Ver. 2.-1. Beloved, I pray that with respect to all things thou mayest prosper.]-In the Greek it is, περι πάντων ευχομαι σε ευοδούσε Sai, which in our Bible is rendered, 'I wish above all things that thou mayest prosper.' Beza's translation is, 'Deum oro de omnibus rebus-I pray God concerning all things,' things temporal as well as things spiritual, that thou mayest prosper. In this translation Beza is followed by Estius and Erasmus Schmidius. Dod dridge's translation is, 'Beloved, I pray that in respect of all things.' 2. Thou mayest prosper.]-Evodour signifies to go on safely and successfully in a journey. Hence it signifies to be prosperous in general.

3. And be in health, even as thy soul prospereth.]-From John's using the word vyv, some conjecture that Caius was of a sickly constitution of body; and from his wishing him prosperity, they fancy that Caius had sustained considerable worldly losses. But I see no reason for either of these conjectures. His worldly affairs, at the time John wrote to him, were such as enabled him to lodge and entertain the brethren and strangers who applied to him for relief. Perhaps also he gave them money to defray the expenses of their journey among the Gentiles. But be this as it may, it is evident that Caius had made himself remarkable among the Christians in that part of the world for his many virtues. For the apostle made his proficiency in the Christian graces the measure of that temporal prosperity and health which he wished to him, not for his own sake alone, but for the benefit of the church. Wherefore, in the apostle's wish there was a delicate insinuation, that if Caius's riches, of which he had made so good a use, and his bodily health, were in proportion to his virtues, they would be very great, and the continuance of his life and health would be a singular blessing to the church.

Ver. 3.-1. For I rejoiced greatly.]-The connexion in which this verse stands with ver. 2. where the apostle told Caius that he prayed for him, teacheth us, that the most proper expression of our joy for the happiness and virtue of our friends, is to give thanks to God for the same, and to pray that these blessings may be continued to them. 2. When the brethren came.]-That exovov is rightly rendered came, see proved 2 John ver. 7. note 1.-The brethren here spoken of seem to have been those mentioned ver. 5. who, having been sent by the apostle either to convert the Gentiles or to water the Gentile churches already planted, had been hospitably entertained by Caius, and perhaps assisted by him with noney; and who, on their return to the apostle, had, in a meeting of the church over which he presided, given an account of Caius's perseverance in the true faith, and declared the great kindness which he had shewed to them, ver. 6. which was the more acceptable to them, as they had generously resolved to take nothing for their maintenance from the Gentiles to whom they preached the gospel.

3. And bare witness to thy truth.-The apostle emphatically terms Caius's joining works of charity with faith in the doctrines of the gospel his truth. For there is no true faith without good works; it always produces good works: neither are any works good but such as proceed from faith. The two joined constitute the truth of religion.

Ver. 4.--1. I have no greater joys than those which I have.]-In the new translation of this clause I have supplied the words which I have because the plural demonstrative pronoun TOUT, construed as it must be with Zoтię z ν Xxgxv, cannot be translated without the addition of these words.-Rich. Baxter's note on this verse is good:-"True ministers rejoice more for the welfare of men's souls, than in their procuring wealth and worldly honours."-See 2 John ver. 4. note 2.

2. When I hear.]-So ive axou must be translated. This use of ir is thought by some a peculiarity in John's style. See, however, Ess. iv. 199.

3. My children.]-I think John, by reckoning Caius in the number of his children, means to tell us that Caius was converted by bim. Others, however, are of opinion, that the apostle gave to

those who were under his inspection the appellation of X TIXVA, my children, to express his tender affection to them, and his concern for their welfare. And in support of their opinion they observe, that the term children is used to express affection, 1 John ii. But the terms used in that chapter are Txvi pov, my little children, and di, young children, which strongly express affection. See 1 John ii. 1. note I.; whereas here, a Tv, my children, denotes simply the relation of children to their father.

Ver. 5.-1. Beloved, thou dost faithfully.-ION 201815, 'Thou dost a faithful thing; a thing becoming a faithful person; or one who is a real believer.

2. What thou performest for the brethren, and for the strangers.] -As the brethren are here distinguished from the strangers, the brethren, I suppose, were members of the church over which John presided. Accordingly it is said of them, ver. 7. that they went forth from the place of their residence, which I suppose was Ephesus, or some other city of Asia where John abode, to publish the name of Christ as the Son of God to the Gentiles in those parts. And, at their return from their first journey, they bare witness to the faith and love of Caius in the presence of the church from which they went forth. But the strangers were poor Christians, who, as Heuman supposes, having been driven from their habitation by their persecutors, had come to the city where Caius dwelt, in the hope of finding relief; and happening to meet the brethren there, they joined them in their first journey among the Gentiles.-To shew how unfaithfully the Papists have translated the scriptures, Benson takes notice, that, to give countenance to their pilgrimages, they have in some of their versions of this passage translated the clause Rui B15 TOUS ŽIVOUs, and to pilgrims. With the same view they have translated vodoxnov, 1 Tim. v. 10. If she hath lodged pilgrims.' See another instance, James v. 11. note.--These examples shew of what importance toward the faithful translation of the sacred oracles it is, to give the true literal meaning of the word, as far as it can be done with propriety.

Ver. 6.-1. These have borne testimony to thy love in the presence, &c.]-Since the apostle represents the strangers as joining the brethren in bearing witness to Caius's love before the church from which the brethren went forth to the Gentiles; also, since in in ver. 7. these strangers are represented as having gone forth with the brethren to the Gentiles, it is probable, as was observed in note 2. on ver. 5. that these strangers met the brethren in the city or place where Caius lived, and joined them in their journey to the Gentiles; and accompanied them when they returned to the church from which they had come.

2. Whom if thou help forward on their journey.]--These brethren and strangers, it seemeth, proposed to undertake a second journey, or had undertaken it, for the purpose of preaching to the Gentiles. The apostle, therefore, requested Caius still to assist them in executing their pious resolution, by entertaining them. For, in the language of scripture, to help forward on a journey sig. nifies, not only to accompany a person on a part of his journey, Acts xxi. 5. but also to furnish him with necessaries for his jour ney, Tit. iii. 13.

Ver. 7.-1. Because for his name's sake they went forth.]-For the different interpretation of these words given by the ancient commentators, see Pref. sect. 3. par. 4.-I think these brethren and strangers were preachers, who had gone forth among the Gen. tiles for the sake of making known to them the name of Christ, that is, his character as the Son of God, and his office as Saviour of the world; because, as was observed, Pref. sect. 3. par. 4. if these strangers had been merely persons in want, there was no reason for their not receiving assistance from the Gentiles, whether converted or unconverted.

2. Receiving nothing from the Gentiles. ]--It is not clear whether the apostle meant the converted or the unconverted Gentiles, or both. I am of opinion that he meant both; because, if the brethren and the strangers were preachers, they may have prudently resolved

ink.

14 For I hope straightway to see thee, (xx, 212.) and so we shall speak face to face. Peace BE to thee. The friends HERE salute thee.2 Salute the friends by name.3

to the elect lady and her children, 2 Epist. ver. 12. See the note on that verse.

Ver. 14.-1. I hope straightway to see thee.]-Lardner conjectures that John did actually visit Caius, and adds, "I please myself with the supposition that his journey was not in vain. I imagine that Diotrephes subinitted and acquiesced in the advices and admonitions of the apostle. Of this I have no assurance. However, I may add, neither doth any one else know the contrary." Canon, vol. iii. p. 312.

2. The friends here salute thee.]-Our translators have inserted the word our in this clause without any authority.-'Oro, the

friends. This appellation is singular, being nowhere else found in scripture. But it applieth excellently to the primitive Christians, as it denoteth in the strongest manner the love which, in the first age, subsisted among the true disciples of Christ. Let it not then be pretended, that the gospel does not recommend private friendship.

3. Salute the friends by name.]-The apostle, by sending a salu. tation to the faithful disciples of Christ, who were in the church of which John was a member, and who were living together in great love, shewed his affection for them, and encouraged them to perse. vere in the truth.

PREFACE.

of James.

In the catalogue which Luke gives of the apostles, chap. vi. 14, 15. James the son of Alpheus, Simon called Zelotes, and Judas the brother of James, are mentioned. In the catalogue, Acts i. 13. we have the same persons named, and in the same order. But in the catalogue, Matt. x. 3. in the place of Judas there is Lebbeus, whose sirname was Thaddeus; and in Mark iii. 18. Thaddeus simply. Wherefore, as all the evangelists agree that there were only twelve apostles, we must suppose that Judas the brother of James was sirnamed Lebbeus and Thaddeus.-The appellation of the brother of James was given to Judas, probably because James was the elder brother, and because, after our Lord's ascension, James became a person of considerable note among the apostles, and was highly esteemed by the Jewish believers.

In the Preface to the epistle of James, sect. 1. we have shewn, that James the son of Alpheus was our Lord's brother or cousin-german. From this it follows, that Judas the brother of James stood in the same relation to Christ. Accordingly we find James and Joses, and Simon and Judas, expressly called the brethren of Jesus, Matt. xiii. 55. Mark vi. 3.-We have no account of the time and manner in which Judas the brother of Jesus became Christ's disciple. But the history of his election to the apostleship is given Luke vi. 13. Perhaps, like some others of the apostles, he was originally a follower of the Baptist, on whose testimony to Jesus he believed him to be the Messiah.

None of the evangelists have said any thing of Judas after he became an apostle except John, who tells us, that when our Lord spoke what is recorded John xiv. 21. Judas saith to him,-22. Lord, how is it that thou wilt manifest thyself to us, and not to the world? 23. Jesus answered and said to him, If a man love me, he will keep my words, and my Father will love him, and we will come to him and make our abode with him;' meaning, that after his resurrection he would shew himself alive to his apostles; and that he and his Father, by the spiritual gifts bestowed on them, would make their abode with them; that is, would shew that they were

present with them in all their ministrations. Accordingly, peared, at different times, after his resurrection. He was also one of the 120 upon whom the Holy Ghost descended in the visible shape of flames of fire, on the memorable day of Pentecost.-Being therefore an eye-witness, and endowed with the Holy Ghost, he no doubt, as Lardner remarks, joined his brethren apostles in witnessing their Master's resurrection from the dead, and shared with them in the reproaches and sufferings which befell them on that account.

Lardner conjectures, that Judas the apostle was an husbandman before he became Christ's disciple; founding his conjecture on a passage of the Apostolical Constitutions, where the apostles are made to say, "Some of us are fishermen, others tent-makers, others husbandmen." He adds, "undoubtedly several of the apostles were fishermen : But by the latter part of the sentence no more may be meant, than that there was among them one tent-maker, even Paul; and one husbandman, intending perhaps St. Jude. For Hegesippus, as quoted by Eusebius, writes, "That when Domitian made inquiries after the posterity of David, some grandsons of Jude, called the Lord's brother, were brought before him. Being asked concerning their possessions and substance, they assured him, that they had only so many acres of land, out of the improvement of which they both paid him tribute and maintained themselves with their own hard labour. The truth of what they said was confirmed by the callousness of their hands," &c. On this passage Lardner's remarks are, "Hence some may argue, that St. Jude himself had been an husbandman; and from this account, if it may be relied upon, we learn that this apostle was married and had children." Lardner on the Canon, vol. iii. chap. xxi. p. 325.

If Judas the apostle was the same person with Judas the author of the epistle, he lived to a great age. And his life being thus prolonged, we may suppose that, after preaching the gospel and confirming it by miracles, he went into other countries for the same purpose. Lardner tells us, some have said that Jude preached in Arabia, Syria, Mesopotamia, and Persia; and that he suffered martyrdom in the last mentioned country. But these things are not supported by any well-attested history. With respect to his being a martyr, it may be doubted;

because none of the ancients have mentioned his having suffered martyrdom. It is therefore generally believed that he died a natural death.-Jerome, in his Commentary on Matt. x. 35. says, That the apostle Thaddeus, called by the evangelist Luke Judas the brother of James, was sent to Edessa, to Agbarus king of Osroëne."-Eusebius, Eccl. Hist. lib. i. c. 13. says, Thomas, one of the twelve, sent to Edessa Thaddeus, one of Christ's seventy disciples, to preach the gospel in these countries.

SECT. II.-Shewing that the Epistle of Jude was written by Judas the Apostle, consequently that it is an inspired Writing.

I. In the inscription of this epistle, the writer styles himself 1sfας Ιησε Χρισε δόλος, αδελφος δε Ιακεβ, Judas, a servant of Jesus Christ, and brother of James.' By these two characters, the author of this epistle hath shewed himself to be an apostle. For, 1. His name Judas is precisely the same with that of the apostle Judas. 2. His designation is the same, and brother of James.If it be objected, that Judas, the writer of the epistle, hath not called himself an apostle, but only a servant of Jesus Christ, the answer is, First, As there was another apostle named Judas, to have called himself an apostle was no distinction at all; whereas, by styling himself the brother of James, he hath made himself known to all who are acquainted with the catalogues of the apostles given by the evangelists, to be a different person from Judas the traitor, and hath as effectually declared himself to be an apostle, as if he had expressly assumed that title. Besides, by calling himself the brother of James, he hath asserted his relation to Christ as his cousin-german, (see Pref. to James, sect. 1. paragr. 1.), and thereby hath secured to himself whatever respect was due to him on account of that honourable relation. Secondly, Some others, who were undoubtedly apostles, have in their epistles omitted to take that title, and have called themselves simply servants of Jesus Christ. Thus, in Paul's epistle to the Philippians, chap. i. 1. we have Paul and Timothy, servants of Jesus Christ; and in the Epistle to Philemon, Paul a prisoner for Jesus Christ,' without any addition: also, in the inscription of the epistles to the Thessalonians, we have 'Paul and Silvanus and Timothy to the church of the Thessalonians,' without any designation whatever. In like manner, James in his epistle, chap. i. 1. calls himself simply a servant of Jesus Christ.' Yet no one, on account of the omission of the word apostle in these epistles, ever doubted of the apostleship either of Paul or of James. Farther, in the first epistle of John, the writer, neither in the inscription nor in any other part of his letters, hath called himself an apostle, or so much as mentioned his own name; yet, by his manner of writing, he hath made himself known so fully, that his epistle, from the very first, hath been universally acknowledged as John's, and respected as a writing divinely inspired. Why then should Judas be thought no apostle, or his epistle be reckoned an uninspired writing, merely because he hath not called himself an apostle, but only a servant of Jesus Christ?

If, in this epistle, there had been any thing inconsistent with the true Christian doctrine, or any thing tending to reconcile the practice of sin with the hope of salvation, there would have been the justest reason for calling the apostleship of its author in question. But, instead of this, its professed design, as shall be shewed by and by, was to condemn the erroneous doctrines, which in the first age were propagated by corrupt teachers, for the purpose of encouraging their disciples in their licentious courses; and to make those to whom this letter was written, sensible of the obligation which their Christian

profession laid on them resolutely to maintain the faith, and constantly to follow the holy practice enjoined by the gospel.

Grotius, however, fancying that the author of this epistle was not Judas the apostle, but another person of the same name, who lived in the time of the emperor Adrian, and who was the fifteenth bishop of Jerusalem, hath boldly affirmed, that the words and brother of James are an interpolation; and that the true reading is, 'Judas, a servant of Jesus Christ, to them who are sanctified,' &c. But as he hath not produced so much as a shadow of authority from any ancient MS. or from the Fathers, in support of his emendation, it deserves not the least regard, and should not have been mentioned, had it not been to make the reader sensible, how little the opinion of the greatest critics is to be regarded when they have a favourite notion to maintain, or wish to make themselves conspicuous by the novelty or singularity of their pretended discoveries.

From the inscription, therefore, of this epistle, I think it certain that it was written by Judas the apostle; and that it is an inspired writing of equal authority with the epistles of the other apostles, which by all are acknowledged to be inspired and canonical.

II. The genuineness of this epistle is established likewise by the matters contained in it, which in every respect are suitable to the character of an inspired apostle of Christ. For, as was already observed, the writer's design in it was to characterize and condemn the heretical teachers, who, in that age, endeavoured by a variety of base arts to make disciples; and to reprobate the impious doctrines which they taught for the sake of advantage; and to enforce the practice of holiness on all who professed the gospel. In short, there is no error taught, nor evil practice enjoined, for the sake of which any impostor could be moved to impose a forgery of this kind on the world.

To invalidate this branch of the proof of the authenticity of the epistle of Jude, it hath been objected, both anciently and in modern times, that the writer of it hath quoted the apocryphal book entitled Enoch, and thereby hath put that book on an equality with the canonical books of the Old Testament. But to this objection learned men have replied, that it is by no means certain that Jude quoted any book whatever: He only says, ver. 14. Now Enoch, the seventh from Adam, prophesied even concerning these men, saying, Behold the Lord cometh with his holy myriads,' &c.-Besides, we have no good evidence, that in Jude's time there was any book extant entitled Henoch or Henoch's Prophecy. In the second and third centuries, indeed, a book with that title was handed about among the Christians. But it seems to have been forged on occasion of the mention that is made of Enoch's prophecy in the epistle of Jude; and was universally rejected as a manifest forgery. In the apostolical writings there are a variety of ancient facts mentioned or alluded to, which are not recorded in the Jewish scriptures; such as, The sin and punishment of the evil angels, 2 Pet. ii. 4. and their confinement in everlasting chains under darkness to the judgment of the great day, Jude, ver. 6.-The prophecy of Enoch concerning the judgment and punishment of the wicked, Jude, ver. 14.-Noah's preaching righteousness to the antediluvians, 2 Pet. ii. 5.—Abraham's seeing Christ's day and being glad, mentioned by Christ himself, John viii. 55.-Lot's being vexed with the filthy discourse of the wicked Sodomites, 2 Pet. ii. 7.-The emblematical purpose for which Moses slew the Egyptian who strove with the Israelites, Acts vii. 25.-The names of Pharaoh's magicians who contended with Moses, 2 Tim. iii. 8.— Moses' exclamation on the mount, when terrified by what he saw, Heb. xii. 21.-The emblematical meaning of the

tabernacles and of their services, Heb. ix. 8, 9.-All which ancient facts are mentioned by the inspired writers, as things universally known and acknowledged.—It is no objection to the truth of these things, that they are not recorded in the books of the Old Testament. For it is reasonable to believe, that the writers of these books have not recorded all the revelations which God made to mankind in ancient times; nor all the circumstances of the revelations which they have recorded. As little have they related all the interesting incidents of the lives of the persons whose history they have given. This is certain with respect to Moses. For he hath omitted the revelation by which sacrifice was appointed; and yet that it was appointed of God is evident from Moses himself, who tells us, that God had respect to Abel and to his offering. Likewise, he hath omitted the discovery which was made to Abraham, of the purpose for which God ordered him to sacrifice his son. Yet, that such a discovery was made to him we learn from Christ himself, who tells us, that Abraham saw his day, and was glad.-Wherefore, the revelations and facts mentioned in the New Testament may all have happened; and, though not recorded in the Old, may have been preserved by tradition. Nay, it is reasonable to think, that at the time the ancient revelations were made, somewhat of their meaning was also discovered, whereby posterity were led to agree in their interpretation of these very obscure oracles. On any other supposition, that uniformity of interpretation which took place from the beginning, can hardly be accounted for.

Allowing, then, that there were revelations anciently made to mankind which are not recorded, and that the revelations which are recorded were accompanied with some explications not mentioned, it is natural to think, that these things would be verbally published to the ancients, who, considering them as matters of importance, would lay them up in their memory, and rehearse them to their children; and they in like manner relating them to their descendants, they were preserved by uninterrupted tradition. Further, these traditional revelations, and explications of revelations, after the art of writing became common, may have been inserted in books as ancient traditions which were well authenticated. And the Spirit of God, who inspired the evangelists and apostles, may have directed them to mention these traditions in their writings, and to allude to them, to make us sensible that many important matters, anciently made known by revelation, have been preserved by tradition. And more especially, that the persuasion, which history assureth us hath prevailed in all ages and countries from the most early times, concerning the placability of the Deity, the acceptableness of sacrifice, the existence of the soul after death, the resurrection of the body, the rewards and punishments of the life to come, with other matters of a like kind, was founded on revelations concerning these things which were made to mankind in the first age, and handed down by tradition. The truth is, these things being matters which by the utmost effort of their natural faculties men could not discover, the knowledge and belief of them which prevailed among all nations, whether barbarous or civilized, cannot be accounted for except on the supposition of their being originally discovered by revelation, and spread among all nations by tradition. Wherefore, in no age or country have mankind been left entirely to the guidance of the light of nature, but have enjoyed the benefit of revelation in a greater or in a less degree.

But to return to the objection formerly mentioned, by which some endeavour to disprove the authenticity of Jude's epistle, founded on the mention which is made in it of Enoch's prophecy. Allowing for a moment, that there was such a book extant in the apostle's days as

that entitled Henoch, or the prophecy of Henoch, and that Jude quoted from it the prophecy under consideration, such a quotation would not lessen the authority of his epistle as an inspired writing, any more than the quotations from the heathen poet Aratus, Acts xvii. 28. and from Menander, 1 Cor. xv. 33. and from Epimenides, Tit. i. 12. have lessened the authority of the history of the Acts, and of Paul's epistles, where these quotations are found. The reason is, if the things contained in these quotations were true in themselves, they might be mentioned by an inspired writer, without giving authority to the poems from which they were taken. In like manner, if the prophecy ascribed to Enoch, concerning the future judgment and punishment of the wicked, was agreeable to the other declarations of God concerning that event, Jude might cite it; because Enoch, who like Noah was a preacher of righteousness, may actually have delivered such a prophecy, though it be not recorded in the Old Testament; and because his quoting it did not establish the authority of the book from which he took it, if he took it from any book extant in his time.

Having thus cleared the internal evidence of the epistle of Jude from the objections which have been raised against it, I shall now set before the reader the external evidence by which the authenticity of that writing is proved.-For this purpose I observe, that although the epistle of Jude was doubted of by some in the early ages, yet, as soon as it was understood that its author was Judas the brother of James, mentioned in the catalogue of the apostles, it was generally received as an apostolical inspired writing, and read publicly in the churches as such. The evidence of these important and decisive facts I shall set before the reader, as collected and arranged by the learned and impartial Lardner.

And first of all, Lardner acknowledgeth that the epistle of Jude is nowhere quoted by Irenæus, who wrote about the year 178; but that Eusebius, giving an account of the works of Clem. Alexandr. who flourished about the year 194, saith, Eccles. Hist. lib. vi. c. 14. initio, “In his Institutions he hath given explications of all the Canonical Scriptures, not omitting those which are contradicted; I mean the epistle of Jude, and the other catholic epistles." Clement's Institutions are lost; but we have a small treatise in Latin, called Adumbrations, supposed to be translated from the Institutions. In these Adumbrations there are remarks upon almost every verse of the epistle of Jude except the last. There likewise is the following observation: "Jude, who wrote a catholic epistle, does not style himself at the beginning of it Brother of the Lord, though he was related to him, but Jude, the servant of Jesus Christ, and brother of James." From this it appears, that Clement thought the writer of the epistle under consideration one of them who are called the Lord's brethren, Matt. xiii. 55. and an apostle.-Farther, verses 5, 6. and 11. of the epistle of Jude, are quoted by Clement in his Pedagogue, or Instructor. Moreover, in his Stromata or Miscellanies he quotes Jude from ver. 8. to ver. 16.-These are sufficient proofs of the antiquity of this epistle, and that it was written by Judas, one of the twelve apostles of Christ.

Tertullian, who flourished about the year 200, hath one very express quotation from Jude's epistle, in his treatise De Cultu Famin. namely this: "Hence it is that Enoch is quoted by the apostle Jude."

Origen, about the year 230, mentions the epistle of Jude in various passages of his writings; particularly in his commentaries on St. Matthew, having cited chap. xiii. 53. 56. he saith, "Jude wrote an epistle in few lines indeed, but full of the powerful words of the heavenly grace, who at the beginning says, Jude, the servant of Jesus Christ, and brother of James." And in the same commentaries on St. Matthew, having quoted 1 Pet. i. 12. he says, “If