2 Peter

THE SECOND EPISTLE GENERAL OF

PETER

[1] [2]

[3]

INTRODUCTION

AUTHENTICITY AND GENUINENESS.--If not a gross

imposture, its own internal witness is unequivocal in its favor.

It has Peter's name and apostleship in its heading: not only his

surname, but his original name Simon, or Simeon, he thus,

at the close of his life, reminding his readers who he originally was

before his call. Again, in

2Pe 1:16-18,

he mentions his presence at the Transfiguration, and Christ's

prophecy of his death! and in

2Pe 3:15,

his brotherhood with Paul. Again, in

2Pe 3:1,

the author speaks of himself as author of the former Epistle: it is,

moreover, addressed so as to include (but not to be restricted

to) the same persons as the first, whom he presupposes to be acquainted

with the writings of Paul, by that time recognized as "Scripture"

(2Pe 3:15,

"the long-suffering of God," compare

Ro 2:4).

This necessarily implies a late date, when Paul's Epistles

(including Romans) already had become generally diffused and accepted

as Scripture in the Church. The Church of the fourth century had,

besides the testimony which we have of the doubts of the earlier

Christians, other external evidence which we have not, and which,

doubtless, under God's overruling providence, caused them to accept it.

It is hard to understand how a book palpably false (as it would be if

Peter be not the author) could have been accepted in the Canon as

finally established in the Councils of Laodicea, A.D. 360 (if the fifty-ninth article be genuine), Hippo,

and Carthage in the fourth century (393 and 397). The whole tone and

spirit of the Epistle disprove its being an imposture. He writes as one

not speaking of himself, but moved by the Holy Ghost

(2Pe 1:21).

An attempt at such a fraud in the first ages would have brought only

shame and suffering, alike from Christians and heathen, on the

perpetrator: there was then no temptation to pious frauds as in

later times. That it must have been written in the earliest age is

plain from the wide gulf in style which separates it and the

other New Testament Scriptures from even the earliest and best of the

post-apostolic period. DAILLE well says, "God has

allowed a fosse to be drawn by human weakness around the sacred canon

to protect it from all invasion."

Traces of acquaintance with it appear in the earliest Fathers.

HERMAS [Similitudes, 6.4] (compare

2Pe 2:13),

Greek, "luxury in the day . . . luxuriating

with their own deceivings"; and [Shepherd, Vision 3.7], "They

have left their true way" (compare

2Pe 2:15);

and [Shepherd, Vision 4.3], "Thou hast escaped this world"

(compare

2Pe 2:20).

CLEMENT OF ROME, [Epistle

to the Corinthians, 7.9; 10], as to Noah's preaching and

Lot's deliverance, "the Lord making it known that He does

not abandon those that trust in Him, but appoints those otherwise

inclined to judgment" (compare

2Pe 2:5, 6, 7, 9).

IRENÆUS, A.D. 178 ("the

day of the Lord is as a thousand years"), and

JUSTIN MARTYR seem to allude

to

2Pe 3:8.

HIPPOLYTUS [On Antichrist], seems to refer

to

2Pe 1:21,

"The prophets spake not of their own private (individual)

ability and will, but what was (revealed) to them alone by God."

The difficulty is, neither TERTULLIAN, CYPRIAN, CLEMENT OF ALEXANDRIA, nor the oldest Syriac

(Peschito) version (the later Syriac has it), nor the

fragment known as Muratori's Canon, mentions it. The first

writer who has expressly named it is ORIGEN, in

the third century (Homily on Joshua; also Homily 4 on

Leviticus, and Homily 13 on Numbers), who names it "Scripture,"

quoting

2Pe 1:4; 2:16;

however (in EUSEBIUS [Ecclesiastical

History, 6.25]), he mentions that the Second Epistle was doubted by

some. FIRMILIAN, bishop of Cappadocia, in

Epistle to Cyrpian speaks of Peter's Epistles as warning

us to avoid heretics (a monition which occurs in the Second, not

the First Epistle). Now Cappadocia is one of the

countries mentioned (compare

1Pe 1:1

with 2Pe 3:1)

as addressed; and it is striking, that from Cappadocia we get the

earliest decisive testimony. "Internally it claims to be written by

Peter, and this claim is confirmed by the Christians of that very

region in whose custody it ought to have been found" [TREGELLES].

The books disputed (Antilegomena), as distinguished from those

universally recognized (Homologoumena), are Epistles Second

Peter, James, Second and Third John, Jude, the Apocalypse, Epistle to

Hebrews (compare EUSEBIUS [Ecclesiastical

History, 3.3,25]). The Antilegomena stand in quite a

different class from the Spurious; of these there was no

dispute, they were universally rejected; for example, the

Shepherd of Hermas, the Revelation of Peter, the Epistle of

Barnabas.

CYRIL OF

JERUSALEM

(A.D. 348) enumerates

seven Catholic Epistles, including Second Peter; so also

GREGORY

NAZIANZEN

(A.D. 389), and

EPIPHANIUS (A.D. 367). The oldest Greek

manuscripts extant (of the fourth century) contain the

Antilegomena. JEROME [On Illustrious

Men], conjectured, from a supposed difference of style between the

two Epistles, that Peter, being unable to write Greek, employed

a different translator of his Hebrew dictation in the Second

Epistle, and not the same as translated the First into Greek.

Mark is said to have been his translator in the case of the Gospel

according to Mark; but this is all gratuitous conjecture. Much of the

same views pervade both Epistles. In both alike he looks for the Lord's

coming suddenly, and the end of the world (compare

2Pe 3:8-10

with 1Pe 4:5);

the inspiration of the prophets (compare

1Pe 1:10-12

with 2Pe 1:19-21; 3:2);

the new birth by the divine word a motive to abstinence from worldly

lusts

(1Pe 1:22; 2:2;

compare

2Pe 1:4);

also compare

1Pe 2:9

with 2Pe 1:3,

both containing in the Greek the rare word "virtue"

(1Pe 4:17

with 2Pe 2:3).

It is not strange that distinctive peculiarities of

STYLE should mark each Epistle, the design of both

not being the same. Thus the sufferings of Christ are more

prominent in the First Epistle, the object there being to encourage

thereby Christian sufferers; the glory of the exalted Lord is

more prominent in the Second, the object being to communicate fuller

"knowledge" of Him as the antidote to the false teaching against which

Peter warns his readers. Hence His title of redemption, "Christ," is

the one employed in the First Epistle; but in the Second Epistle, "the

Lord." Hope is characteristic of the First Epistle; full

knowledge, of the Second Epistle. In the First Epistle he puts his

apostolic authority less prominently forward than in the Second,

wherein his design is to warn against false teachers. The same

difference is observable in Paul's Epistles. Contrast

1Th 1:1;

2Th 1:1; Php 1:1,

with Ga 1:1; 1Co 1:1.

The reference to Paul's writings as already existing in numbers, and as

then a recognized part of Scripture

(2Pe 3:15, 16),

implies that this Epistle was written at a late date, just before

Peter's death.

Striking verbal coincidences occur: compare

1Pe 1:19,

end, with

2Pe 3:14, end;

"His own," Greek,

2Pe 1:3,

2Pe 2:16; 3:17

with 1Pe 3:1, 5.

The omission of the Greek article,

1Pe 2:13

with 2Pe 1:21; 2:4, 5, 7.

Moreover, two words occur,

2Pe 1:13,

"tabernacle," that is, the body, and

2Pe 1:15,

"decease," which at once remind us of the transfiguration narrative in

the Gospel. Both Epistles refer to the deluge, and to Noah as the

eighth that was saved. Though the First Epistle abounds in

quotations of the Old Testament, whereas the Second contains

none, yet references to the Old Testament occur often

(2Pe 1:21;

2:5-8, 15; 3:5, 6, 10, 13).

Compare Greek, "putting away,"

1Pe 3:21,

with 2Pe 1:14;

Greek, "pass the time,"

1Pe 1:17,

with 2Pe 2:18;

"walked in,"

1Pe 4:3,

with 2Pe 2:10; 3:3;

"called you,"

1Pe 1:15; 2:9; 5:10,

with 2Pe 1:3.

Moreover, more verbal coincidences with the speeches of Peter in Acts

occur in this Second, than in the First Epistle. Compare

Greek, "obtained,"

2Pe 1:1

with Ac 1:17;

Greek, "godliness,"

2Pe 1:6,

with Ac 3:12,

the only passage where the term occurs, except in the Pastoral

Epistles; and

2Pe 2:9

with Ac 10:2, 7;

"punished,"

2Pe 2:9,

with Ac 4:21,

the only places where the term occurs;

the double genitive,

2Pe 3:2,

with Ac 5:32;

"the day of the Lord,"

2Pe 3:10,

with Ac 2:20,

where only it occurs, except in

1Th 5:2.

The testimony of Jude,

Jude 17, 18,

is strong for its genuineness and inspiration, by adopting its very

words, and by referring to it as received by the churches to which he,

Jude, wrote, "Remember the words which were spoken before of the

apostles of our Lord Jesus Christ; how that they told you

there should be mockers in the last time, who should walk after

their own ungodly lusts." Jude, therefore, must have written

after Second Peter, to which he plainly refers; not before, as

ALFORD thinks. No less than eleven passages of

Jude rest on similar statements of Second Peter.

Jude 2,

compare

2Pe 1:2;

Jude 4,

compare

2Pe 2:1;

Jude 6,

compare

2Pe 2:4;

Jude 7,

compare

2Pe 2:6;

Jude 8,

compare

2Pe 2:10;

Jude 9,

compare

2Pe 2:11;

Jude 11,

compare

2Pe 2:15;

Jude 12,

compare

2Pe 2:17;

Jude 16,

compare

2Pe 2:18;

Jude 18,

compare

2Pe 2:1; 3:3.

Just in the same way Micah,

Mic 4:1-4,

leans on the somewhat earlier prophecy of Isaiah, whose inspiration he

thereby confirms. ALFORD reasons that because

Jude, in many of the passages akin to Second Peter, is fuller than

Second Peter, he must be prior. This by no means follows. It is at

least as likely, if not more so, that the briefer is the earlier,

rather than the fuller. The dignity and energy of the style is quite

consonant to what we should expect from the prompt and ardent foreman

of the apostles. The difference of style between First and Second Peter

accords with the distinctness of the subjects and objects.

THE DATE, from what has been said, would be about

A.D. 68 or 69, about a year after the first, and

shortly before the destruction of Jerusalem, the typical precursor of

the world's end, to which

2Pe 3:10-13

so solemnly calls attention, after Paul's ministry had closed (compare

Greek aorist tense, "wrote," past time,

2Pe 3:15),

just before Peter's own death. It was written to include the

same persons, and perhaps in, or about the same place, as the first.

Being without salutations of individuals, and entrusted to the care of

no one church, or particular churches as the first is, but directed

generally "to them that have obtained like precious faith with us"

(2Pe 1:1),

it took a longer time in being recognized as canonical. Had Rome been

the place of its composition or publication, it could hardly have

failed to have had an early acceptance--an incidental argument against

the tradition of Peter's martyrdom at Rome. The remote scene of

its composition in Babylon, or else in some of the contiguous regions

beyond the borders of the Roman empire, and of its circulation in

Cappadocia, Pontus, &c., will additionally account for its tardy but at

last universal acceptance in the catholic Church. The former Epistle,

through its more definite address, was earlier in its general

acceptance.

OBJECT.--In

2Pe 3:17, 18

the twofold design of the Epistle is set forth; namely, to guard his

readers against "the error" of false teachers, and to exhort them to

grow in experimental "knowledge of our Lord and Saviour"

(2Pe 3:18).

The ground on which this knowledge rests is stated,

2Pe 1:12-21,

namely, the inspired testimony of apostles and prophets. The danger

now, as of old, was about to arise from false teachers, who soon were

to come among them, as Paul also (to whom reference is made,

2Pe 3:15, 16)

testified in the same region. The grand antidote is "the full

knowledge of our Lord and Saviour," through which we know God the

Father, partake of His nature, escape from the pollutions of the world,

and have entrance into Christ's kingdom. The aspect of Christ presented

is not so much that of the past suffering, as of the future

reigning, Saviour, His present power, and future new

kingdom. This aspect is taken as best fitted to counteract the

theories of the false teachers who should "deny" His

Lordship and His coming again, the two very points which,

as an apostle and eye-witness, Peter attests (His "power" and

His "coming"); also, to counteract their evil example in

practice, blaspheming the way of truth, despising governments,

slaves to covetousness and filthy lusts of the flesh, while boasting of

Christian freedom, and, worst of all, apostates from the truth. The

knowledge of Christ, as being the knowledge of "the way of

righteousness," "the right way," is the antidote of their bad practice.

Hence "the preacher" of righteousness, Noah, and "righteous Lot," are

instanced as escaping the destruction which overtook the "unjust" or

"unrighteous"; and Balaam is instanced as exemplifying the awful result

of "unrighteousness" such as characterized the false teachers. Thus the

Epistle forms one connected whole, the parts being closely bound

together by mutual relation, and the end corresponding with the

beginning; compare

2Pe 3:14, 18

with 2Pe 1:2,

in both "grace" and "peace" being connected with "the knowledge" of our

Saviour; compare also

2Pe 3:17

with 2Pe 1:4, 10, 12;

and

2Pe 3:18,

"grow in grace and knowledge," with the fuller

2Pe 1:5-8;

and

2Pe 2:21;

and

2Pe 3:13,

"righteousness," with

2Pe 1:1;

and

2Pe 3:1

with 2Pe 1:13;

and

2Pe 3:2

with 2Pe 1:19.

The germs of Carpocratian and Gnostic heresies already existed,

but the actual manifestation of these heresies is spoken of as

future

(2Pe 2:1, 2,

&c.): another proof that this Epistle was written, as it professes, in

the apostolic age, before the development of the Gnostic

heresies in the end of the first and the beginning of the second

centuries. The description is too general to identify the heresies with

any particular one of the subsequent forms of heresy, but applies

generally to them all.

Though altogether distinct in aim from the First Epistle, yet a

connection may be traced. The neglect of the warnings to circumspection

in the walk led to the evils foretold in the Second Epistle. Compare

the warning against the abuse of Christian freedom,

1Pe 2:16

with 2Pe 2:19,

"While they promise them liberty, they themselves are the

servants of corruption"; also the caution against pride,

1Pe 5:5, 6

with 2Pe 2:18,

"they speak great swelling words of vanity."