Who wrote the book of 1 and 2 peter
Second Epistle of Peter - WikipediaThere has been much debate over the authorship of 2 Peter. Most conservative evangelicals hold to the traditional view that Peter was the author, but historical and literary critics have almost unanimously concluded that to be impossible. The result of this debate is that 2 Peter is concluded by most critical scholars to be pseudepigraphal literature. Conservatives say this has serious ramifications for the doctrines of inspiration and inerrancy. The critics, on the other hand, claim this was standard procedure and therefore not dishonest.
Is 2 Peter Peter’s?
For most readers of the New Testament, Peter needs little introduction. Peter is also notorious for having three times denied knowing Jesus on the night the Lord was betrayed. The first several chapters of the book of Acts depict Peter as a leader of the church in Jerusalem. For example, after his powerful Pentecost sermon, Peter performs wonders in Jerusalem, continues to preach, faces persecution, and exercises discipline within the budding Christian community. After a vision in Joppa he meets with a Gentile named Cornelius and then returns to Jerusalem to convey the importance of mission to the Gentiles. However, Peter disappears in the second half of the book of Acts as the ministry of Saul of Tarsus takes center stage. Church history and legend offer answers to some questions concerning the ongoing ministry and fate of the apostles.
The authorship of the Bible is a hot topic in both the scholarly and popular worlds. One of the most debated books in Scripture concerning its author is 2 Peter. This article will examine skeptical arguments against 2 Peter to see whether or not they are correct. Did Peter write the second epistle with his name attached to it? There are many different arguments used against the authenticity of 2 Peter including, but not limited to: 1 poor attestation in the early church; 2 some teachings, such as the fact that Christ had not returned yet, seem to point to a late date of composition; 3 Peter borrowing from Jude why would Peter use material from someone who was not an apostle? We will examine these and other arguments throughout this article. The best place to start is with the attestation of the epistle in the early church.
Outline of Bible-related topics. The authorship of the Petrine epistles First and Second Peter is an important question in biblical criticism , parallel to that of the authorship of the Pauline epistles , since scholars have long sought to determine who were the exact authors of the New Testament letters. Most scholars today conclude that Saint Peter was not the author of the two epistles that are attributed to him and that they were written by two different authors. The author of the First Epistle of Peter identifies himself in the opening verse as "Peter, an apostle of Jesus", and the view that the epistle was written by St. Peter is attested to by a number of Church Fathers : Irenaeus — , Tertullian — , Clement of Alexandria — and Origen of Alexandria — If Polycarp , who was martyred in , and Papias alluded to this letter, then it must have been written before the mid-2nd century.
What happened to Peter?
Most critical biblical scholars have concluded Peter is not the author, considering the epistle pseudepigraphical. According to the Epistle itself, it was composed by the Apostle Peter, an eyewitness to Jesus' ministry. If 2 Peter alludes to 1 Peter, the audience of the epistle is the various Churches in Asia Minor in general cf. It criticizes "false teachers" who distort the authentic, apostolic tradition, and predicts judgment for them. It calls on Christians to wait patiently for the parousia and to study scripture. The date of composition has proven to be very difficult to determine. Commentaries and reference books have placed 2 Peter in almost every decade from AD 60 to
Of all the epistles accepted into the New Testament canon, the book of 2 Peter remains the most difficult. However, if the issue of authorship can be reasonably determined, most of the knots considerably loosen themselves. The rejection of Peter as the writer of 2 Peter is by far the most common opinion today. In fact, the view of the pseudonymity of the epistle is almost universal. Either of these might be fatal for any degree of Petrine authorship. Together they must be regarded as entirely conclusive against Petrine authorship. The choice seems to lie between two fairly well defined alternatives.