The Expositor's Bible: The General Epistles of St. James and St. Jude — John Shaqi
The Expositor's Bible: The General Epistles of St. James and St. JudePlummer, Alfred
Religion
The Expositor's Bible: The General Epistles of St. James and St. Jude
Plummer, Alfred
Bible. James -- Commentaries; Bible. Jude -- Commentaries
individual reader; and it has restored the Epistles to the Hebrews and
of James and Jude to their proper places in the New Testament, instead
of leaving them in the kind of appendix to which Luther had banished
them and the Revelation. Moreover, the passage containing the
statement about the "veritable Epistle of straw"[16] is now omitted
from the preface to his translation. And with regard to this very
point, his former friend and later opponent Andrew Rudolph Bodenstein,
of Karlstadt, pertinently asked, "If you allow the Jews to stamp books
with authority by receiving them, why do you refuse to grant as much
power to the Churches of Christ, since the Church is not less than the
Synagogue?" We have at least as much reason to trust the Councils of
Laodicea, Hippo, and Carthage, which formally defined the limits of
the New Testament, as we have to trust the unknown Jewish influences
which fixed those of the Old. And when we examine for ourselves the
evidence which is still extant, and which has greatly diminished in
the course of fifteen hundred years, we feel that both on external and
internal grounds the decision of the fourth century respecting the
genuineness of the Epistle of St. James, as a veritable product of the
Apostolic age and as worthy of a place in the canon of the New
Testament, is fully justified.
[8] The date so frequently given, A.D. 363, cannot be substantiated,
and on the whole is not probable. See Hefele, _History of the Church
Councils_, II. vi. 93.
[9] The Epistle to the Hebrews and the Apocalypse.
[10] γνωρίμων δ' οὖν ὅμως τοῖς πολλοῖς (_H. E._ III. xxv. 3), where
γνώριμος, as usual, indicates _familiar_ knowledge. Eusebius is a
desultory writer, and one has to gather his views from statements
scattered over chaps. iii., xxiv., and xxv., some of which are not
very precise. The following table seems to represent his opinion:--
{ Four Gospels, Acts,
{ fourteen Epistles
{ _Universally acknowledged_ { of Paul (Hebrews ?),
{ (τὰ ὁμολογούμενα) { 1 John, 1 Peter,
CANONICAL BOOKS { { Apocalypse (?).
(ἐνδιάθηκοι {
γραφαί) { { _As to authenticity_--2 Peter.
{ _Disputed_ {
{ (τὰ ἀντιλεγόμενα) { _As to Apostolicity_--James,
{ Jude, 2 and 3 John.
Public-domain text, read in full here on John Shaqi.
Reviews
Reviews
No reviews yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this work.
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account