Assumption, Jude 16 from the Testament (p. Ixii.). On the latter Charles compares οὗτοί εἶσι γογγυσταί, µεμψίμοιροι, καὶ τὸ στόµα αὐτῶν λαλεῖ ὑπέρογκα, θαυµάζοντες πρόσωπα ὠφελίας χάριν with Ass. M. vii. 7, quaerulosi, vii. 9, et manus eorum et mentes immunda tractantes et os eorum loquetur ingentia, v. 5, erunt illis temporibus mirantes personas. . . et accipientes munera (MS. acceptiones munerum). He identifies the ἐμπαῖκται of Jude 18 with the homines pestilentiosi of Ass. Μ. vii. 3, and calls attention to the frequent recurrence of the word ασεβεῖς in the former (vv. 4, 15, 18) and zmpzz in the latter: see vi. 1, facient facientes impietatem, vii. 3, pestilentiosi et impii, τὸ. 7, ix. 3, mie, 7:
Again there appears to be a reminiscence of the Testaments of the Patriarchs,' where the sin of the Watchers is connected with that of Sodom : cf. Test. Nepht. 3, ἥλιος καὶ σελήνη καὶ ἀστέρες οὐκ ἀλλοιοῦσι τὴν τάξιν αὐτῶν . . . ἔθνη πλανηθέντα καὶ ἀφέντα κύριον ἠλλοίωσαν τάξιν αὐτῶν . . . ἐξακολουθήσαντες πνεύµασι πλάνης. Ὑμεῖς μὴ οὕτως . . . ἵνα μὴ γένησθε ὡς Σόδομα, Aris ἐνήλλαξεν τάξιν φύσεως αὐτῆς. ὙὉμοίως καὶ ᾿Εγρήγορες ἐνήλλαξαν τάξιν φύσεως αὐτῶν, οὓς κατηράσατο Κύριος ἐπὶ τοῦ κατακλυσμοῦ, Lest. Aser 7, μὴ γίνεσθε ὡς Σόδοµα Arts ἠγνόησε τοὺς ἀγγέλους κυρίου καὶ ἀπώλετο ἕως αἰῶνος. There seems to be more than a casual coincidence between these passages and Jude 6, 7 and 13, ἀγγέλους τοὺς μὴ τηρήσαντας τὴν ἑαυτῶν ἀρχήν ... ὡς Σόδοµα . . . τὸν ὅμοιον τρόπον ἐκπορνεύσασαι καὶ ἀπελθοῦσαι ὀπίσω σαρκὸς ἑτέρας πρόκεινται δεῖγμα πυρὸς αἰωνίου . . . ἀστέρες πλανῆται.
We have seen how this use of apocryphal books was viewed by the early Christian writers. They were at first disposed to think that a book stamped with the approval of St. Jude must be itself inspired. Later on, the feeling changed: the authority of St. Jude was no longer sufficient to save the apocryphal writing: on the contrary the prejudice against the Apocrypha and its “blasphemous fables” (Chrys. Hom. 22 in Gen.) led many to doubt the authority of St. Jude: see above quotation from Jerome, who argues that the approval of the Apostle need not be supposed to extend to the whole of the book of Enoch, but only to the verses quoted by him. So Augustine (Civ. Dei, xv. 23, 4): “Scripsisse quidem nonnulla divina Enoch illum septimum ab
δεσπόζων: ἄλλοι δέ, ὅτι βουλόμενος 6 Θεὸς δεῖξαι ὅτι μετὰ τὴν ἔνθενδε ἀπαλλαγήν, ταῖς ἡμετέραις ψυχαῖς ἀνθιστάμενοι «ἦσαν» δαίµονες πορευοµέναις τὴν ἐπὶ τὰ ἄνω πορείαν͵ τοῦτο οὖν συνεχώρησεν ὁρᾶσθαι ἐπὶ τῆς Μωσέως Tapas: ἐβλασφήμει γὰρ καὶ ὁ διάβολος κατὰ Μωσέως, φονέα τοῦτον καλῶν διὰ τὸ πατάξαι τὸν Αἰγύπ- τιον" &6 Μιχαἡλ ὁ ἀρχάγγελος, μὴ ἐνεγκὼν τὴν αὐτοῦ βλασφημίαν, εἴρηκεν αὐτῷ ὅτι Ἐπιτιμήσαι σοι Κύριος ὁ Θεός, διάβολε. ἔλεγε δὲ καὶ τοῦτο, ὅτι ἐψεύσατο 6 Θεὸς εἰσαγαγὼν τὸν Μωσῆν ἔνθα ὤμοσεν αὐτὸν py εἰσελθεῖν. 1 ΑΠ edition has lately been brought out by Charles.