Jude

Short New Testament letter that quotes a prophecy also preserved in 1 Enoch 1:9.

Jude is a short New Testament letter from Jude, a brother of the Lord and of James, traditionally dated about 65–80 CE. Verses 14–15 attribute a judgment saying to Enoch that matches 1 Enoch 1:9 in later witnesses. That parallel is a direct quotation in this dataset’s relationship list. The quotation is reception of Enochic tradition inside a New Testament book. It does not make the whole Book of Enoch canonical for later Western churches. Jude itself remains part of the twenty-seven-book New Testament, including the list in Athanasius’s Festal Letter 39.

The quotation is evidence of reception of Enochic tradition, not proof that every later church listed 1 Enoch as canonical.

Date

c. 65–80 CE (traditional)

Confidence

medium

Languages

Greek

Traditional authorship

Jude, brother of James

Authorship note

Jude, a brother of the Lord and of James (Jude 1)

• P72 · Papyrus 72

  3rd–4th centuries CE · Greek · Jude with 1–2 Peter

  Papyrus 72, also called Bodmer VII–VIII, is a Greek papyrus codex from the third or fourth century. It contains the Epistle of Jude together with 1 and 2 Peter. That is one of the earliest substantial copies of Jude. The codex also includes other Christian writings that later New Testament lists did not keep, so presence in P72 is manuscript evidence, not by itself the twenty-seven-book canon. Jude is also copied in the fourth-century pandects Sinaiticus and Vaticanus. P72 is the earlier papyrus witness.

• א · Codex Sinaiticus

  Mid-4th century CE · Greek · Catholic epistles

  Codex Sinaiticus is a Greek parchment pandect from the middle of the fourth century, associated with Saint Catherine’s Monastery on Sinai and now shared by the British Library and partner libraries. Its designation is aleph. After the New Testament it copies the Epistle of Barnabas and the Shepherd of Hermas in full enough form for this dataset to link both writings. That binding is a fact about one great Bible manuscript: early Christian scribes put those books in the same codex as the New Testament. Athanasius, in Festal Letter 39, still treats the Shepherd as a book appointed to be read for instruction and not as part of his canon list. Later twenty-seven-book New Testament lists generally leave both Barnabas and Hermas outside the closed canon. Preservation in Sinaiticus is manuscript evidence. The canonical decision is a separate witness.

• B · Codex Vaticanus

  4th century CE · Greek · Catholic epistles

  Codex Vaticanus, Vat. gr. 1209, is a fourth-century Greek parchment Bible long held in the Vatican Library. Its designation is B. The Old Testament follows a Septuagint-shaped collection. This dataset links Greek Tobit, Wisdom of Solomon, and Sirach to that Old Testament block, and it notes lacunae elsewhere in the codex, so “present in Vaticanus” is not a claim that every leaf survives. The find spot is not known in the way Sinaiticus’s monastery is known. What the manuscript shows is that these Greek writings were copied inside a fourth-century Christian Bible of the Septuagint type. Catholic reception later names overlapping books as deuterocanonical at Trent. Protestant confessions later deny them equal canonical status. Vaticanus itself is the copy, not those later rulings.

• A · Codex Alexandrinus

  5th century CE · Greek · Catholic epistles

  Codex Alexandrinus is a fifth-century Greek parchment Bible, shelfmark Royal MS 1 D V–VIII in the British Library. Its Old Testament is Septuagint-shaped and includes books that later Western lists call deuterocanonical, among them Tobit, Judith, Wisdom, Sirach, Baruch, the Letter of Jeremiah, 1 Esdras, and 1–4 Maccabees, plus the Prayer of Manasseh among the Odes. The New Testament includes Jude. After the biblical books the codex copies 1 Clement. A fifth-century binding shows what one scriptorium copied. It is not the Council of Trent and not the Westminster Confession.

• lists noncanonical

  Jewish biblical canon

  Jude is not Jewish Scripture. It is not in the Tanakh, and Second Temple Jewish communities did not receive it as a biblical book. The letter does quote a Jewish Enochic line and argue from Jewish examples such as the Watchers, Sodom, and the wilderness generation. Those are Jewish traditions used by a Christian author. The Jewish material inside or behind it, if any, is a source the Christian writer used. That use is not a Jewish canon decision, and it does not put the Christian book into the Hebrew Bible.

• lists canonical

  Athanasius, Festal Letter 39

  Jude belongs to early Christian literature rather than to the Hebrew Bible or the Septuagint. Churches copied it, and some canon lists mention it. Athanasius in 367 names Jude among the catholic epistles in the twenty-seven-book New Testament. Papyrus 72 and the fourth-century pandects already copy the letter. The Muratorian Fragment’s New Testament list is often read as including Jude as well, though that fragment’s date is disputed. Being copied or discussed in the second to fourth centuries is reception. It is not the same as a place in the twenty-seven-book New Testament, which later lists settled more narrowly.

• ProtestantCanonical

  New Testament epistle in the Protestant 27.

• CatholicCanonical

  New Testament epistle in the Catholic canon.

• OrthodoxCanonical

  New Testament epistle in Eastern lists.

• EthiopianCanonical

  New Testament epistle in the EOTC collection.

• TanakhNot applicable

  Christian New Testament writing, not part of the Tanakh.

• LXXNot applicable

  Not an Old Testament / LXX book.

• Early ChristianCanonical

  Received among the Catholic Epistles in Athanasius’s 367 list.

• Second TempleNot applicable

  Later Christian letter, not Second Temple Jewish Scripture.

• Mid-to-late first century CE · Historical witness · Eastern Mediterranean

  Jude quotes an Enochic prophecy

  Jude 14–15 attributes to Enoch a judgment saying that matches 1 Enoch 1:9 in later witnesses.

  In the mid-to-late first century, the letter of Jude quotes a prophecy it attributes to Enoch. The saying matches 1 Enoch 1:9 as that verse stands in later Ethiopic and related witnesses. The event is a quotation inside a New Testament book. It shows Enochic tradition was known and was cited by name. It does not install the whole composite Book of Enoch in the Western canon, and it does not record a later deletion. Ethiopian Orthodox reception of 1 Enoch rests on that church’s own list. Jude’s verses remain a New Testament witness to one Enochic passage.

  Why it matters. This is reception of Enochic tradition inside the New Testament. It does not by itself make 1 Enoch canonical for later Western churches.

  Source: Jude 14–15 quotes a prophecy attributed to Enoch, matching 1 Enoch 1:9 in later Ethiopic/Aramaic witnesses.

• 367 CE · Canon list · Alexandria

  Athanasius, Festal Letter 39

  Athanasius lists 22 Old Testament books and the 27-book New Testament, and names some other writings as useful to read but not canonical.

  Athanasius, bishop of Alexandria, wrote Festal Letter 39 for Easter 367. The public-domain text in the Nicene and Post-Nicene Fathers preserves his reminder of which books the church accepts as divine Scripture, written because some readers were mixing other books in with them.

  He counts twenty-two Old Testament books, the number of letters in the Hebrew alphabet as he had heard it handed down. In that count, several familiar writings share one entry: the two books of Samuel and the two books of Kings are two books of Kings, the two books of Chronicles are one, Ezra and Nehemiah are one, the twelve prophets are one, and Jeremiah is counted with Baruch, Lamentations, and the epistle. He then names the New Testament as the four Gospels, Acts, seven Catholic epistles, fourteen Pauline epistles including Hebrews, and the Revelation of John.

  He also names books that are outside that canon and still appointed to be read by newcomers who want instruction in godliness: the Wisdom of Solomon, the Wisdom of Sirach, Esther, Judith, Tobit, the Teaching of the Apostles, and the Shepherd. He calls the first list the books in which the doctrine of godliness is proclaimed, and the second list books that are read.

  Read the letter as one bishop’s Easter list from Alexandria. It belongs on Councils & Lists because it names books and draws a line around them. It is an influential episcopal list, especially for the twenty-seven-book New Testament, and it is a single letter rather than a council minute that bound every church on that date.

  Why it matters. An influential episcopal list, not a claim that every church already agreed or that earlier Jewish collections were identical.

  Follow-up questions

  Where does Athanasius place Esther, Judith, and Tobit?

  In this letter they stand with the Wisdom of Solomon, the Wisdom of Sirach, the Teaching of the Apostles, and the Shepherd: appointed to be read for instruction, and outside the twenty-two-book Old Testament list. That is his classification in 367. Later Catholic, Orthodox, and Protestant lists do not all copy it.

  How does he reach twenty-two Old Testament books?

  He pairs some English Bible books into one entry. Samuel and Kings become two books of Kings, Chronicles are one book, Ezra and Nehemiah are one book, the twelve prophets are one book, and Jeremiah is one book together with Baruch, Lamentations, and the epistle.

  Is Festal Letter 39 a church council?

  It is an Easter letter from the bishop of Alexandria. Corpus Witness files it as a canon-list on this tab because it names books. A council minute and a bishop’s letter are different kinds of evidence, and both can still be read side by side.

  Source: Athanasius, Festal Letter 39 (367), lists 22 Old Testament and 27 New Testament books and names some other writings as useful but not canonical.

• 393 CE · Council · Hippo Regius, North Africa

  Council of Hippo

  A North African council is reported to have approved a scriptural list that includes books later called deuterocanonical in the West.

  In 393 a council at Hippo Regius, in North Africa, is reported to have approved a scriptural list. As later reports give that list, it includes books Western churches afterward call deuterocanonical.

  The source for this event says the original acts survive only in later reports, summarized through later Carthage recensions. The date, the place, and the report of a list are the claim this page is willing to make. A free-standing copy of the Hippo minutes is not what the source provides.

  Use Hippo as regional conciliar reception in Latin North Africa. Carthage in 397 is the next North African list on this tab, and Trent in 1546 is the much later decree that defines the modern Catholic canon. Each of those has its own source.

  Why it matters. Regional conciliar reception, known mainly through later reports—not a universal “removal” or addition by one person.

  Follow-up questions

  Why does this page say the Council of Hippo is reported?

  The source record says the original acts survive only in later reports, summarized through later Carthage recensions. The word “reported” matches that limit. The date and the idea of a list belong to that received tradition.

  What does the reported Hippo list include?

  Books later called deuterocanonical in the West, inside a scriptural list the council is said to have approved. Because the wording comes through later reports, this page keeps the summary and does not paste a reconstructed decree.

  How should I read Hippo next to Carthage and Trent?

  Hippo in 393 and Carthage in 397 are North African reception. Trent in 1546 is the decree that defines the modern Catholic canon, including the deuterocanonical writings received in the Vulgate. Read them as three dated events, each with its own source.

  Source: The Council of Hippo (393) is reported to have approved a scriptural list that includes books later called deuterocanonical in the West.

• 397 CE · Council · Carthage, North Africa

  Council of Carthage

  The Carthage list includes Tobit, Judith, Wisdom, Sirach, and 1–2 Maccabees among books to be read in church.

  The Council of Carthage in 397 left a canon in the African canonical collection, the Codex Canonum Ecclesiae Africanae. Editions number that canon as 36 or as 47. The curated source names Tobit, Judith, Wisdom, Sirach, and 1–2 Maccabees among the books to be read in church, together with the books that later form the widely received Protestant sixty-six.

  “Read in church” is the council’s category: liturgical and canonical reception in Latin North Africa. Carthage documents that reception in 397. The modern Catholic definition of overlapping books comes later, at Trent on 8 April 1546. Reformation rankings, including Luther’s 1534 Apocrypha section, come later as well. Those further events stay on this tab with their own sources.

  Why it matters. Documents Western liturgical/canonical reception of books later disputed in the Reformation.

  Follow-up questions

  Why do references say canon 36 and canon 47?

  The same African list is numbered both ways in the Codex Canonum Ecclesiae Africanae. The source title records “canon 36 / 47” so either numbering still points at this 397 Carthage list.

  Which books does the Carthage list name beyond the later Protestant sixty-six?

  The curated source names Tobit, Judith, Wisdom, Sirach, and 1–2 Maccabees among the books to be read in church, alongside the books later counted in the Protestant sixty-six.

  Does “read in church” mean the same thing as Trent’s canonical list?

  Carthage’s phrase is North African reception in 397: these books are to be read in church. Trent’s decree of 8 April 1546 lists the books the Catholic Church receives as canonical, including the deuterocanonical writings received in the Vulgate. The two documents belong to one broad story and remain two different acts.

  Source: The 397 Carthage list includes Tobit, Judith, Wisdom, Sirach, 1–2 Maccabees among the books to be read in church, alongside the widely received Protestant 66.

• 8 April 1546 · Council · Trent

  Council of Trent, Session IV

  Trent listed the Catholic canonical books, including the deuterocanonical writings received in the Vulgate.

  On 8 April 1546, Session IV of the Council of Trent published its decree on the canonical Scriptures. The decree lists the books the Catholic Church receives as canonical, including the deuterocanonical writings already received in the Latin Vulgate. In this dataset, Tobit is one book tied directly to that decree.

  Trent answers sixteenth-century disputes about which books count as Scripture. Luther’s 1534 Bible had already printed selected Old Testament books in a separate Apocrypha section and ranked them below Holy Scripture. Trent’s list is the Catholic definition of canonical status for the books it names.

  The decree dates that ruling. Composition dates and manuscripts for each writing stay on the writing’s own page. Trent describes the church’s canonical list in 1546, and it leaves the earlier existence of those books to the other evidence on this site.

  Why it matters. Defines the modern Catholic canon in response to Reformation disputes. It does not describe a single ancient moment when those books first existed.

  Follow-up questions

  What did Trent’s Session IV decide?

  On 8 April 1546 it listed the books the Catholic Church receives as canonical, including the deuterocanonical writings received in the Vulgate. In this dataset Tobit is one of the books attached to that decree.

  What dispute is the decree answering?

  Reformation arguments about which books count as Scripture. The Luther Bible of 1534 had already printed selected books in a separate Apocrypha section and said they were useful to read but not equal to Holy Scripture.

  Does Session IV tell me when Tobit was written?

  The decree dates a Catholic canonical ruling in 1546. Tobit’s composition, language, and manuscripts are earlier evidence, kept on Tobit’s own Canon page rather than inside the conciliar date.

  Source: Council of Trent, Session IV (8 April 1546), lists the Catholic canonical books including the deuterocanonical writings received in the Vulgate.

• 1646/1647 CE · Reformation · Westminster, London

  Westminster Confession names the 66-book canon

  The Confession lists the 66 books and says the books commonly called Apocrypha are not of divine inspiration and are not part of the canon of Scripture.

  The Westminster Assembly’s Confession of Faith, chapter I, was finished in London in 1646/1647. Sections I.2–3 name the sixty-six books of the Protestant canon. They say the books commonly called Apocrypha are not of divine inspiration and are not part of the canon of Scripture.

  This is a Reformed confession. It sits on Councils & Lists because it is a dated canon list with a church-document source. It explains why many later Protestant editions leave the Apocrypha out of the printed Bible.

  Set it next to the other Protestant-tradition entries on this tab. Luther’s 1534 Bible still printed selected books in a separate section and called them useful to read, while ranking them below Holy Scripture. The 1611 King James Bible still included an Apocrypha section. Westminster’s wording refuses those books a place in the canon.

  Why it matters. A defining Reformed statement of the modern Protestant 66. It explains later omission from many Protestant printings.

  Follow-up questions

  What does Westminster Confession chapter I say about the canon?

  It names the sixty-six books and says the books commonly called Apocrypha are not of divine inspiration and are not part of the canon of Scripture. That wording is the source citation for this event.

  How is Westminster different from Luther’s 1534 Bible?

  Luther printed selected books in a separate Apocrypha section and called them useful to read, while ranking them below Holy Scripture. Westminster refuses them a place in the canon. Both are Protestant-tradition events, and they use different wording.

  How is Westminster different from the Council of Trent?

  Trent in 1546 defines the Roman Catholic list, including the deuterocanonical writings received in the Vulgate. Westminster in 1646/1647 is a Reformed confession that names the sixty-six and excludes the Apocrypha from the canon of Scripture. They are different bodies and different lists.

  Source: Westminster Confession I.2–3 names the 66-book Protestant canon and says the books commonly called Apocrypha are not of divine inspiration and are not part of the canon of Scripture.

• Direct quotation · Jude 14–15 ↔ 1 Enoch 1:9

  High confidence — strong primary or manuscript support.

  Jude attributes to Enoch a judgment saying that matches 1 Enoch 1:9 in Ethiopic and related witnesses. High confidence for the parallel; medium confidence for the exact first-century wording of Enoch.

• Possible allusion · Wisdom 13–15 ↔ idol-polemic tradition

  Low confidence — disputed or tentative.

  Greek Jewish idol-polemic in Wisdom belongs to a wider tradition also heard in early Christian writings. This is a possible shared tradition, not a claim that Jude quotes Wisdom.

1. Mid-to-late first century CE — Jude quotes an Enochic prophecy
2. 367 CE — Athanasius, Festal Letter 39
3. 393 CE — Council of Hippo
4. 397 CE — Council of Carthage
5. 8 April 1546 — Council of Trent, Session IV
6. 1646/1647 CE — Westminster Confession names the 66-book canon

• Jude 14–15 quotes a prophecy attributed to Enoch, matching 1 Enoch 1:9 in later Ethiopic/Aramaic witnesses.
• Council of Trent, Session IV (8 April 1546), lists the Catholic canonical books including the deuterocanonical writings received in the Vulgate.
• Athanasius, Festal Letter 39 (367), lists 22 Old Testament and 27 New Testament books and names some other writings as useful but not canonical.
• The Ethiopian Orthodox Tewahedo Church publishes an 81-book list that includes 1 Enoch, Jubilees, and the Meqabyan books.
• Josephus, Against Apion 1.8, speaks of 22 Jewish books and distinguishes later writings as not equally trusted.
• Brenton’s public-domain Septuagint translation includes Tobit, Judith, Wisdom, Sirach, Baruch, the Additions, and Maccabees as part of the Greek Old Testament corpus.
• Papyrus 72 (Bodmer VII–VIII) is a third- or fourth-century Greek codex that contains Jude with 1 and 2 Peter.
• Codex Sinaiticus preserves a fourth-century Greek Bible and, after the New Testament, includes the Epistle of Barnabas and the Shepherd of Hermas.
• Codex Vaticanus is a fourth-century Greek Bible whose Old Testament contents follow a Septuagint-shaped collection, with some lacunae.
• Codex Alexandrinus is a fifth-century Greek Bible. It includes a Septuagint-shaped Old Testament, the New Testament, and 1 Clement.
• The Council of Hippo (393) is reported to have approved a scriptural list that includes books later called deuterocanonical in the West.
• The 397 Carthage list includes Tobit, Judith, Wisdom, Sirach, 1–2 Maccabees among the books to be read in church, alongside the widely received Protestant 66.
• Westminster Confession I.2–3 names the 66-book Protestant canon and says the books commonly called Apocrypha are not of divine inspiration and are not part of the canon of Scripture.