New-York tribune. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1866-1924, 1891-06-04
NEW PUBLICATIONS.
JAMES AND JUDE.

JAMEo AMI JUDE.
THE EXPosIToR's BIBLE Edited by the Rev; or vi
Epstles Of st. james and ST. Jude BY the rev.
Alfred Plummer NJ A.. d. D. svo, PIP. x. 4'o'
This is creditable work. and recognizes fairly
though not always fully might be desired, the
conclusions OF modern Biblical criticism The Episfles
Of James and Jude disputed in the early Church
that is to say. many doubted whether they were IN
spired and Apostolic productions The earliest hst
Of New Testament writings, fragmentary canon maze
about 40 A. D.. docs not mention James Henaeus
(oOOl classed James and Jude among writings when
he regarded edfying but not inspired Clement OIL
Alexandria (ls0) classed Jude among the INFERIOR
writings. Tertullian 600 omits James entirely rom
his canonca list and puts Jude in his class of edyins
but not inspired writings Ongcn (2oOl ranks ooth
James and Jude among the doubtful Writings
Eusebius C34o) does the same And finally, when we
get down TO the last half of the fourth century and
the first half Of the fifth century we find Athonesius
and Augustine admitting them into the canonical
list OF inspired books where they have remained ever
SINCE not without protests. however Luther
wanted to reject james. calling it "a hight stiawy
epistle" Jude he thought to be poor transcript OF
Second Peter Oecolampsdius classed James and judo
with the Apocryphal books as not inspired. 1t Is,
however only fair 10 say that Luthers contemptuous
opinion Of James was the fact that he thought
It contradicted the Pauline view Of Justification
on the other hand there are quotations from and
fathers. The Pcshito Synsc version contains James.
which DR.. Plummer considers a strong argument In
favor of its genuineness That the Epstlcs did not
receive notice in the early Church is doubtless
due partly TO the fact their tone is practical
rather than doctinal, and partly to the fact that
they very short.
As to James, there is little doubt that written
before the Pauline controversy, and by James. the
Lords brother who, according TO tradition, Bishop
Of Jerusalem. 1t was written to Judean Christians
who inclined TO attach too much importance to
faith without works. That. under these circum
stances 1t should be supposed to be in conflict with
Pauls doctrine Of Justification by faith only is very
natural But the conflict is verbal rather than ma
tcral. The faith without works Of James is not
the Justification by faith only of Paul But while
there is essential conflict, there is undoubtedly
different point Of view While James put the accent
on works. without denying the efficacy of faith Paul
put ii on faith. without denying the necessity Of
works Paul and James are complementary to each
other and for this reason, If for other, it is
for rejoicing that the writings Of both these Apostles
lnaly found their way into the canon.
We think, however, that DR.. Plummer errs when he
declares that the presence of James In the Peshto
version already referred is conclusive fact In the
external evidence concerning the epise for If that be
So the absence of Id Peter, lid and lid John and
Jude nom the version ought to be conclusive
fact against them, argument which the learned COM
mcntator would hardly allow. As matter of fact.
the early versions not In themselves conclusive
witness as to the cancn of the New Testament They
made for the Of certain groups OF CHURCHES,
and only Included such writings in the judgment Of
those who made them, would be useful to those |
churches. Moreover all the apostolic writings which
were sfterward collected into the canon were not
universally known to the early Church Some of them
had only limited circulation in the regions to which
they first sent, and II was only after a long |
period that general clearing house, to speak, for
Writ cd ny me Of
which they generally circulated. This fact will
explain the absence of certain books from the early
canonicsl lists and the doubt concerning them which
was expressed by various Church fathers.
Tho dispute concerning Jude largely because
the writer quotes with approval apocrypha works.
the Book OF Enoch" and the Assumption of Moses"
and because, also, il comparatively little known
the early Church The last objection has already been
referred to. There is little doubt that the epstle
written by of the two persons known In Scripture
Jude or Judas TO rebuke and condemn certain per-
who trying to subvert the peace and purity
Of the Church. The tone of the eptle is practical
and evangelical rather than doctrnal.
The writer's reference to certain apocryphal legends
concerning dispute between Michael the Archange |
and the devil tho body of Moses has provoked
much controversy. How, it has been asked, could
inspired writer give the stamp approval to myth
After dsmissng the theory of special revelation, DR.
Pummer thus meets this difficulty "Have any |
right to that inspiration raises writer to the
intellectual position Of critical historian with power
70 discriminate between legend and fact7 . . . |
Let us reverenty examine the features which inspired
writings actually present TO u.s. and not hastily de-
termine beforehand what properties they ought to pos
scss."
This is an entirely rational view of the subject, but
unfortunately, many Christians are estopped from
taking II by the Greed Of their Church. which has laid
down hard and fast theory Of inspiration that admits
no possibility Of error the part of the Biblical
writer's.
DR.. Pummers expostons of these two very inter
esting epistles at discriminating and rev.
ereTt. and will be most useful TO all who desire to
study them carefully.