Writer of the Epistle: Many doubted the writer of that epistle. St. Eronemos said that there are few who doubted who wrote that second epistle because of the difference in the style between that epistle and the first one. However, he ascertained that St. Peter is the one who wrote it, and considered it one of the Catholikon epistles in his letter to Paulimius. He clarified that the difference between the two epistles is the difference in translation. The following are the proofs that the author is St. Peter: First: Some writers tried to count the number of common Greek words between the two epistles and they found that: 369 words were used in the first epistle and not the second, and that 230 words were used in the second epistle and not the first, and that one hundred words were used in the two epistles. A. We notice that one sixth of the common words between the two epistles is a big percentage to make us not doubt. B. St. Peter does not know the Greek language, so the one who translated the first epistle for him is different than the one who translated the second epistle. C. The difference in the subject and the purpose lessens the existence of common words. Second: The early church accepted that epistle, for Yusabios the historian1 mentioned that St. Clement of Alexandria excerpted some parts from it. St. Jerome, Firmilians, the bishop of Caesaria, and Origen his disciple has ascertained that St. Peter is the writer. St. Clement of Rome excerpted many of his writings from it. There were many words and expressions only mentioned in the writings of this epistle like: the road of truth, not being diligent and unfruitful, eternal kingdom, the prophetic words2. This epistle is very similar to the epistle of St. Jude. Third: St. Peter mentioned the epistles of St. Paul in chapter (3: 5, 16), which made some think it was written at a later date after St. Paul’s letters. To refute that, the epistles were written and spread between the different churches immediately (Col. 4:16), besides having a strong friendship between the two apostles, which made St. Peter know St. Paul’s letters. Fourth: The testimony of the writer himself, for the following reasons: 1. He started the epistle by saying “Simon Peter”. 2. He called himself one among the apostles. (1:1, 3:2) 3. He was with the Lord Himself in the transfiguration. (1: 16-18) 4. He wrote that he has written a previous epistle. (3: 1) To whom was it written? 1 Ecol. His. 6:14:1. 2راجع "دراسات في رسالة بطرس الرسول الثانیة" للدكتور موریس تاوضروس. 3 It was directed to the Christians of Asia Minor, of which the first epistle was directed to. He wrote, “I now write to you this second epistle…” (2 Pet. 3: 1) When was it written? It was written toward the end of his life as it is apparent from his saying, “Knowing that shortly I must put off my tent…” (2 Pet. 1: 14), that is between the years 64 and 68 A.D. Reasons for writing it: 1. Since the Lord has declared to him his departure from this world, he wanted to send his children his final commandments to tell them about the precious yearning of his heart which is “The kingdom of heaven and the Second Coming of the Lord.” 2. Waiting for the heavenly kingdom drives the believer to the life of holiness and rejecting heresies. Similarity of this epistle to the epistle of St. Jude3: First: The two epistles are similar, especially what came in the second chapter: 1. False teachers 2 Pet. 2: 1-3 Jude v. 4 2. Destruction of the angels who sinned 2 Pet. 2: 4 Jude v. 6 3. Destruction of Sodom and Gomorrah 2 Pet. 2: 2 Jude v. 7 4. Uncleanness and speaking evil of dignitaries2 Pet. 2: 10-12 Jude v. 8-10 5. Feasting of the teachers 2 Pet. 2:13 Jude v. 12 6. Following the way of Balaam 2 Pet. 2:15 Jude v. 11 7. Reserving the heretics for darkness: 2 Pet. 2:17 Jude v. 13 8. Speaking swelling words of emptiness 2 Pet. 2:18 Jude v. 16 9. Reminding them of the apostles’ sayings 2 Pet. 3: 1-3 Jude v. 17, 18 Second: This close resemblance between the two epistles in meaning, purpose, style, and even words, made some scholars assume the following: 1. That one of them depended on the other, for some said that St. Peter depended on St. Jude’s letter while some said the opposite. 2. Some said that the second chapter of the second epistle of St. Peter until the second verse of the third chapter was added to the original letter depending on the letter of St. Jude, and that the rest of the epistle is its true content. No one supported that point of view for moving to this part (2 Pet. 2: 1-3: 2) is a natural transition and if we omit it, the epistle would not be complete. Moreover, the unity of the style in this epistle proves that this assumption is false. 3. Many of the expressions in the epistle of St. Jude clarified what was mentioned in the second epistle of St. Peter However; St. Peter used the future tense, while St. Jude mentioned it as a true event that is the epistle of St. Peter preceded the epistle of St. Jude. It was mentioned in the epistle of St. Jude that the apostles have prophesied about these matters (Jude 17, 18). Probably, he meant St. Peter as one of them. St. Jude, using some expressions as St. Paul which St. Peter did not use (like to those who are called v. 1), the saints (Jude v. 3), these dreamers (Jude v.19), made some say that St. Jude did not excerpt his epistle from St. Peter but the similarities are due to the unity of circumstances, unity of purpose and unity of time. 3راجع "دراسات في رسالة بطرس الرسول الثانیة" للدكتور موریس تاوضروس. 4 The epistle is divided into three parts: 1. The kingdom of heaven: chapter 1 2. The appearance of false teachers: chapter 2 3. The Second Coming of Christ: chapter 3
Welcome