them,
and that they constituted, along with the writings of the Old
Testament, that whole of divine revelation which the Christian
churches employed in assaulting the kingdom of Satan.

The testimony of Eusebius himself is of the same general import
as that of Origen--that the first epistle of Peter has been
universally acknowledged; but that the one current as the second
has not been received as a part of the New Testament; but yet,
appearing useful to many, has been studied with the other
Scriptures (Hist. Eccl., 3. 3); that among the writings which
are disputed, yet known to many, are the epistles current as
those of James and Jude, and the second epistle of Peter (Hist.
Eccl., 3. 25).

Jerome says that Peter "wrote two epistles that are called
catholic, of which the second is denied by most persons on
account of its disagreement in style with the first." Scrip.
Eccl., 1. But he himself received the epistle, and explained the
difference in style and character and structure of words by the
assumption that Peter used _different interpreters_ in the
composition of the two epistles (Epist. 120 ad Hedib., chap.
11); and from his time onward the epistle was generally regarded
as a part of the New Testament.

The reader who wishes to investigate farther the question of
external testimonies will find them all given in Davidson's
Introduct. to New Test.; and Alford's Commentary, Introduction
to 2 Peter. We simply repeat the remark already made (Chap. 6,
No. 3) that although the universal and undisputed reception of a
book by all the early churches cannot be explained except on the
assumption of its genuineness, its non-reception by some is no
conclusive argument against it. It may have remained (as seems
to have been peculiarly the case with some of the catholic
epistles) for a considerable period in obscurity. When it began
to be more extensively known, the general reception and use of
it would be a slow process both from the difficulty of
communication in ancient as compared with modern times, and
especially from the slowness and hesitancy with which the
churches of one region received anything new that came from
another region. Chap. 2, No. 5. Jerome does indeed mention the
objection from the difference of style between this epistle and
the first of Peter; but it