64 Terrance Callan displays a much greater degree of verbatim agreement than does Jude 4-18 / 2 Pet 2,1–3,3, though there are also many differences between Matthew and Luke at this point. Most of all they differ in the order of the second and third temptations. The use of Heb 1,3-13 by 1 Clem 36.2-5 (or the reverse) is quite similar to the relationship between Jude and 2 Peter. In 36.2 the author of 1 Clement takes the first phrase of Heb 1,3 and joins it to a slightly altered version of Heb 1,4. In 36.3-5 the author of 1 Clement cites Pss 104,4; 2,7; and 110,1, which are cited in Heb 1,7.5 and 13 respectively. In this way the author of 1 Clement uses the material of Hebrews selectively to make a slightly different point than that made by Hebrews. Literary dependence of 2 Thessalonians on 1 Thessalonians has often been suggested. If this is the case, the relationship between them is more distant than the relationship between Jude and 2 Peter. 2 Thess 1,1-2a is almost identical to 1 Thess 1,1; 2 Thess 3,8b is almost identical to 1 Thess 2,9b; and 2 Thess 3,18 is almost identical to 1 Thess 5,28. This is somewhat more verbatim agreement than we find in the relationship between Jude and 2 Peter. What is absent is use of the argument of 1 Thessalonians by 2 Thessalonians. It is sometimes argued that the double thanksgiving in 2 Thess 1,3; 2,13 is based on that of 1 Thess 1,2; 2,13, and that the benediction of 2 Thess 2,16-17 is based on that of 1 Thess 3,11-13. But even if that is the case, it indicates use of the formal elements of 1 Thessalonians by 2 Thessalonians, not use of its content. Athenaeum of Ohio Terrance CALLAN 6616 Beechmont Avenue Cincinnati, OH 45230 SUMMARY Assuming that 2 Pet 2,1–3,3 is dependent on Jude 4-18, this essay describes in detail the way the author of 2 Peter has used Jude’s material. It is clear that the author of 2 Peter has not simply incorporated Jude, as is sometimes asserted. Rather, 2 Peter has thoroughly reworked Jude to serve its own purposes. 2 Pet 2,1–3,3 is best described as a free paraphrase of Jude 4-18. The relationship between the two texts is similar to the relationship between 1 Clem 36.2-5 and Heb 1,3-13.