. Shortened from the Greek 
Enoch quoted above. 

daePeis. Cf. vv. 4, 18. The word 
thrice repeated in this verse runs through 
the epistle as a sort of refrain. 

irepi TrdvTwv twv (TkXtjpwv a>v eXdXTjcrav. 

This is taken from Enoch xxvii. 2. 
Charles, p. 366 (To Gehenna shall come), 
iravTCS oiTtves tpovciv tw <rTdp,aTt avTciv 
Kara Kvpiov <j><i)vt|v dirpeiTTJ Kal irepl T'^s 
8d|T]s avTov (TKXTipd XaXi]<rovaiv, cf. ib. 
V. 4, " 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. ci. 3, al., Gen. xlii. 7, eXdXrjo-ev avTois 
o-KX'Tjpd, I Kings xii. 13, dirEKpid-ri irpos 
Tov Xaov o-KXi^pd, Mai. iii. 13-15. 

Ver. i6. ovToi ei<rtv yoyyvtrrai, p.«p.- 
\)/tp.oipoi. Charles thinks that we have 
here another case of borrowing from the 
Assumption of Moses, SGQ his Introd. on 
Apocryphal Quotations. The word yoy- 
Yvo-Tiis is used in the LXX, Exod xvi. 8,- 
Num. xi. I, 14-27, 29. The verb yoy- 
yv^w is found in John vii. 32 of the whis- 
pering of the multitude in favour of Jesus, 
but is generally used of smouldering dis- 
content which people are afraid to speak 
out, as in i Cor. x. 10, of tha murmurings 
of the Israelites in the wilderness ; Matt. 
XX. II (where see Wetst.) of the grum- 
bling of the labourers who saw others 
receiving a day's pay for an hour's 
labour; John vi. 41-43 of the Jews w!io 
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.ds is used in i Peter iv. g. See 
further in Phrynichus, p. 358 Lob. For 
the word ixep.ij/ip.oipos see Lucian, Cynic. 
17, viijis Se Sid TTjv €vSai|xoviav ovSevl 
TWV yiyvop.€vo)v dp€<rK€cr0€, Kal iravTi 
p,E|j,<|>Ecr9c, Kal TO p.£v TrapdvTa 4>Epciv ovk 
Ifle'XeTe, tuv Sc dTrdvTwv c(^iE(r0e, x^''H^<*'~ 
vos (xev Oe'pos f.v\6\Livoi, Oepovis 8c x^l- 
p,b>i/a . . . KaOdwep oi voaoOvTcs, 
SucrdpEcrToi Kal p.Ep.\j/ip.oipoi ovtes, and 
Theophr. Char. 17. It is used of the 
murmuring of the Israelites by Philo, 
Vit. Mos. i. 109 M. Sej other examp'es 
in Wetst. The same spirit is condemned'. 
in James i. 13. 




yoyyuo-Tat, fJie|Jii|/ijj.oipot, Kara rots ciriGufAias auTaJf iropeuofievoi, 
Kttl TO (TTOjjia aoTw*' Xa\et uirepoyKa, Oauji.d^oi'Tcs irpoo-WTra w<j)e\Las 

I 7. 'Yfjieis hi, dyaiTTjToi, iiyr]<TQr]Te rOtv pT^jxaTWc twi' TTpoeipr]|i.e- 

V(i}\> UTTO TWC dirOCTToXoJl' ToO KUpiOU l^fAoil' 'lr]0-OU XpiCTToG ■ 18. OTl 

Kara ras £Tri0v(jiias auTuiv iropevdiAevoi. 

Cf. 2 Pet. iii. 3 and ii. 10, below ver. 
18, and see my notes on James iv. i, 2. 
Plumptre notes "The temper of self- 
indulgence recognising not God's will, 
but man's desires, as the law of action, 
is precisely that which issues in weariness 
and despair . . cf. Eccles. ii. 1-20". 

TO crTdp.a avTwv \aXet virepoyKa. See 
Enoch V. 4, quoted on ver. 15, also Enoch 
ci. 3, "ye have spoken insolent words 
against His righteousness," Ps. xii. 4, 
Ps. Ixxiii. 8, Dan. vii. 8, o-TOfxa XoXovv 
fJieydXa and ver. 20 of the little horn ; 
compare above vv. 4, 8, ii, and James 
iii. 5 foil. In classical writers vir£poyKa 
is generally used of great or even exces- 
sive size, in later writers it is also used of 
"big" words, arrogant speech and de- 
meanour, see Alford's note on 2 Pet. ii. 
18 and Plut. Mor. iiig b (Socrates), ttiv 
e(APpovTTj<rtav Ik tov ^iov Kat tov Tt)<|>ov 
e^Y^Xavve Kal tols eiraxOets Kal ■u-ircpoy- 
Kovs KaToi-qcreis Kai p.eyaXavxias, ib. 
7 A, where -q 6€aTpiKT) Kal irapaTpdyuSos 
Xe'lis is styled virepoyKos in contrast with 
liTxvTt Xe|is, Plut. Vifae 505 b, tov 
^ao-iXcus TO (|>p6vT]|xa TpayiKov Kal -inrep- 
oyKOv ev Tais p,£ydXais eviTV)(iais 
eyeydvei. It is found in 2 Peter ii. 18 
and in Dan. xi. 36, 6 ^aonXevs v\|;a)9r]o-£- 
Tai Kal p,£yaXvv9ijcr£Tai ettI irdvTa deov, 
xaX XaXi]<r£i virfpoYKa. 

6av|xa^ovT€9 Trpocruira u>(|>£Xias x'^P''^- 
The phrase occurs with the same force 
in Lev. xix. 15, oi (jltj 9avp,da~)[)S irpdoro)- 
TTOv, Job xiii. 10, see my note on James ii. 
I, fATj £v irpoo-u7roXT]p,\}rCais ^X^t^ ttjv 
TTio-Tiv TOV Kvpiov '^{xuv *l. X., and cf. I 
Tim. iii. 8, 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 o-Tdp,a avTwv XaX£i 
— 9avp,d£ovT€s) compare Col. ii. 2, tva 
'7rapoKXT]9ti)<riv al KapSiai vp.uv o-U|xPi- 
j3ao-9£VT£s €v €lpr]VT], where a similar peri- 
phrasis (ai KapSiai ■ii(jL<iiv = v|j.£ts) is 
followed by a constriictio ad sensnm, also 
Winer, p. 716. Perhaps the intrusion of 
the finite clause into a participial series 
may be accounted for by a reminiscence 
of Ps. xvii. 10, TO <rTd|xa avTwv eXaXv^o-Ev 

VTr£pT)4>aviav, or Ps. cxliv. 8, 11, where a 
similar phrase occurs. 

Vv. i-j-ig.—The Faithful are bidden 
to call to mind the warnings of the 
Apostles. The Apostles warned you re- 
peatedly that in the last time there would 
arise mockers led away by their own car- 
nal lusts. It is these that are now break- 
ing up the unity of the Church by their 
invidious distinctions, men of unsancti- 
fied minds, who have not the Spirit of 
God. See Introduction on the Early 
Heresies in the larger edition. 

Ver. 17. vp,eis Se, dyairTjToi, jiVTjo-GTjTe 
Tti)v pT]fxaT(i>v Twv irpofiptjixEvuv virb tuv 
onroo-ToXwv. 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 Peter iii. 3, where the quota- 
tion is given more fully. But, there also, 
the words are referred back to a prior 
authority, "holy prophets" and "your 
Apostles". The words oti fiXeyov vjiiv, 
which follow, imply that the warning was 
spoken, not written, and that it was 
ofterf repeated. 

Ver. 18. £ir' IcxaTov XP***'"'" eo'ovTai 
EjATraiKTat. The parallel in 2 Peter iii. 3 
is £X£vo-ovTai eir* eoxdTwv twv -qiifpuv Iv 
Ipiiraiynovn Ip.iraiKTai., where see note on 
the use of the article with £<rx*Tos, etc. 
For Itti, cf. Arist. Pol. iv. 3, lirl twv 
dpxaicdv 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 ii. 13, £T£poi xXevd^ovTEs 
IXfiyov OTl yX£VKOvs |A£p,£0"Ta)p,£voi. elo-i. 
In the O. T. we have such examples as 2 
Chron. xxxvi. 16 (the summing up ot the 
attitude of the Jews towards the prophets) 
■^aav p.vKTT]pi£ovT£5 Tovs dyyIXovs avTov 
Kal l5ov9£vo{ivT£S To-iis Xdyovs avTov Kal 
l|xirai£ovT£9 Iv tois 'irpO(J>r^Tais avTov, 
Jer. XX. 8, kyivr\iT[ Xdyos Kvpiov €15 6v£i- 
8io-(a6v Ifiol Kal fits xXevacr(j,ov irdcrav 
T|p.£pav. Cf. also the mockery at the 
crucifixion, and the declaration in Matt. 
X. 25 f., £1 TOV olVoSeo-TrdT-qv Bcc^^PovX 
lireKaXso-av, -irdcrco p.dXXov k.t. X. In 2 


lOYAA Eni2:T0AH 


cXeyoi' ujilv 'Eir' ecrxaTou ^ xpo''°" ^ laoi'Tai ^ cp.TralKTai Kara ras 
lauTwi' tTTiGufAias ■nrop€u6|jL6i'OL twi' do-e|3ei(iji'.^ 19. OijToi cioriK 01 
dTToSiopi^oi'Tes,^ (j/uxiKOi, TTveOfia fjirj ex^*''''^?- 

^ €Tr' eaxarov ^B; on trr' tax- AC; [on] eir* €<rx. Treg.; on €V ttr\aT<f KL 

P vulg. sah. 

- xpoi'ov BC ; Tov xpovov ^A ; \povto KL ; no xpovcp P sah. ; twv xpovwv boh. 

^€o-ovToi {^BCKLP; eXevorovrai J^-AC^, sah. boh. 

■* Tcjv acrePeiuv] oiria-to aae^tiuv syrh ; oirio'ti) acTEPeias syrP, 

' airo8iopi^ovTes] add. eavTovs C vulg. 


Peter the purport of this mockery is ex- 
plained 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 im- 
pious words, if they denied God and 
Christ, they would naturally laugh at the 
idea of a judgment to come. On the 
form efjnraiKTiis and its cognates, see note 
on 2 Peter. 

Tuv do-«p€iwv. I am rather disposed 
to take Tuv aa-e^eiav here as a subjective 
genitive, " lusts belonging to, or arising 
from their impieties," cf. Rom. i. 28, 
Kadus oviK £8oKi(Aa<rav tov ©eov €X€i.v 
£v €TriYvoio-«i, iTOpe'ScoKev avTovs 6 ©ebs 
€is a8oKi{i.ov vovv. The position of the 
genitive is peculiar, and probably intended 
to give additional stress. We may com- 
pare it with James ii. i, (jlt) ev irpoo-wiro- 
XTljivj/iais ^X^T^ TTiv irio-nv tov Kvpiov 
T)(Aa)v '\r\arov XpiCTTOv, ttjs So^tjs, where 
some connect T-qs 86|i]s with Kvpiov in a 
qualitative sense. 

Ver. ig. ovtoi elcriv oi airoSiopi^ovTCS. 
" These are they that make invidious 
distinctions." See Introduction on the 
Text. The rare word diroSiopi^ovTes is 
used of logical distinctions in Aristotle, 
Pol. iv. 43, bjo'irep ovv €i t,(Sov irpoYj- 
povp,Eda XaPeiv €i8t), TrpojTov av d7ro8ia>- 
pi^op,ev oirep dva^Kaiov irdv ^X^*-^ t,<oov 
("as, if we wished to make a classifica- 
tion 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 |xev <()v<rLKOv upiacv etr' aiPTOV, to 
SiYi'ajjjL'.Kov d-iroSiupicr£, translated " natu- 

ral! in eo (Christo) constituta voluntate, 
arbitrariam dispunxit," ib. p. 131 c, <os 6 
XoYos ■^v avTow, \x,6vov to c(xira6^s, dXX' ov 
to 4)v<riKov d'lroSiopio-acrdai OeXTjjAa, 
" quod dixerat hoc solum spectare ut 
libidinosam, non ut naturalem voluntatem 
a Salvatore eliminaret," Severus de 
Clyst. xxxii., xxv., oTav TavTa Ta o-uja- 
itTuiAaTO o»j/'[) irapdvTa, d7ro8i<ipi^c tt)v 
opYavtKTjv voo-ov ^k ttjs 6|jiotofji,£pot)s. The 
simple 8iopi^b> is found in Lev. xx. 24, 
Siupicra v\t.a.<5 diroTciv cOvwv " I separated 
you Irom the nations," Job xxxv. n; so 
a<j)opi£<u Matt. xxv. 32, d<|>opi^ci to 
irpdPaTa diro twv Ipi^xov, Acts xix. g 
(Paul left the synagogue) Kal d4><opio-€v 
Toiis |ji,a0T)Tas, 2 Cor. vi. 17, egcXflaT* 
Ik \).i<Toy> aviTwv Kal d<f>opio'6'r]TC, Luke vi. 
22 (of excommunication) Stuv d({>opio-b>o-iv 
vixds. Gal. ii. 12 (of Peter's withdrawal 
from the Gentiles) vir/o-TeXXev koi d<|)(i- 
pi^cv cavTiiv. 

\|;vxi-KOi. Used of worldly wisdom in 
James iii. 15, where see note, distinguished 
from irvevp.aTiKos in i Cor. ii. 13-15, xv. 
44, cf. the teaching of the Naassenes {ap. 
Hippol. p. 164) els TOV oIkov Scov ovk 
clo'cXevorcTai dKaOapTOS 0'u8eis, ov v|/vx>-- 
K<5S) oi (rapKiK^s, dXXd TrjpeiTai irv6V|Aa- 


irvcvfi,a (IT) exovTes. The subjective 
negative may be explained as describing 
a class (such as have not) rather than as 
stating a fact in regard to particular per- 
sons ; but the use of (itj is much more 
widely extended in late than in classica' 
Greek, cf. such phrases as eirei |j.ii, ot- 
IM]. It is simplest to understand TrvcvjAa 
here of the Holy Spirit, cf. Rom. viii. g, 
Vfieis ovk Io-t€ €v aapKi dXX' £v irvevixaTi, 
etirep Trv€V(Aa ©eov oiKei Iv vfiiv, I Cor. 
ii. 13, vii. 40, I John iii. 24, iv. 13, and 
the contrast in ver. 20, iv irvevixaTi ky'n^ 
irpoo-cvxoiAevoi,. Others, e.g. Plumptre, 
prefer the explanation that " the false 
teachers were so absorbed in their lower 
sensuous nature that they no longer pos- 
sessed, in any real sense of the word, 



20. 'Yiicis 8e» dYonrTjTOt, eiroiKo8ojBbG»'T€s lauxous Ttj dytwrarj] 
ii\x<2v TTicTTei, £1' TTi'cufAaTi dyiw ^rpoo■eu)(o|i.€^'Ol, 2 1. eaoTOu? ec 
dydiTT] 0£ou TT)pr|(TaTe ^ irpoffSexotievoi to eXeos toO Kupi'ou inp.wi' 

1 T qpTjcrare] TT]pT)tru)jji,€V BC. 

tJiat element in man's compound being, 
which is itself spiritual, and capable there- 
lore of communion with the Divine 

Vv. 20-23. The Final Charge to the 
Faithful.— 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 by prayer in the Spirit. 
Do not rest satisfied with the belief that 
God loves you, but keep yourselves in 
His love, waiting for the mercy of our 
Lord Jesus Christ which leads us to 
eternal life. And do your best 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, while you shrink 
irom the pollution of his sin. 

Ver. 20. vp.£is 8e, ayair-fiToi. Con- 
trasted with the libertines, as in ver. 17. 

eiroiKoSofioOvTes tavTOvs t'q ayiuTaTifj 
tifiuv ■jTio-Tci. For the spiritual temple, 
cf. I Pet. ii. 3-5 ; Col. i. 23 ; Eph. ii. 20- 

22, |-7rOlKo8o|JlT)6€VT€S iTTl TUI GeflcXlO) TUV 

d-irocTToXwv Ktti ■7rpo<|>T)Twv, 8vTOS aKpo-yoj- 
viaiov avTov XpitrTov 'Itjctov k.t.X., i 

Cor. iii. 9-17, a passage which the writer 
may have had in his mind here and in 
ver. 23. Dr. Bigg compares Polyc. Phil. 
iii. " If ye study the epistles of the blessed 
apostle Paul, Svvr]9r\frt<rde olKo8op,£ia6ai 
€19 TT)v SoOeicrav v|aiv ttio-tiv. Add Clem. 
Strom, v. p. 644, T| KOivT) itio-tis KaSairep 
OejAeXiov viroKetTai. Usually Christ is 
spoken as the foundation or corner-stone 
of the Church, and we should probably 
assign an objective sense to r-jj ttio-tci 
here, as in ver. 3 above (kirayiovilecrdai 
TTJ TTio-Tti). Otherwise it might be ex- 
piairved of that faculty by which we are 
brought into relation with the spiritual 
realities (Heb. xi. i, iriorris £Xiri£op,£vu)v 
-inrooTao-is, irpoYIJidTOjv eXcyx"? "'•' 
pX€irop.£v<i)v), that which is the introduc- 
tion to all the other Christian graces, see 
note on 2 Pet. i. 5, and which leads to 
eternal life (i Pet. i. 5, and 9, Kop.i5op.«vot 
TO TC'XOS TTJS iri<rT€<i)S vp.wv, cwTi^piav 
\|>vxiJv). 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 (i 
John v. 4, 5). Cf. I Pet. v. 9, <L avTi<TTr\r€ 
(TTcpeoi TT) iri(rT£t. 

ev irvevjiaTi dyico ■n(to<Tev\6\i.tvoi. 
These words, contrasted with irvevfia 
|jiT) €xovT£s in ver. 19, show how they are 
to build themselves up upon their faith. 

1 understand them as equivalent to James 
V. 16, 8eT)a-i.s SiKaiov) €V£pyov(i^vT], where 
see note. Compare also Eph. vi. 18, 8ia 
irdcTT)? irpoo-evxTJS irpoorevxofAtvoi ev 
iravTi Kaipu €v irv£ijp.aTi, Rom. viii. 26, 


Ver. 21. eavTOvs ev dydiri] ©coO 
TTjpi]<raTe. In ver. i the passive is used : 
those who are addressed are described as 
kept and beloved {cf. ver. 24, tw 8t)vap.€vt> 
<{>vXd|ai) : here the active is used and 
emphasised by the unusual order of 
words ; each is to keep himself in the 
love of God, cf. James, i. 27, dcnriXov 
lavTov TTipelv, Phil. ii. 12, tt)V eavxwv 
«rwTT]piav KaT«pyd£€<r6ai • ©ebs ydp 
IcTiv 6 Ivtpyuv «v ■ 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. v. 5, •^ AydirTj 
Tov 0COV cKKc'xvTat. ev rais KapSiais 
Tifiuv Sid irvtviJiaTOS dyiov tov 8oO«vtos 
Tiftiv, ib. viii. 39, ire' oti ovtc 
OdvaTOS ovre ^mr] . . . ovtc tis ktictis 
£T£pa 8vvii<r€Tai T|p.ds x<^P'<''*'' diro ttjs 
dydiTTis TOV 0€ov, John xv. 9, KaOw; 

.■qydir-qo-ev p.£ 6 iraTTip Kdyb> vp.ds 
T|ydirTjo-o, p,£ivoT€ tv Tfj dydiT'j) TTJi«p.TJ. 
«dv Tas €VToXa9 (Jiov Tr\pr\<ri\r€, (itveiTC 
ev Tfi dydiT'j) |xov. The aor. imper. is 
expressive of urgency, see note on ■f\yrf(r- 
a<r6e, in James i. 2. 

irpoaSexop-fvoi to eXeos. Cf Tit. ii. 
13, irpoo-SexoiAtvoi tt|v p,aKapiav eXiriSa 
Ktti e'iri4)dveiav Tris 8d|T]s tov (jieydXov 
©eov Kal o-<DTTJpos y)\i-u>v 'I. X., and 2 
Pet. iii. 12, 13, 14. The same word is 
used of the Jews who were looking for 
the promised Messiah at the time of 
His first coming, Mark xv. 43, Luke ii. 

25, 38. 

els 5wT)v al<iviov. Some connect this 
closely with the imperative TTipi^o-aTe, 
but it seems to me to follow more natu- 




'Itjo-oO XpKTToO CIS ^(DT)!/ aiwi'ioi'. 22. Kal ous fi€i' i\iy\€Te^ 
SiaKpicojJieVous,^ 23. 085 Se ^ ctoj1^€T€ * ck -irupos dpTrd^oi'Tes, ous 8e 

^«\«YX*''"* ^^ vulg. boh. arm. + ; eXcare J>^BC-; eXeeixe KLP +. 

^ Si.aKpi,vo}i,€Vovs ^ABC ; 8t.aKpi,vop.€voi KLP. 

3 ovs St (i) ^ACKLP ; om. B. * o-uleTt ^ABC ; ev 4>o^<f <ra>S€T€ KLP. 

rally on the nearer phrase, irp. rh eXeos : 
cf. I Pet. i. 37, evXo7r]T6s 6 ©eog ... 6 
Kara to ttoXv axiTOv cXeos avaY«vvr^aas 
T|p,ds CIS KXTjpovoniav a<J)8apTov . . . 

T£Tt]pT]p€VTJV £V OVpaVOlS CIS {ipEs TOV% 

. . . 4>povpovp.£vovis . • . €ls (roiTr\piav 
€TOipT]v diroKaXv^jOfjvai ev Kaipoi ifrxarm, 
Ver. 22. ovs pev IXeyx^Te SiaKpiv- 
opevovs. On the reading see the Intro- 
duction. For the form 8s pev instead of 
6 pev, cf. Matt. xiii. 8, xxii. 5, Lukexxiii. 
33, Acts xxvii. 44, Rom. xiv. 5, i Cor. 
vii. 7, xi. 21, 2 Cor. ii. 16, 2 Tim. ii. 20, 
not used in Heb., i and 2 Pet., James or 
John. The doubled 8s Se is found in 
Matt. xxi. 35, 8v pev eScipav, Sv Se 
dire'KTCivov, ov 8e eXiOo^oXTfO-av, ib. xxv. 
15, (o pev eouKev irevTe TaAavra, u oe 
8vo, u Se ev. The use is condemned as 
a solecism by Thomas Magister and by 
Lucian, Soloec. i, but is common in late 
Greek from the time of Aristotle, cf. 
Sturz. Dial. Maced. pp. 105 f. On the 
word eXe7x<^ (here wrongly translated 
" strafen," in the sense of excommunica- 
tion, by Rampf), see Const. Apost. vii. 
5, 3, eXcYpw eXe'Y^eis xiv dSeX^xSv <rov, 

ev TTJ irioTTei, ib. i. g, tovs avTiXe'^ovxas 

eXe'YX«iv, 2 Tim. iv. 2 (ths charge lo 
Timothy) eXeylov, irapaKaXeo-ov e» 
irdo-T] paKpoOvpia, Apoc. ui. 19, octods 
eov 4)iXw eXe'yx*^ '<*'■ "TaiSevo), Eph. v 
13, TO, 8e -TrdvTa eXeyx^P**'* ^'"'^ "^"^ 
(|><oTos 4)avepovTai. There is a tone of 
greater severity in the iroi-fjcrai Kpiaiv 
Kal eXe'ylai of the 15th verse, but even 
there we need not suppose that the 
preacher is hopeless of good being ef- 
fected. The point is of importance in 
deciding the mutual relations of the 
three cases here considered. 

8iaKpivope'vovs. We should have ex- 
pected a nominative here to correspond 
with dpira^ovTes and pio-ovvres in the 
following clauses, and so the text. rec. 
has SiaKpivopevoi, wrongly translated in 
A.V., as if It were the active SioKpivovres, 
" 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. Keep- 
ing the reading of the best MSS. we may 
either take the accusative as comple- 

and Hare's excellent note L in his mentary to eXe'-yxexe (as we find in Plato, 

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 " eXe'Yx^i*" 
always implies the refutation, the over- 
coming of an error, a wrong, by the 
truth and right. When this is brought be- 
fore our conscience through the eXeyxo^j 
there arises a feeling of sin, which is 
always painful : thus every eXeyxos 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. vi. 4, ov ■pio'Y]o-eis irdvxa 
avOpuirov, dXX' ovs pev eXe-y^eiS, ovs Se 
€Xei]0-eis, Trepl aiv Se TrpoaevlTj, ovs 8e 
dytt'TT^o'ets virep xt)v ^vxtiv <rov, which 
is also found in the Didache ii. 7, with 
the omission of ovs 8e eXei^o-cis. Cf. 
John xvi. 8, iKeivos eXe'Y^ei xov KiSo-pov 
irepi dpapxias Kal irepl 8i.KaiocrvvT)S Kal 
irepl Kpio-eus, i Cor. xiv. 24, eXe'Yx«Tat 
viro •jrdvxwv (the effect of the prophets' 
teaching on an unbeliever), Tit. i. 13, 
eXcYx* avxovs oTroxdixug ivo vy^c^^^'^ci*' 

Theaet. 171 d, epe eXeylas XTjpovvxa, 
Xen. Mem, i, 7, 2, k\iyx^-f\friTo.\. y«Xoios 
wv, 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 SiaKp. Is 
it to be understood in the same sense as 
in James i. 6, ii. 4 ? 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 mean- 
ing here is " convince them when they 
dispute with you," which we may com- 
pare with 1 Pet. iii. 15, exoipoi del irpos 
diroXoYiav iravxl xi alxovvxi vpds 
XoYov . . . dXXd pexd irpavxrixos Kal 
(fxipov [cf. ev <j)dp<j) below). So taken, 
this first clause would refer to intellectual 
difficulties to be met by quiet reasoning; 
the force ot 8iaKpiv6pevos being the 
same as that in ver. g, xw SiapdXoi SiaKp., 
and in Socr. E.H. v. 5, o Xaos cixf 
opdvoiav Kal ovKe'xi irpos dXXr]Xous 

Ver. 23. o-ci?exe. Here again a word 




cXcaxe iv <|>o^b),^ fiiCTOuvTCS tal Toi' diro rfjs aapitos €<nriXu»jJieVoi' 

24. Tw Sc Sut'ttfie'cw <})u\d|ai ujaSs ^ aTTTauCTTOus ^ Kal oTTJaai 

^ovs Se (2) eXtare €v 4)0^0) ^AB ; om. KLP; €v (^o^a C. 
'^ vfias ^BCL vulg. syrr. boh. ; T)(ias A ; avrovs KP, 
^ airTaicTTO-osJ add. Kai acnriXovs C. 

which is strictly applicable to God is 
transferred to him whom God uses as 
His instrument, cf. i Pet. iv. 11 and 
notes on rtipijcroTC, iXiyxere aboxe, 
especially James v. 20, 6 €iricrTpe\j;os 
afiaproiXov ck iTXdvT]s 68ov aviTOti o'ua'Ci 
\|;vxT)v Ik OavaTOv. 

eK irvpos apira^ovTes. The expres- 
sion is borrowed from Amos iv. 11, 
KOTe<rTpe\j/a v|xas Ka6&)S KareaTpevj/ev 6 
©ebs Z6Sop.a Kal Top-oppa, Kal iytviaBt 
u)S SaXos llccriraafjLevos £k irvp(5s, Kal 
ov8' us lireo-Tpeij/aTe irpds (X€, \iy€>, 
Kvpios, and Zech. iii. 3, ovk iSoi ovtos 
SaXbs l|€o-ira(rp.€vos €k irvpds > 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, 
eiriTip.TJerai o-oi Kvpios quoted in ver. g, 
and preceding a reference to filthy gar- 
ments (see note below). In it the High 
Priest Joshua is a representative of 
Israel, saved like a brand Irom 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 Koiah (see above ver. 7) 
described in Num. xvi. 35, Ps. cvi. 18, 
e^€Ka,vdi] irvp ev rfj (rvva-ywYfi avrtov Kal 
(j>\b^ KaTe<}>Xe|€v ap.apT(i)Xovs. 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, 
I Cor. iii. 13-15, eKaa-rov to fpYOv, oiroidv 
eariv, to irvp aiiTO SoKip-daei • . . £i 
Ttvos TO epYov KaxaKai^trcTai, ^t]|jii,<o- 
6ri<mai, avTos Se trajBi^creTai, ovTtos 8e 
cos Sia irvpds. Such an one may be 
spoken of as " a brand snatched from 
the fire," not however as here, saved 
irom the fire of temptation, but as saved 
through the agency of God's purgatorial 
fire, whether in this or in a future life. 

IXedre ev (JxjPu. 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 they influence should be led to 
think too lightly of the sin whose ravages 

they are endeavouring to repair. Cf. 
2 Cor. vii. I, KaOapiaufxev eavTOvs dirb 
iravTos |xoXvap.ov crapKOS Kal irvevixaTOS 
eiriTeXo-uvxes a-yiuo-uvTjv ev ()>dPo> Oeov, 
Phil. ii. 12, I Pet. i. 17, iii. 15. For the 
conlusion of the contracted verbs in -e'o* 
and -dw in late Greek see Jannaris, § 850. 
§ 854 f.. Winer p. 104. The best MSS. 
read ^X«a in Prov. xxi. 26, and eXeuivTos 
Rom. ix. 16, but eXeei in Rom. ix. iS. 

fjiiaovvTes Kol tov onrb T-i^s o^apKos 
etririXcop-e'vov xi'^wva. While it i& the 
duty of the Christian to pity and pray 
for the sinner, he must view with loath- 
ing all that bears traces of the sin. The 
form of expression seems borrowed from 
such passages as Isa. xxx. 22, Lev. xv. 
17, perhaps too from Zech. iii. 4, Mtjo-ovs 
■>]v £v8e8v)p,e'vos IfAdxia p-uirapd. Cf. 
Apoc. iii. 4, OVK IfxdXvvav to. lp,dTia 
ovTuv, and Apocal. Pauli quoted bv 
Spitta, 6 x''''''^*' H*"'*' o^it epviroiOT], The 
derivatives of cririXos are peculiar to late 
Greek : the onlv other exainples of 
airiXdo) in Biblical Greek are James iii. 
6, y\ YXuio-era . . . r\ aTriXovo-a oXov to 
(rft>p.a and Wisd. xv. 4, eI8o9 ffirtXwOev 
Xp(^fxa(ri 8iT)XXa7|A«'vois. Compare for 
the treatment of the erring 2 Tim. ii. 
25, 26, ev TrpavTTjTi iraiSevovTa Tois 
dvTi8LaTi9ep,e'vovs, y.-q-KOTi 8a)T| avTois 
6 0e6'; [xexdvoiav els eiriYvojo-iv d\T|6eias, 
Kai dvavr]\|/(i)criv Ik tt^s tov SiaPdXov 

Vv. 24, 25. Final Benediction and 
Ascription. I have bidden you to keep 
yourselves in the love of God ; I have 
warned you against all impiety and im- 
purity. But do not think that you can 
attain to the one, or guard yourselves 
from the other, in your own strength. 
You must receive power from above ; 
and that it may be 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 
spotless in exceeding joy. To Him, the 
only God and Saviour, belong glory, 
greatness, might, and authority through- 
out all ages. 

Ver. 24. T(ji 8e 8vvap.e'v<{> 4>vXd|ai 
vp.ds diTTOiaTovs. Apparently a reminis- 




KttTei'cjinoi' TTjs S<S^T)9 auTou dp.cj|jiou9^ ei' ayaWido-ei, 25. (xoi'o) ^ 
^ a(jKi>|jiovs] aixcfiiTTovs A. ^ (jiovcj)] add. cro<^(o KLP +. 

cence * of Rom. xvi. 25 f., t a» 8 ^ 8 vv a- 
^^vco ifias cTTTipilai . . . |xdv{i> 
cro<|>&> 0€a) 8ia Mtjctov XpKTTOv, 
w '^ 8 (i I a els Toiis a l u v a s twv 
al«/c:v. Similarly the noble doxo- 
logy in Eph. iii. 20, commences tw 8^ 
8vva|x,cv(i>. The reading tip,as is con- 
firmed by the evidence of ^ and B, which 
was unknown to Alford when he en- 
deavoured to defend the reading ovtows, 
found in KP and some inferior MSS. 

airrato-TOs. Occurs in 3 Mace. vi. 39, 
IxcyaXoSolus €-iri<|>dvas ri eXeos avTov 


eppvcraro : used here only in the N.T. 
The verb Trxaiw has the same figurative 
sense in James ii. 10, iii. 2, ci tis Iv 
\6y<a ow irraiei, o-Ctos WXeios dvi7p, 
2 Pet. i. 10, TavTa iroioOvTCS ov ut] 
'irTaion]T€ troTe. 

<rTT](rai KaT€v<uTriov tt)s 8d|T)S airov 
dfxu|xov9 Iv aYaXXidcrei.. Cf. Matt. xxv. 
3J^-33) orav Se ^XOt) 6 vios tot) dv8p(uirov 
Iv T-jj So^T] avTov . . . (TTTJcrei xd fjiev 
TTpS^ara Ik Se^iuv avrov, Acts vi. 6, 
ovs io-TTfcrav Ivajiri.ov T&iv dirocTToXoiv, 
Col. i. 22, irapao-Tijtrai tifidg ayiov% Kal 


aiiTov (which Lightfoot refers to present 
approbation rather than to the future 
judgment of God, comparing Rom. xiv. 
22, I Cor. i. 29, 2 Cor. ii. 17, iv. 2, vii. 
12, xii. 19). In the present passage the 
addition of the words ttjs 8o|tjs shows 
that the final judgment, the goal of 
4>vXd|ai, is spoken of. Hort, in his 
interesting note on i Pet. i. 19, tijaio) 
aip-ari dis d|j,vov d|ji,b>p,ov Kal dcririXov 
XpicTTov, traces the way in which the 
words ixwfAos " blame," and d{j.(>>ftos 
" blameless," 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. i. 4, v. 27, 
Heb. ix. 14. In 2 Pet, iii. 14, dfjiufiriTos 
seems to be used in the same sense. 
The word KaTcvtiiriov is apparently con- 
fined to the Bible, where it occurs in 
Josh. i. 5, xxi. 42, Lev. iv. 17, Eph. i. 4, 
dfji,<ojXT)TOs KaT€vuiriov aviTOv Iv dYaiTT). 
KaT€vo)ira is found in Horn. //. xv. 320. 
For dYaXXia«ris see Hort's note on i Pet. 
i. 6. Iv <{) d-yaXXidcrOe, " in whom ye 
exult ". The verb with its cognate sub- 
stantives "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 (Matt, Luke, Acts, 1 Pet., 
Jude, John, 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 dyaXXop-ai, properly ' to be proud 
of,' but often combined with TJSo|j,ai and 
such words." 

Ver. 25. |j,(5v<{> ©eoi trwTTJpi i^jawv. See 
above on ver. 4, xov p,dvov 8€cnrox7)v. 
God is called o-wx-rjp in Isa. xlv 15, <rv 
ydp ei ©cos ... 6 Oebs tov 'Icrpa-fjX 
cTftjxijp, ib. ver. 21, Sir. Ii. i, alveorw <re 
Geov xov o-ci>XY]pd p.ov, Philo, Conf:is. 
Ling. §20, i. p. 4i8/«., xis 8' ovk dv 
. . . irpos xov ^6vov aoixTJpa 0£ov Ik- 
Poi^o-jj (? -o-ai); cf. Luke i. 47, i^yaXXia- 
<r€v xo irvevfid |*,ov liri xa> 0£<p xoi o-uxTjpi 
fjiov, elsewhere in N.T. only in Tit. i. 3, 
ii. 10, iii. 4, ox« r\ xPT'''''ox'rjs . . . 
lirei^avTj xov <rcoXTJpos -qijiuv ©eov . . . 
Kaxd x6 avxov eXcos etroxrev T|p,ds 8id 
. . . TTvcvjxaxos ayiov ov k^iyjiev l^' 
T]|xds TrXotitria)? 8id 'I. X. xov o-cux-f^pos 
T|fxwv, I Tim. i. i, flaijXos dirdaxoXos 'I. 
X. Kttx' liruxa-yTjv ©coti a<iixi]pos T||>VKa'i, 
X. 'I. ib. ii. 3, iv. 10. 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. 

5id 'Iti<j-ov Xpio-xov. It seems best to 
take 8id with 86|o and the following 
words. The glory of God is manifested 
through the Word, cf. i Pet. iv. 11, tva 
Iv Trdaiv So^d^ii^xai 6 0€os 8id *l. X. cu 
Icxiv 1^ 8d^a Kal x6 Kpdxos els xovs alti- 

8d|a. The verb is often omitted in 
these ascriptions, cf. 2 Pet. avxai i\ 8d|a, 
Rom. xi. 36, xvi. 27, Gal. i. 5, Luke ii. 16, 
8<J|a Iv ■u\|/io-xoi9 ©€&). In i Peter iv. II 
it is inserted, w lo-xiv j\ 8d5a Kal xo 
Kpdxos, and, as we find no case in which 
€o-xw is inserted, and the indicative is 
more subject to ellipse than the impera- 
tive, it might seem that we should supply 
"is" here; but the R. V. gives "be," 
and there are similar phrases expressive 
of a wish or prayer, as the very common 
)(dpis vjAiv Kal clptjtnr) diri ©eov iraxpds, 
where we must supply eaxw or y^voixo. 

* 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. 
VOL. V. 18 




©€w ffWTTJpi tjfiwi' Sia^ 'lT)aou XpiaTOJ toG Kupiou ■t\\i(in' 86|a (ieya- 
XwCTUKT] KpciTos Kai e^ouaitt irpo Tvarros tou oidifos koI vuv Kal €is 
Trdi'Tas ^ Tous aiw>'as • 6.\ir)v. 

1 8ia I. X. Tov Ktjpiov Tip.wv] om. KP» 

" CIS "JrovToSj «is ^5- 

De Wette maintained that the following 
words irpo iravros tov alwvos, 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, remind- 
mg 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 
realisation in time, as in the Lord's 
Prayer, y€vt)6iitci) to 6^Xi]p.a <rov is Iv 
ovpavu Kal lirl 7rjs. The omission ol 
1 hs verb allows of either or both views in 
varying proportion. 8o|a by itself is the 
commonest of all ascriptions. It is joined 
with Tifii^ in I Tim. i. 17 and elsewhere, 
as here with p.€-Ya\(o<ruvT|. It is joined 
with KpaTos in i Pet. iv. 11, v. 11, Apoc. 
i. 6. Fuller ascriptions are found in 
Apoc. iv. II, a|ios el, 6 Kvpios • . • 
XaPeiv TTjv S6|av Kai ttjv ti|jit)v Kai ttjv 
8vvap.iv, V. 13, Tw KaBr]\Livta eirl tw 
t)pdvii> . . . iq cuXoyia Kal ■q Tipr) Kal t] 
So^a Kal TO Kpdros els tovs aliivas twv 
aluvbiv, vii. 12, -t] cvXo^ia Kal tj 8o|a Kal 
-1] (To^ia Kal "q cvxapiorT^a Kal y\ Tip,T) Kal 
■q Kal r\ i<r\V9 T<a 0«o> iqpuiv. 
Just before (ver. 10) we have the re- 
markable ascription 4] auTi^pia tw ©€&> 
•qpoiv. Compare with this the ascription 
of David { I Chron. xxix. 11), o-ol Kiipie -q 
p,£YoXo)crovif| Kal-q 8'uva|jii.s Kal to Kavx'HP'tt 
Kal -q viKTj Kal i\ io^vs, oti (rv iravTuv 
Tuv Iv ovpav^ Kal cirl Y'fjs Scotto^ciS. 
For a similar expression in regard to the 
future blessedness of man, see Rom. ii. 10, 
So^a Sk Kal Tip,T| Kal elpi]VT) iravTl Tta 
epYa^op.^vi>> to aYaOov.* An unusual form 
of ascription occurs in Clem. Rom. 59. 2, t) 
Xapis TOV Kvpiov r]\i.S)v '\y\<rov Xpicrov 
jji.e6' xipuv Kol p€Ta irdvTuv iravTax'H twv 
kckXt)>v vird tov 0eov koI 8u* avTov* 

St* ov avTu 86|a, Tip,!], KpaTOS Kal 
pcYaXwavvT), Opdvos aluvios airo tuv 
aluvwv els tovs aluvas twv aluvuv. 

peYaXwo-vvT]. Only found elsewhere 
in N.T. in Heb. i, 3, cKadio-ev ev 8e|t^ 
TTJs peYaXwoTjVTjs Iv v\|/t)XoIs, repeated in 
viii. I. Dr. Chase notes that it occurs in 
Enoch v. 4, KaTeXaXi^aaTc peYaXovSKal 
ctkXtipovs Xd-yovs ev o-TopaTi aKaOapaias 
vpuv KaTo. TTJs peYaXoo-uvTis avTOV, xii. 
3, TW Kvpiw TTJS p«YoXocrvvT)S, xiv. 16 (a 
house excelling) Iv 8<5|d Kal Iv Tipfj koI 
ev peYaXoo-vvj]. It is coupled with 8d|a, 
of which it may be regarded as an exten- 
sion, in the doxology used by Clem. Rom. 
20, 61, I am not aware of any other 
example of l|ovo-ia in a doxology : com- 
pare, however. Matt, xxviii. 18, ISodt] 
fioi xdo-a l|ovo-ia Iv ovpavw Kal lirl yi\s- 
vpb iravTos tov alwvos. Cf. I Cor. ii. 
7 (tt)v <70<|>iav) '^v TTpowpiaev 6 ©ebs'fpb 
TWV aiwvwv els 8d|av T|pwv, Prov. viii. 23, 
TTpoTov alwvos l0£peXtwo-e'pe (i.e. o'o<j>iav), 
Iv dpxij irpo TOV TTJV Y'H'' iroiTJeroi. An 
equivalent expression is irpo KaTaPoXTJs 
Kocpov found in John xvii. 24, TiYan'iio-ds 
pc ir. K. K. also Eph. i. 4, l|eXe'|aTO Tjpds 
Iv avTw IT. K. K. and i Pet. i. 20 (Xpio-Tov) 
irpoeYvwo-pe'vov pev ir. K.K.,(t>avepw6e'vT0S 
Se lir' IcrxaTov twv xP'^^'^*'- 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 (i 
Cor. ii. 7), and St. John of only one age 
in the future. 

els irdvTas tovs alwvas. This precise 
phrase is unique in the Bible, but els 
TOVS alwvas is common enough, as in 
Luke i. 33, Rom. i. 25, v. 5, xi. 36, xvi. 
27, 2 Cor. xi. 31, etc., so in LXX, Dan. ii. 
4, 44, vi. 6, 26. The stronger phrase els 
TOVS olwvas TWV aiwvwv occurs in Gal. i. 5, 
Phil. iv. 20, I Tim. i. 17, 2 Tim. iv. 18, 
Heb. xiii. 21, i Pet. iv. 11, v. 11, Apoc. i. 
6, etc. John uses only els rhv alwva 
apparently with the same meaning. Other 
variations are found in Eph. iii. 21, avTw 
T| 8d^a Iv T'li IkkXijo'iiji Kal Iv X. M. els 
irdcras tois y^^^^^ tov alwvos twv aiwvwv, 
2 Pet. iii. 18, avTw t| 86|a Kal vvv Kal els 
iqp^pav alwvos. 

* For a full account of the early doxologies, see Chase on the Lord's Prayer {Texts 
and Studies, i. 3, p. 68 foil.). He states that the common doxology at the end of 
the Lord's Prayer {<rov iarriv iq ^ao-iXeia Kal r\ Svvapis Kal i) B6^a els tovs alwvas 
" appears to be a conflation of two distinct forms," and "was added to the Prayer 
in the ' Syrian ' text of St. Matthew's Gospel ". 




James Moffatt, D.D. 

Longsuffering toward us here is the Most High : 

He hath shown us that which is to be, 

And hath not hidden from us what befalleth at the end. 
For the youth of the world is over. 

Long since hath the strength of creation laiied. 

And the advent of the times is at hand. 
The pitcher is nigh to the cistern, 

The ship to the haven, 
The caravan to the city, 

And life to its consummation. 

— The Syriac Apocalypse of Baruch (Ixxxv. 8, lo), a.d. 7o-i<», 


§ 1. The Text. — The exceptionally corrupt state of the Textus 
Receptus in the Apocalypse is due to the fact that for this book 
Erasmus (to whose text it goes back) had access to only a single 
cursive 1 (numbered 1) of the twelfth or thirteenth century. Even 
that was inferior and incomplete. The MSS. which have become 
available since his day are neither ample nor faultless. Throughout 
the five uncials (two of which, i.e., C and P, are defective palimp- 
sests), over 1600 variants have been counted — excluding merely 
orthographical differences — in the 400 verses of the book; this 
proportion is considerably higher than in the Catholic epistles, for 
example, where 432 verses only yield about 1 1 00 variants. The earliest 
uncial goes back to the fourth century (i^) ; A and C, the most 
weighty, to the fifth ; Q ^ to the eighth ; and P to the ninth. Of 
these, i^AQ are complete, while the Apocalypse in Q is bound up 
with the writings of Basil the Great and Gregory of Nyssa — " one of 
many instances in which the Apocalypse was bound up with ordinary 
theological treatises instead of with the other N.T. writings" 
(Gregory i. 121). C lacks i. 1, iii, 19-v. 14, vii. 14-17, viii. 5-ix. 16, 
X. 10-xi, 3, xiv. 13-xviii, 2, xix. 5-end. P is defective in xvi. 12-xvii. 1, 
xix. 21-xx. 9, xxii. 6-end. 

i^AC reflect a fairly uniform text, which seems to have been 
influenced by an older uncorrected text allied to that underlying the 
vulgate. Hence, as fc^ in the Apocalypse, owing to its eccentric 
element, is not of exceptional value by itself (though supported by 
the cursives 95 and 36), AC vg. form an important group of witnesses, 
to which the minuscule 95 (like 68 and 38) and Syr. seem allied. The 
relation of P and Q is less obvious. Their diff'erences (they agree 

^ Relatively high among the secondary documents, but woefully inferior to the 
uncials. On the performance of Erasmus, see Delitzsch's Hatidschrifte Funde, i. 
(i85i), pp. 17 f., with A. Bludau's essay on the Erasmus editions of the N.T. in 
Bardenhewer's Biblische Studien, vii. 5. 

*To avoid confusion with the B of Codex Vaticanus, it is better to cite this 
codex Vaticanus as Q (so, after Tregelles, Weiss, Haussleiter, Bousset, Swetc) than 
as B (Tisch.) or B^ (WH, Simcox). 


only in about fifty cases against b^AC) point either to two recensions 
of some older original (Bousset) or to a text based again upon some 
older revised text (Weiss), Q approximates rather to the cursives 
in text. But its archetype usually tallies v?ith t>^AC, and is allied 
somehow to the text behind the so-called " Coptic " ^ version {cf. 
Goussen's "Theolog. Studia, fasciculus I."; Apoc, S. Johannis 
apostoli versio sahidica, 1895, pp. iv.-vii.), like a small group of 
cursives (Bousset's Q rel.). In no one MS. or group of MSS. is a 
neutral or fairly accurate text preserved. This is mainly due to the 
/ interval which elapsed before the Apocalypse became generally 
canonical, particularly in the East ; its text was less carefully 
guarded during this period than any other portion of the N.T., and 
even by the time that the b^AC text (or texts) came into being, the 
book had not secured its canonisation throughout the Eastern 
churches. In addition to this, the grammatical irregularities and 
anomalies 2 which studded its pages tempted many a scribe to 
correct and to conform the text. Systematic emendation of this kind 
must have begun very early (Weiss, pp. 144 f.). 

This paucity and conflict of uncial evidence lends additional 
weight to the versions and patristic citations, especially as they 
reflect a text or texts which cannot be taken to be identical with, 
and yet must be older than, those underlying the MSS. Often, 
indeed, the versions themselves reproduce some of the most patent 
errors in the MSS., while the patristic texts are sometimes too 

1 In the textual notes = Sah. {i.e., Sahidic) : a further fragment is edited by J. 
C16dat in Revue de ['Orient Chretien (1899), pp. 263-279. Gregory (pp. 546-547) 
throws both this and the later Bohairic or Memphitic version (= me.) back into the 
second century, but this is probably too early a date. All the extant fragments of 
the former are printed in Delaporte's Fragments Sahidiques du tN.T. (Paris, 1906). 
For the latter, cf. Leipoldt in Church Quart. Rev., 1906, pp. 292 f. 

2 These are not invariably Hebraisms, as Viteau and the older grammarians 
argue, but it is almost uncritical at the opposite extreme to rule out Hebraisms 
entirely. The Apocalypse is so saturated with the original text and the Greek version 
of the O.T., that there is more likelihood here than elsewhere in the N.T. of a 
grammatical solecism being due, directly or indirectly, to the influence of Semitic 
idiom. Even though a parallel instance can be adduced in some cases from the 
papyri or the kouvti elsewhere {cf. Helbing, p. iv.), this merely suggests a possible 
origin for the phrase in question. Besides, the Apocalypse is a piece of literary 
art. Where its eccentricities are not due to ignorance of Greek or to reminiscences 
of Hebrew idiom, they are deliberate violations of grammar and syntax in the 
interests of rhetoric or faith. That Greek was spoken in these Asiatic townships 
although native dialects lingered in the country, is shown by L. Mitteis in his 
Reichsrecht und Volksrecht in den ostlichen Provinzen d. rom. Kaiserreiches (1891), 
pp. 23 f. 


insecure to admit of reliable inferences being drawn from their 
contents {cf. Bebb in Studia Biblica, ii. 195-240). Yet, even with 
these drawbacks, one need not despair of utilising either. Thus 
the Latin versions^ and patristic citations — which are of special 
moment, since the Apocalypse was never absent from the Latin 
N.T., and since the fourth century version did not affect it seriously — 
reveal a fairly distinctive Greek text behind the type of African text 
preserved by Cyprian (third century, citations in his Testimonia)^ 
Primasius, the sixth century African commentator, and the frag- 
mentary Fleury palimpsest (sixth or seventh century)."'' Critical 
opinion is still unsettled upon the precise connexion of this text with 
the uncials, or even with the citations of Latin fathers like Tertullian, 
Jerome and Augustine, to say nothing of Ticonius, Beatus (eighth 
century), Haymo (ninth century) and Cassiodorus (sixth century). 
Thus it is quite uncertain whether the idiosyncrasies of Tertullian's 
quotations reflect a private recension (so Haussleiter) or some eccles- 
iastical version, if they are not made directly from the Greek [cf. 
Nestle's Ein/uhrung, 94, 227 f., E. Tr. 119-20). Nevertheless, it is 
in this direction that the most promising outlook of textual criticism 
upon the Apocalypse lies. It has unique aid in the Latin versions. 
The greater respect shown by the ecclesiastical West to the Apo- 
calypse must have conspired upon the whole to give its text 
a better chance of preservation than in the East. Certainly, 
the fragments of the so-called African text carry us back to a 
Greek text of the Apocalypse which was current in the middle of 
the third century, prior to the origin of any extant uncial, while 
the evidence of Dr. Gwynn's Syriac text comes only second in 
importance. The Greek citations of Clem. Alex, and Origen 
also echo a text which hardly corresponds to that of any of 
the uncials ; but, where the latter writer agrees with iJ^, some early 
Alexandrian text may probably be discerned, which might be termed 
Western. His citations have also affinities with the text of S {cf. 
Gwynn, pp. Iv. f.). As for the more important of the cursives, so far 
as they have been collated (cf. Gregory, i. 316-326, Scrivene 's 
Introd., 1894, i. 321-326), they seem mainly to corroborate other lines 

^ Dr. Armitage Robinson (Cambridge Texts and Studies, u 2, pp. 73, 97 f.), 
followed by Dr. Salmon (Introd. to N.T., pp. 567 f.), even argues from the Ep. Lugd., 
(Eus., H. E., V. i) that the Galilean churches must have had a Latin version of the 
N.T. (including the Apocalypse) by the middle of the second century, akin to the 
African old Latin. 

^Cf. Gregory, 609, and Mr. E. S. Buchanan's collation in Journ. Theol. Studies 
viii., pp. 96 L 


of evidence. In the dearth of better witnesses, their place is occa- 
sionally more serious than some editors would allow ; but no attempt 
at grouping them can be pronounced successful (about sixty contain 
the commentary of Andreas), and it is merely in the wake of earlier 
and heavier authorities that most of the minuscules can, as a rule, be 
employed with any safety. 

In the main, however, there is a fair consensus of editors (c/. 
W.H ., ii., 260 f.) for the bulk of the text as printed in the following 
pages. Exigencies of space have obliged the present editor to omit 
nearly all the textual material which he had amassed, and the only 
variants noted, as a rule, are those of direct significance for the 
expositor. Once or twice a variant has some intrinsic interest of a 
special kind, or the reading has had to be justified, but the textual 
notes do not profess to provide anything like a complete textual 
conspectus. Thus there is no discussion upon the gloss of S on di-a 
in iv. 8, upon the curious Syriac rendering of viii. 13 (as if |xe(r. = 
fieo-os oupd atjia), or upon the interpolation at xi. 1. All that one 
has been able to do is to furnish the reader with as accurate a text 
as possible for that elucidation of the religious ideas of the book 
which it is the primary object of the Expositor's Greek Testament 
to facilitate. 

Special Abbreviations {cf. others in vol. ii. 754-756, 

iii. 33-36, 413). 

And. = comm.^ of Andreas, bishop of Caesarea in Cappadocia (fifth 
or sixth century), author of first Greek edit. (IpfjiYji/cia els tyjk 
'ATroKdXui|/ii'). Cf. von Soden's ^j<2 Schriften des N.T., i. 1, 
472-475, 702 f., and Delitzsch's Hands. Funde, ii. (1862), 
pp. 29 f. 

Areth. = comm. of Arethas, his successor (in 10th cent.?), allied to 
Q (Delitzsch) as And. to A upon the whole. 

Arm. = Armenian version. Cf. Conybeare's A rinenian Version of Rev. 
(London, 1907), from codex 4 (12th cent.). 

Bs. = Bousset's " Textkritische Studien zum N.T." [Texte u. Unter- 
suchungen, xi. 4, 1-44), 1894. 

edd. = consensus or large majority of editors : so min. (minuscules), 
MSS. (manuscripts), and vss. (versions). 

1 Extant in these forms: Anda = codex August., 12th cent. (14th, Gregory), Andc 
= codex Coisl. (loth cent.), Andbav = codex Bavaricus (i6th cent.), Andpal = codex 
Palatinus (15th cent.). The newly discovered commentary of Oecumenius (6th cent., 
cf. Diekamp in Sitzungsberkhte der kbnigl. preuss. Akad., 1907, 1046 f.), as yet un- 
edited, may take the primacy from Andreas. 


•gig. = codex gigas Holmiensis (13th cent.), witness either to old Latin 
text or to " late European " type (Hort). 

Pr. = Primasius, ed. Haussleiter in Zahn's Forschungen zur Gesch. 
des NTHchen Kanons, iv., pp. 1-224 (1891), a very import- 
ant study. Cf. the same critic's essay on Vict., Tic, and 
Jerome in Zeits./ur Kirchl. Wiss. u. Leben (1886), 237-257. 

S. = Syriac Philoxenian recension (6th cent.), ed. Gwynn (1897); 
reflects a Greek text, which is mixed, but is in the main 
(Ixi. f.) allied to the normal uncial text, and is especially 
close to C and Origen (Iv. f.). Cf. Gregory, ii. 507, 509. 

Spec. = pseudo-August. Speculum (8th or 9th cent.). 

Syr. = Harkieian recension (represented by about eight considerable 
MSS.) : posterior and inferior to S. 

Tic. = " comm. in Apoc. homiliis octodecim comprehensus " of 
Tyconius the Donatist (end of 4th cent.). 

vg. = vulgate (Jerome's version, 4th cent.), best preserved in codices 
Am. ( = Amiatinus, 8th cent.), and Fuld. ( = FuIdensis, 6th 
cent.), Harl. (= Harleianus, 9th cent.), and Tol. ( = Tole- 
tanus, 8th cent.). 

Vict. = comm. of Victorinus, bishop of Pettau in Pannonia (end of 3rd 

Ws. = B. Weiss : " die Joh. Apk., textkritische Unters. u. Textherstel- 
lung" (Texte u. Unters. vii. 1), 1891. 

§ 2. Analysis. — The Apocalypse of John, which is thrown into 
epistolary form, is a slender book with a large design. After the title 
i}. 1-3) and prologue (i. 4-8) in which the prophet puts himself into 
relation with seven churches of Western Asia Minor, he proceeds to 
describe the vision of Jesus Christ (i. 9 f.) which furnished him with 
his commission to write.^ The immediate outcome of the vision is a 
series of charges addressed to these churches (ii.-iii.).^ Like the 

^ The phrase ev KvpiaK'^ (=imperial, cf. Deissmann's Licht vom Osten, 258 f.) 
iq|X£pi;^ (i. 10) denotes the Christian Sunday, not the day of judgment to which he 
Avas transported (so Wetstein, Weyland, Selwyn, Hort, Russell's Parousia, 371, 372, 
and Deissmann in E. Bi., 2815). The day of the Lord is only twice used in the Apoc. 
(vi. 14, xvi. 14), and there in a special eschatological connexion and in its normal 
grammatical form. In the Apocalypse it means the day of judgment, whereas in 
i. 10 the words imply revelation, and the Apocalypse is not a mere revelation of the 
judgment-day. Besides, ev irv. must go here with tyev. as in iv. 2, otherwise it 
would have a verb of transport (so xvii. 3, xxi. 10). 

* These are addressed to tiny communities in the cities, not to the churches as 
being in any sense the cities. The character and history of the Christian community 
are by no means to be identified with those of the city ; we have no reason to assume 
that the local Christians, who were ardently awaiting a citizenship from heaven, 


author of the 50th Psalm, he tries to rouse God's people to the 
seriousness of their own position, before he enters into any predic- 
tions regarding the course of the outside world. The scene then 
changes to the celestial court (iv.-v.), where God appears enthroned 
in his presence-chamber over the universe, with Jesus installed as 
the divine revealer of providence in the immediate future. The 
description of the hea.ven\y penetralia forms a series of weird Oriental 
arabesques, but the nucleus is drawn from the tradition of the later 
post-exilic prophets (especially Ezekiel). According to one phase of 
this tradition, the climax of things was to be heralded by physical 
and political disturbances ; a regular crescendo of disasters was im- 
minent on the edge and eve of the world's annihilation. Hence the 
next series of visions is full of material and military troubles, delineated 
partly in supernatural colours which are borrowed from the fanciful 
astro-theology of eschatological tradition. Prom this point onwards 
the sword of the Lord is either an inch or two out of its scabbard, 
or showering blows upon his adversaries. In the prophet's own 
metaphor, before the contents ot the Book of Doom (in the hands 
of Jesus Christ) can be read, its seven seals must be broken, and at 
the opening of each (vi.-vii.) some fresh woe is chronicled.^ The 
woe heralded by the seventh seal drifts over, however, into another 
series of fearful catastrophes which are introduced by seven trumpet 
blasts (viii.-ix.), and it is only on their completion that the way is 
now clear for the introduction of the protagonists in the last conflict 
upon earth. These protagonists are the messiah of God, i.e., Jesus 

had any vivid civic consciousness, or were keenly sensitive to the historical and 
geographical features of their cities. The analogies sometimes drawn from the latter 
are interesting but for the most part specious and irrelevant coincidences. It is 
modern fancy which discovers in such directions any vital elements present to the 
mind of the prophet or his readers. Why these particular churches were selected, 
remains a mystery. The cities in question were not all conspicuous for a special 
enforcement of the imperial cultus, and the churches themselves can hardly be sup- 
posed to be in every case representative or particularly important. Even the plaus- 
ible theory that they were the most convenient centres for district-groups of churches 
(Ramsay, Seven Letters, pp. i8o f.) does not work out well in detail. 

' The longing of the martyred souls in vi. g-ii ("lignes toutes divines, qui suf- 
front ^ternellement k la consolation de I'ame qui soufTre pour sa foi ou sa vertu," 
Renan, 463), recalls the function of the Erinnys in Greek religion, the Erinnys 
being primarily " the outraged soul of the dead man crying for vengeance " (cf. J. E. 
Harrison, Prolegomena to Study of Greek Religion, p. 214). Only, the souls in the 
Apocalypse are passive ; they do not actively pursue their revenge upon the living. 
The point of the vision is in part to reiterate the deterministic