hn appointed bishops in Asia, and there is no reason for
doubting that episcopacy dates back to this period. The apostle
evidently intends to punish Diotrephes for his malice when he visits
the district again. It is just possible that the letter to the Church
(ver. 9) which Diotrephes repudiated is our "Second Epistle" of St.
John. This theory will win acceptance with some of those who think
that the Second Epistle was not written to an individual, but to a
Church.

ANALYSIS

Salutations to Gaius, congratulations that he is walking in the truth,
his hospitality to travelling Christians, the tyranny of Diotrephes,
recommendation of Demetrius, personal matters.

[1] _H. E._ iii. 39.

[2] It is impossible to accept the recent Rationalist hypothesis that
these words were written by a pious Christian who had not seen Jesus,
but wished to emphasize the truth that the historical Church was
intimately connected with the historical Jesus.

[3] Among these critics must be numbered Luetzelberger (1840), Keim
(1867), Bousset (1899).

{265}

CHAPTER XXIV

THE GENERAL EPISTLE OF JUDE

[Sidenote: The Author.]

"Judas, a servant of Jesus Christ, and brother of James." We can be
sure that the James here mentioned is the James who acted as the first
bishop of the Church at Jerusalem. The author's designation of himself
would not be intelligible unless he meant that he was related to a very
prominent man of that name. The writer cannot be the Apostle Jude. He
does not claim to be an apostle, and he seems indirectly to repudiate
the authority of an apostle by describing himself only in relation to
his brother and by referring to "the apostles of our Lord Jesus Christ"
in a manner which seems to distinguish them for himself. If the
Apostle Jude was the _son_ of James (as many scholars think), this Jude
was clearly another man. If the Apostle was the _brother_ of James (as
the English Authorised Version holds), then his identification with
this Jude is still doubtful.

Jude was a son of St. Joseph. At first he did not believe in our Lord
(John vii. 5), but was convinced by the Resurrection (Acts i. 14). He
was married (1 Cor. ix. 5). Hegesippus, a writer of the 2nd century,
tells us that two of his grandsons were taken before the Emperor
Domitian as being of the royal house of David, and therefore dangerous
to the empire.[1] He found them to be poor rough-handed men, and
dismissed them with good-humou