INTRODUCTION TO II PETER
I.
THE RECIPIENTS.
This letter is addressed to them that have obtained a like precious faith with us (2 Peter 1:1). More specifically, it was intended for the same people as was I Peter; i.e., the elect who are sojourners of the Dispersion in Pontus, Galatia, Cappadocia, Asia, and Bithynia (1 Peter 1:1), for Peter himself states in 2 Peter 3:1, This is now, beloved, the second epistle that I write unto you.
II.
PLACE OF WRITING.
It is not known. Among places conjectured have been Rome, Egypt, Palestine, and Asia. Perhaps he is still in Babylon (1 Peter 5:13).
III.
TIME OF WRITING.
It is generally accepted that second Peter was written toward the end of the first century, and is one of the latest New Testament books. How do we arrive at such a conclusion?
a.
Peter speaks of his death as near, 2 Peter 1:14-15.
b.
Apparently, most or all of Paul's epistles had already been written, 2 Peter 3:15-16.
c.
Paul's Epistles had existed long enough to be perverted, 2 Peter 3:16. His letters cover the years between 62 A.D. (I Thes.) to 66 A.D. (II Tim.).
d.
Heresies dealt with in the epistle did not become a real problem until the latter part of the first Century. (Compare the book of Jude, where there are many parallels to this book in thought and language.)
Thus the date has been set at about 66 or 67 A.D., perhaps even later.
IV.
THE HUMAN AUTHOR AND THE GENUINENESS OF THE BOOK.
No book in the entire New Testament has had its genuineness questioned more than the second epistle of Peter. It is placed among the seven books called The Antilegomena, or disputed books, about which certain questions arose which prevented them from being received into the canon until a later date, At the core of these disputes concerning the epistle's authenticity lies this question: Is the Apostle Peter its true author?
Some have rejected this book as the work of Peter because of statements made by early Church Fathers. So Eusebius says, One epistle of Peter, called the first, is acknowledged. This the presbyters of ancient times have quoted in their writings, as undoubtedly genuine, But that called his second, we have been informed by tradition, has not been received as a part of the New Testament, Nevertheless, appearing to many to be useful, it hath been carefully studied with the other Scriptures.[36]
[36] Eusebius, Ecclesiastical History, lib. ii.c.3, (about 325 A.D.)
Again, Eusebius states: Among the contradicted [books] but yet well known to many [or approved by many], are that called the Epistle of James, and that of Jude, and the second of Peter, and the second and third of John. [37]
[37] Ibid, lib. iii.c.25.
Origen is the first writer to mention II Peter by name, about 240 A.D.[38] Later, he quotes 2 Peter 1:4, partakers of the divine nature, and labels it Scripture. But he adds: Peter has left one acknowledged Epistle, and perhaps a second, for this is contested.
[38] In his Homily on Joshua; also in his 4th Homily on Leviticus 13:1-59 th on Numbers.
Jerome, though including it in his Vulgate Version, knew of the scruples which many entertained concerning it. His own uncertainty, he said, stemmed from a difference in style from I Peter.
The book is not mentioned in the writings of Tertullian, Cyprian. Clement of Alexandria, Muratori's Canon, or the older (Peshitta) Syriac Version (the later Syriac has it). This is not to say these sources did not know of the bookonly that they did not mention it by the name as a part of Scripture.
Over against these statements, which may seem weighty against our acceptance of this book as the inspired work of Peter, we would submit both external and internal evidences in favor of its acceptance as the genuine work of the inspired aposle whose name it bears.
1. EXTERNAL EVIDENCE.
a. Traces of acquaintance with it appears at a very early date. Hermas, who flourished about 140, is best known for the book we call The Shepherd of Hermas. In Vision 3:7 we have They have left their true way (Cp. Pet. 2 Peter 2:15 where it is closely parallel in the Greek) and in Vision 4:3, Thou hast escaped this world (Cp. 2 Peter 2:20). In Similes 6:4 we have luxury in the day. luxuriating with their own deceivings; (Cp. 2 Peter 2:13 in the Greek). Clement of Rome, whose Epistle to the Corinthians (96 A.D.) is one of the most valuable works of the early church, may allude to it in 7:9 and 10. Concerning Noah's preaching and Lot's deliverance, he said, the Lord making it known that he does not abandon those that trust in Him, but appoints those otherwise inclined to Judgment (Cp. 2 Peter 2:5-9). Irenaeus (died about 192) uses the phrase the day of the Lord is as a thousand years as does Justin Martyr (100-165)a statement we immediately connect with 2 Peter 3:8. Hippolytus (3rd Century), in The Antichrist, seems to refer to 2 Peter 1:21 in these words: The prophets spoke not of their own private [individual] ability and will, but what was [revealed] to them alone by God.
b. Though there were scholars of the early church who rejected it, other learned men, of equal ability, accepted it. Among these were Firmilian of Caesarea in Cappadocia (died, 264),[39] Athanasius (293-373), Epiphanius (315-403), Cyril of Jerusalem (315-386),[40] Rufinus (345-410), and Augustine (354-430).
[39] This evidence is found in his Epistle ad Cyprian, where he speaks of Peter's Epistles as warning us to avoid hereticsan admonition which occurs in the second letter. Note that Cappadocia is one of the countries addressed in both epistles (1 Peter 1:1, 2 Peter 3:1), and it is certainly striking that from this country we have 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.
[40] who enumerates seven Catholic General Epistles, including II Peter.
c. It is included in the Sinaitic MS. (350), The Alexandrian (450)and the Vatican (325-350), or in all the big 3 manuscripts. Let us remember that the scholars and teachers of the fourth century, when the canon of the New Testament was fixed, had, in many ways, more evidence to go upon than we now possess. It was only as a result of careful examination that any writing was admitted as part of the canonical Scriptures.
d. The Antelegomena (disputed) books are to be carefully distinguished from those regarded as Spurious and false. The former designation merely separated them from the Homologoumenathose books universally accepted as canonical, By the middle of the fourth century, all of the Antelegomena books were accepted as canonical.[41] Included among the Spurious were The Gospel of Peter, The Apocolypse of Peter, and The Acts of Peter, but not the second epistle of Peter! Now to say a book is pseudopigraphal or spurious is one thing, and to say it is contested is another. To know that a book was carefully examined by the most critical scholars shortly after it was written, and then accepted as genuine, is reassuring evidence in favor of its authenticity.
[41] These include: II Peter, James, II and III John, Jude, Hebrews and Revelation.
2. INTERNAL EVIDENCE.
a. The direct claim of Peter's authorship, 2 Peter 1:1.
b. He states he had already written to the same people he was now addressing2 Peter 3:1.
c. The author mentions that he, along with the other apostles, was one of the eyewitnesses of Christ and with Him on the mount of transfiguration, 2 Peter 1:16-18.
d. The writer was apparently an older man, and expecting death soonappropriate for Peter, 2 Peter 1:13-14.
e. Although there is considerable difference in style, yet there is also considerable similarity between this epistle and I Peter. There are a good number of words and phrases common to both epistles, but rarely or never found in other New Testament books.[42] Also, words and phrases employed in both epistles are also found to be similar to those used by Peter in the Book of Acts.
[42] See the New Bible Commentary, p. 1143, for a comprehensive list of these similarities. Also, the International Standard Bible Encyclopedia, Vol. IV, pp. 2355-2356.
BIBLIOGRAPHY
Here is a partial list of the works used:
I. LEXICONS
1. A Greek-English Lexicon of the New Testament, by C L. W. Grimm. Translated from the German, revised and enlarged by J. H. Thayer. American Book Co., New York.
2. A Manual Greek Lexicon of the New Testament, by G. Abbott Smith. Charles Scribner's Sons, New York. 1953.
3. A Greek-English Lexicon to the New Testament, by Thomas Sheldon Green. 24th Edition. Samuel Bagster & Sons Limited, 80 Wigmore St., London.
4. The Analytical Greek Lexicon. Harper and Brothers, New York.
5. The Vocabulary of the Greek New Testament, illustrated from the Papyri and other non-literary sources, by J. H. Moulton and G. M. Milligan. Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Co., Grand Rapids, Michigan. 1959.
6. A Greek-English Lexicon, by Henry G. Lidell and Robert Scott. A New Edition, revised and augmented throughout, by Henry Stuart Jones and Roderick Mckenzie. Unabridged edition of 1940, reprinted, 1958. OXFORD, at the Clarendon Press.
7. A Greek-English Lexicon of the New Testament and Other Early Christian Literature. A translation and adaptation of Walter Bauer's Greek-German Worterbuch. Fourth Revised and Augmented Edition. By Wm. G. Arndt and F. Wilbur Gingrich. The University of Chicago Press, Chicago, Illinois. 1952.
8. An Expository Dictionary of New Testament Words, with their Precise Meanings for English Readers. By W. E. Vine. Oliphants Ltd., London, Edinburgh. 1953 Ed.
9. Word Studies in the New Testament. By Marvin R. Vincent. Volume I. Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Co., Grand Rapids, Michigan.
10. The Interlinear Translation of The Greek New Testament (Greek-English New Testament Lexicon section). George-Ricker Berry. Wilcox and Follett Co., Chicago. 1954.
11. A Pocket Lexicon to the Greek New Testament, by A. Souter. OXFORD at the Clarendon Press, London. 1918 Ed. Reprinted, 1953.
II.
COMMENTARIES
1. The Pulpit Commentary. Edited by H. D. M. Spence and Joseph S. Excell. Vol. 50, Funk & Wagnalls Co., New York.
2. A Commentary on the Holy Scriptures: Critical, Doctrinal and Homiletical, with Special Reference to Ministers and Students. By John Peter Lange, Translated from the German and edited by Philip Schaff. New York: Charles Scribner's Sons, 1915.
3. The New Bible Commentary, Davidson, Stibbs, and Kevan. Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Co., Grand Rapids, Michigan, 1953.
4. Bible Commentary, by E. M. Zerr. Vol. Six, Mission Messenger, 7505 Trenton Ave., St. Louis 14, Missouri. 1954.
5. Ellicott's Commentary on the Whole Bible, Vol. VIII. Edited by Charles John Ellicott. Zondervan Publishing House, Grand Rapids, Michigan. 1954.
6. Barnes-' Notes on the New Testament, James-Jude. Edited by Robert Frew. Baker Book House, Grand Rapids 6, Mich., 1951.
7. A Critical, Experimental and Practical Commentary on the Old and New Testaments, by Jamieson, Fausset, and Brown. Vol. VI. Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Co., Grand Rapids, Mich. 1948.
8. The Interpretation of The Epistles of St. Peter, St. John and St. Jude, by R. C. H. Lenski. The Wartburg Press, Columbus, Ohio. 1945.
9. A Commentary on the New Testament Epistles of Peter, John, and Jude. Gospel Advocate Co., Nashville, Tenn. 1958. By Guy N. Wood.
10. A Commentary and Exposition of the Epistles of James, Peter, John and Jude, by N. T. Caton. Gospel Light Publishing Co., Delight, Arkansas.
11. The People's New Testament with Explanatory Notes, by B. W. Johnson. Vol. II.
12. The Apostolical Epistles, by James Macknight. A New Edition. Baker Book House, Grand Rapids, Michigan. 1949.
III.
OTHER BOOKS USED (partial list)
1. Illustrations of Holy Scripture, by George Bush. J. B. Lippincott & Co., 1865.
2. A Manual of Church History, by Albert Henry Newman. Vol. I. The American Baptist Publication Society, Philadelphia. 1953.
3. The Life and Works of Flavius Josephus. Translated from the Greek by William Whiston. Standard Edition. The John C. Winston Co., Philadelphia.
Also the following: The Encyclopaedia Americana, The Encyclopaedia Brittanica, several atlases, The International Standard Bible Encyclopaedia, The Schaff-Herzofi Encylopaedia of Religious Knowledge, Chamber's Encyclopaedia, and six or seven different translations of the New Testament.