occasional tendency to amplification (i. 2 f., 8; ii. 11, 13: iii. 2,7, 9,10; v. 1, 3, 5, 23, etc.), and to round off the ends of sentences with adverbial phrases (i. 5, 6; ii. 2, 16, 17; iii. 3, 9, etc.). There is to be noted the frequent introduction of expressions which recognise the knowledge and remem- brance of the writer’s correspondents, as ca0a@s oidate even as ye know: also the forms of adjuration and comparison (ii. 5, 10; iii. 6). A certain ruggedness and lack of symmetry in the structure of sentences appears at times (i. 2 ff., 8; ii. 10 ff.,17f.,19 £.; iv. 1f., 3 ff.). The vocabulary is relatively small. Repetitions and similarities of expression occur.
There are no citations from the Old Testament, and no use of apocryphal writings can beshown. The mode of expression is thoroughly Pauline. The character of the Epistle does not lead us to expect many of the technical terms of the Pauline dogmatic; but such as we do find are Pauline, as é«doy7 election ; Kandelv to call; Gytoe saints; ayvacpes sanctification ; pn elddtes Tov Oecv not knowing God. ‘There are also to be noted the characteristic play of words (ii. 4); paradox (i. 6); mixed metaphor (v. 5), and antithesis of prepositions Gi. 5; iv. T; il. 8, ete.). There are relatively few hapaxlegomena, some peculiar uses of words common in the New Testament; possibly a dozen words and modes of expression which appear only in the deutero-Pauline writings, and a few which are almost exclusively confined to the writings of Luke and the Epistle to the Hebrews. .
The authenticity of the Epistle is generally conceded. It has been assailed by Baur, Steck, Holsten, and Loman.