EVENING SPIRITUAL DIARY FOR 6/25/2025 9:40 PM
Focus: PT-2
“Introduction to Jude”
I explained in yesterday evening’s SD that I am pretty
much starting over in the book of Jude as when I ordered the commentary from
John MacArthur on 2 Peter that Jude was included in the book, and since I had
studied Jude using Dr. Warren Wiersbe’s commentary about 12 years ago I decided
to use MacArthur’s commentary to help me better understand this second to last
chapter in the New Testament.
I continue to quote from his introduction to Jude and am
taking it one section at a time, and tonight I will look at “External
Attestation.”
“External Attestation.”
“The external evidence for the existence and authenticity
of Jude is more complete than it is for 2 Peter. There are even possible allusions to it in
the Apostolic Fathers (The Didache, Clements’s
Epistle to the Corinthians, The Epistle of Barnabas, The Shepherd of Hermas, and
Polycarp’s Epistle to the Philippians),
but they are too vague in conclusive. By
the late second century, however, the evidence is undeniable. For example, the Muratorian Canon (a late
second-century list of New Testament books) includes Jude as canonical. At about the same time, the Christian
philosopher Athenagoras reflected an awareness of Jude’s epistle in his defense
of Christianity (which he addressed to Emperor Marcus Aurelius). Theophilus of Antioch, a contemporary of
Athenagoras, was also familiar with the letter.
“Later in the second century or early in the third,
Tertullian referred to the epistle as Scripture and Jude as its author. At about that same time, Clement of
Alexandria wrote a commentary on the Scriptures, including Jude (cf. the
discussion in the Introduction to 2 Peter in this volume). Clements’s student, Origen, acknowledged that
some in his day had doubts about Jude authenticity. Origen, however, did not share those
doubts. Instead, he quoted Jude
frequently. The third-century Bodmer
papyrus P72 also contains Jude, indicating that the third-century church
affirmed it to be part of the canon.
“In the fourth century, Eusebius included Jude among the
books whose authenticity was questioned by some (he did the same with 2
Peter). He did not, however, list it as
one of the spurious books. Eusebius also acknowledged that Jude was accepted by
many in the church. Later in the fourth
century, Didymus the Blind (who headed the Christian training school at
Alexandria) defended Jude’s authenticity against its detractors. Those who questioned the epistle primarily
did so because it quotes from the Jewish apocrypha. Nonetheless, the book was commonly accepted
by the fourth-century church—as evidenced by the testimonies of Athanasius, the
Council of Laodicea, Cyril of Jerusalem, Gregory of Nazianzus, Epiphanius, and
Jerome (each of whom regarded Jude as canonical).”
I have to say that this section of MacArthur’s commentary
tested my typing skills with all of those names that I have not heard of many
of them. MacArthur puts much time in
writing his commentary and I appreciate his hard work. Looks like tomorrow I will talking about the
Author and I am looking forward to that, hope you are too.
6/26/2025 9:29 PM
No comments:
Post a Comment