trine relating to the false teachers. This is that ἐντολὴ παρα Soleiσa mentioned in the close of the foregoing chapter, the commandment delivered to the faithful,' to guard them against the corruptions of the false teachers, and to show them rǹv idòv Tñs dikaιoovvηs,' the way of righteousness.' This warning, so solemnly given, would, as the Apostle insists, be an aggravation in the case of all such as, having been made thus acquainted with the way of righteousness, should nevertheless turn aside ἐκ τῆς παραδοθείσης αὐτοῖς ἁγίας ἐντολῆς, ‘from the holy commandment delivered unto them.' St. Jude plainly says that his epistle was written purely on the account of the false teachers; that his intentions were to have written to them περὶ τῆς κοινῆς σωτηρίας, of the common doctrines of salvation; but that he had quitted the design, being necessitated' (åváyêŋv ë☛xov) to write to them to strive for the faith delivered to the saints, in opposition to the false teachers who had stolen in among them. The sense of this passage is lost in our translation, as it is likewise in both the interpretations proposed by Erasmus on the place; in which he has been followed by most of those who came after him. Interpreters have been misled by confounding the κοινὴ σωτηρία and the παραδοθεῖσα πίστις together, as if they meant one and the same thing; whereas they mean quite different things. The common salvation' here spoken of means the doctrines of the gospel published to all the world, without respect to difference of times or seasons, or to particular doctrines of the corrupters of the faith: the rapadoleĩσa míσris is the same with the Tapadoletσa evroλn in St. Peter, the form of sound doctrine,' sent to all the churches by direction of the Apostles, in opposition to the false teachers. This then is the meaning of St. Jude, and thus it may be paraphrased: "Beloved, I was intent on the design of writing to you on the common doctrines and hopes of the gospel, for the improvement of your faith and knowlege in Christ Jesus; but I find myself obliged to lay aside this design, and to warn you against a present danger, to exhort you to earnestness in contending for that true doctrine once already delivered to you and all the faithful, in opposition to the false teachers who are crept in unawares among you." The Arabic and Ethiopic versions have both preserved this sense in some measure: the Arabic comes very near the true meaning; the sense of which the Latin interpreter has thus expressed: O dilecti mei, omni studio adhibito ut scriberem vobis de salute perfecta universali, atque communi, coactus sum scribere vobis, deprecans ut soliciti sitis in fide quæ semel tradita est sanctis. The Ethiopic version speaks of this faith once delivered to the saints' as superadded to the common teaching, and consequently as distinct from the Kown owrnpía, the com mon salvation.' But to come nearer our point, the agreement of the two epistles in the description of the false teachers: it is to be observed that both St. Peter and St. Jude profess to write as reminding their churches of things with which they had before been made acquainted.* St. Jude says expressly that the very subject of this letter had once already been known unto them: iπoμvñσaι δὲ ὑμᾶς βούλομαι, εἰδότας ὑμᾶς ἅπαξ τοῦτο, ὅτι ὁ κύριος λαὸν ἐκ γῆς Αἰγύπτου, κ. τ. λ. The word ana used here is the same we met with before: the ἅπαξ παραδοθεῖσα πίστις, and the εἰδότας iμās åtal Toũto, are relative to the same matter; and it appears that the warning against the false teachers, and the prophetic description of them, were sent to the churches together with the (évroλ) commandment. It appears, likewise, that both St. Peter and St. Jude wrote their epistles after this commandment had been delivered to the several churches; for they write to them 'reminding' them of what they had before received. This being the case, there is no necessity to suppose that St. Jude transcribed St. Peter's epistle: it is much more probable that both he and St. Peter wrote from the common plan communicated to the churches, and drew their description of the false teachers from the same apocryphal book. But be this as it will, yet on all views the second epistle of St. Peter stands clear of the old objection drawn from the difference of style between his first and second epistles. * Compare 2 Peter iii. 2. with Jude 5. SUMMARY OF DISSERTATION II. INTENTION of the writer to trace the sense of the Jewish church, regarding the Mosaic history of the fall. No records left to give light on the subject but the books of the Old Testament; and no book of the Old Testament treats directly of this subject after Moses. No aid to be expected from the historical writers: some little from the moral and prophetical. The moral and theological difficulties relating to this point are not stated in this inquiry: reasons given. History of the fall traced in the ancient writers. Oldest book remaining is that of Job. Its testimony shown to be distinct from and previous to that of Moses. The antiquity of this book supposed, two questions arise: 1. whether the fall of Adam was known to its writer: 2. what notion he had of the circumstances and consequences of it. It is shown that the writer had a knowlege of Adam's fall from the discourse of Sophar in the 20th chapter; from Job's vindication of his own integrity, chap, 31.; from his magnifying the power of God in chap. 12.; and from the words of Job respecting the crooked serpent in chap. 26. It is shown also that the writer had a knowlege of the consequences of the fall, and of the state of the world after it, from chap. xxxvii. 12. 13. xxxviii. 23. 8. 15. ix. 7. xxxvi. 31. &c.: the origin of the general corruption and depravity of mankind is indicated in chapter xv. 14., and parti cularly in chap. xiv. 1. 2. 3. 4. A material question still remains; viz., what hope or expectation this ancient writer had of a deliverance from the evil and corruption which prevailed. In answer, it is observed that the argument of this whole book supposes man to be accountable to his Maker for the good or evil of his actions: from chap. xiv. 2. 10. 12. and chap. xvii. 14-16. it is argued that Job expected a resurrection in the day of God's visitation; and this exposition is supported by the famous passage chap. xix. 25. &c. Many learned men, among whom is Dr. Patrick, understood in this latter passage a temporal deliverance expected by Job: reasons given which seem to favor this exposition; these probably inclined the Jewish interpreters to confine it to a temporal sense. Grotius lays great stress on their opinion: he also thinks that they who interpret it of a resurrection, depart from the original Hebrew. It is happy that this learned person has given his own sense of the passage, as it shows that no just interpretation can be given, that excludes the notion of a resurrection. Consideration of what light may be had by examining the passage itself, and the sentiments on which it is founded. The degree of light and knowlege contained in the passage, which seems disproportionate to the age of Job, accounted for. The conduct of Job's friends seems unaccountable; for if they allowed and believed this great truth of a resurrection, why did they continue to press their argument, and insist that he was undoubtedly wicked because miserable? Examination of this case; the circumstances of which, duly observed, cast a great light on it, and are a means of opening to us its true meaning. It appears then that Job's friends understood him to speak of a resurrection to judgment, and not of a temporal deliverance. This passage shown to be no inconsiderable argument of the reality of the history contained in the book of Job, and of its antiquity. Reason given why the writer has been so long in his examination of this book; is very short in what follows. Psalms, Proverbs, and Ecclesiastes, considered as the production of one and the same age: little found in these on the subject of the fall, and the promise made to Adam: reasons of this. The case was much the same with the succeeding pro |