ἡ σπιλοῦσα, καὶ Φλογίζουσα-- καὶ φλογιζοµένη, ἵν. 8, ἐγγίσατε τῷ Θεῷ--- καθαρίσατε χεῖρας-- ἁγνίσατε καρδίας, SO iv. 9, v. 17, 18. Perhaps we may find a septet in the beautiful description of heavenly wisdom (iii. 17) πρῶτον μὲν ἁγνή, ἔπειτα εἰρηνική, ἐπιεικής, εὐπειθής, μεστὴ ἐλέους καὶ καρπῶν ἀγαθῶν, ἁδιάκριτος, ἀνυπόκριτος. But the distinctive mark of St. James’s style is “ paronomasia’”’ passing at times into sucha climax as we find in i. 14, 15 quoted above and ini. 3, 4, τὸ δοκίµιον ὑμῶν τῆς πίστεως κατεργάζεται ὑπομονήν, ἡ δὲ ὑπομονὴ ἔργον τέλειον ἐχέτω, ἵνα ἦτε τέλειο. See pp. ccxxii f. of my edition.
Another characteristic which may be noted is the love of forcible antithesis as in J. ver. 10, ὅσα μὲν οὐκ οἴδασιν βλασφημοῦσιν, ὅσα δὲ φυσικῶς ὡς τὰ Goya Loa ἐπίστανται, ἐν τούτοις φθείρονται. As regards vocabulary, the most striking resemblance is the occurrence of ψυχικός as opposed to πνευματικός, Of which the earliest biblical example is in James iii. 15, but this had been adopted by Paul (1 Cor. ii. 10 foll.) before it was made use of by Jude.
B. (1) The differences between the two Epistles are hardly less marked: Jude evidently belongs to a much later period of Christian development. James, as I have endeavoured to show in the Intro- duction to his Epistle, wrote about the year 45 a.p. before any of the other canonical, books was in existence, and his theological position is that of the early Church described in the opening chapters of the Acts. Jude is familiar with the writings of St. Paul. He is familiar with the terms σωτήρ and σωτηρία (vv. 3 and 25): in wv. 20, 21 he brings together the three Persons of the Trinity; he addresses those to whom he writes in Pauline language as κλητοί (ver. 1) and ἅγιοι (ver. 3), and uses forms of ascription and doxology closely resembling those which occur in St. Peterand St. Paul. Their “ most holy faith” is a “tradition once delivered to the saints” (vv. 4, 20): they are bidden to ‘‘remember the words of the Apostles, how they told them that in the last time there should come scoffers” (vv. 17, 18). The error which he combats appears to be a misgrowth of St. Paul’s teaching in regard to a salvation of free grace, “not of works, lest any man should boast” (ver. 4). Many of the features which he dis- tinguishes are such as we find delineated in St. Paul’s farewell to the Ephesian Church, and in some of his Epistles, especially those to Titus and Timothy.
(2) Another difference might seem to be Jude’s repeated references to Pseudepigrapha such as the book of Enoch and the Assumption of Moses (on which see the next chapter) and his readiness to give credence to fanciful legends such as the fall of the Watchers, and the contention for the body of Moses. Credulity of this kind seems to