2 Peter

Home A B C D E F G H I J K L M N O P Q R S T U V W X Y Z Abbreviations Glossary

---

1 & 2 Peter, Jude, by Erland Waltner and J. Daryl Charles (Believers Church Bible Commentary)

Introduction

Relevance

Because of their similarities, Jude and 2 Peter are often analyzed together (e.g., Jude 4-16 and 2 Pet 2:1-22; see charts in deSilva: 782-83 and The SBL Study Bible: 2124). Both Jude and 2 Peter demand moral, ethical, and doctrinal purity to counter the influence of “intruders” (Jude 4) or “false teachers” (2 Pet 2:1). Along with pleas for purity is the affirmation that the Lord Jesus Christ will physically return to earth, the world as we know it will come to an end, and “new heavens and a new earth” will come as promised (3:10, 13). The letter invites readers to explore how the New Testament (NT) often connects ethics and eschatology, as seen in the question of 3:11-12, “Since all these things are to be destroyed in this way, what sort of persons ought you to be in leading lives of holiness and godliness, waiting for and hastening the coming of the day of God, because of which the heavens will be set ablaze and destroyed and the elements will melt with fire?” (NRSVue, passim). Given that the author mentions the apostle Paul’s letters, equating them to the Hebrew Scriptures (3:15-16), several questions arise about Peter, Paul, their relationship, and the development of the NT. Yet, as also with Jude, 2 Peter is not merely an indictment of theological and moral enemies—it is also an exhortation to virtuous living (1:5-7; 3:17).

Author, Date, Setting

The letter opens with, “Simeon Peter, a servant and apostle of Jesus Christ” (1:1). “Simeon” is a variant of “Simon,” the more common version of Peter’s name in the NT. However, some ancient Christians, as well as most modern scholars, question the apostle Peter’s authorship of 2 Peter. According to the fourth-century church historian Eusebius, Origen expressed doubts a century earlier that Peter authored the letter. After surveying ancient views on 2 Peter, Jörg Frey (173) asserts that “the acceptance of 2 Pet into the canon was more disputed than all other NT texts.” Among the several reasons that contemporary scholars reject Petrine authorship are the letter’s elevated literary style, unique Greek vocabulary, and dissimilarity to 1 Peter. Furthermore, those who argue against Petrine authorship contend that the false teaching condemned in the letter is likely heresy that developed in the second century. Richard Bauckham’s assertion that 2 Peter is not only a letter, but a testament—a farewell discourse—leads him to argue that 2 Peter is pseudonymous but that the letter’s recipients would have recognized it as such, so there would be no deception on the author’s part (Bauckham: 161–62). However, Bauckham’s theory has detractors (see Reese: 117).

Dating ancient texts is, of course, connected to the question of authorship. For those who maintain Petrine authorship, the letter was likely written in the early 60s CE, prior to Peter’s martyrdom, yet with enough time to be aware of Paul’s writings (2 Pet 3:15-16; see Reese: 115–21; Charles: 260–63). Scholars who consider 2 Peter to be pseudonymous offer dates ranging from late first century (ca. 80 CE) to late second century (ca. 180 CE; see Frey: 220).

The letter is truly general, or catholic, being addressed to all who share in the apostolic faith (1:1). These readers are familiar with “our beloved brother Paul” (3:15), but their precise geographic location is unknown. However, in 3:1 the author writes, “This is now, beloved, the second letter I am writing to you.” For some scholars, this suggests 2 Peter is addressed to the same communities as 1 Peter, namely, Pontus, Galatia, Cappadocia, Asia, and Bithynia (1 Pet 1:1). The recipients of 2 Peter apparently understood the author’s Hellenistic literary influence; for example, the phrase “participants of the divine nature” in 1:4 reflects Hellenistic ideas, and tartaroō (2:4, Gk. “hold captive in Tartarus,” the lowest level of the underworld) appears nowhere else in the New Testament. The absence of final salutations, a common feature in most other NT letters, makes it even more difficult to identify the recipients.

Form and Structure

Second Peter conforms to the style of most personal letters of the ancient Greco-Roman world and is a farewell that also serves as a pastoral reminder (1:12-15). After a typical greeting, the letter urges readers to adopt virtues familiar to Greek philosophy, such as moral excellence and self-control, along with explicitly Christian virtues of faith and love (1:5-7). The author establishes his apostolic authority over against false teachers by recounting the transfiguration of Jesus (1:16-18; cf. Matt 17:1-8). Then, as in Jude, 2 Peter denounces false teachers (2:1), relying upon Jewish tradition to characterize the behaviors of these teachers and present the sort of judgment they will face. After describing God’s condemnation of the false teachers, the author counters their arguments, especially regarding eschatology, the end times and the second coming of Jesus Christ (3:1-10). The author’s farewell focuses on the promise of Jesus’ bodily return to earth, called the day of the Lord, where judgment will bring destruction for ungodly people (3:9) yet renewal for the cosmos (3:13). The readers are to live upright lives, expecting Christ’s return (3:11-14), and Paul’s writings serve to support the author’s pleas for doctrinal and ethical purity (3:15-17). Finally (3:18), the letter does not end with salutations but with a benediction (“grow in the grace and knowledge of our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ”) and a doxology (“To him be the glory both now and to the day of eternity. Amen.”)

Literary Analysis

J. Daryl Charles (207) notes three main themes operating in 2 Peter: “(1) a call to virtuous living, knowing the certainty of our salvation; (2) a warning to beware of those who lead others into apostasy; and (3) a reminder that God will fulfill his divine purposes by judging those who do evil and vindicating the faithful.” These three themes revolve around the notions of ethics, knowledge, and eschatology. Lists of ethical virtues are common in the NT, reflecting Hellenistic and Jewish influences, and such a list appears early in 2 Peter 1:5-7 (see Charles, “The Ethical List as a Teaching Device,” 263–65). Knowledge is a key topic in 2 Peter, and the author relies upon frequent use of Greek nouns for “knowledge” (gnōsis, epignōsis) and several verbs for “knowing” (ginōskō, epiginōskō, proginōskō, and oida; see Reese: 182, who also notes 2 Peter’s dependence upon words for memory and remembering). Eschatological concerns are also woven throughout, as the author mentions the day of judgment in 2:9 and the parousia (coming) of Jesus Christ: in connection with the transfiguration in 1:16 and his return in 3:4, 12 (extended discussion 3:1-13).

Outline of 2 Peter

I. Opening (1:1-15)

A. Author’s identity (v. 1a)

B. Spiritual identity of recipients (v. 1b)

C. Blessing directed to the recipients (v. 2)

D. Reason for writing (1:3-15)

1. Moral virtue through Jesus Christ (vv. 3-11)

2. Peter’s testament, referencing his imminent death (vv. 12-15)

II. Body of the Letter (1:16–3:13)

A. Author’s justification of his authority (1:16-21)

1. Apostolic witness (1:16-18)

2. Prophetic word (1:19-21)

B. Dispute with “false teachers” (pseudodidaskaloi) (2:1–3:10)

1. Introduction of the false teachers (2:1-3)

2. Three Old Testament examples (2:4-10a)

a. Fallen angels (v. 4)

b. People in the days of Noah (v. 5)

c. Sodom and Gomorrah in the days of Lot (vv. 6-10a)

3. Polemic against the false teachers (2:10b-22)

4. Scoffers who deny Christ’s second coming (3:1-4)

5. Objections to scoffers’ arguments (3:5-10)

C. Admonition based on dispute with false teachers (3:11-13)

III. Closing (3:14-18)

A. Exhortations (vv. 14-17)

B. Benediction (v. 18a)

C. Doxology (v. 18b)

Summary and Comment

Participation in the Divine Nature (1:1-11)

After Simeon Peter’s salutation (1:1) and wish for abundant grace and peace (1:2), he elaborates on his greeting, which serves as a transition to the main body of the letter. This elaboration employs Hellenistic vocabulary (e.g., “divine power” in 1:3 and “divine nature” in 1:4) to explain that Jesus Christ has given his followers everything necessary for an upright life. The upright life means becoming sharers or participants (Gk. koinōnoi) in the divine nature (theios), which seems to describe physical and moral incorruptibility. The theological notion of theōsis—or deification—is important in Orthodox theology and emerges from 1:4, though not the term itself. Through Christ’s power, Christians share God’s essence to the extent that their behaviors are not given over to evil, and their bodies escape ultimate decay (see 1 Cor 15:52-54). Because divine power provides what is needed, readers are to adopt virtuous behavior. In Peter’s catalog of virtues, “faith can be seen as the foundation of the Christian ethic and love as the climax” (Charles: 264). The adoption and continual practice of these moral virtues (1:8) demonstrate genuine conversion (1:9-10) and point to eternal life in Christ’s kingdom (1:11).

Recognizing and Disputing False Teachers (1:12–3:13)

In 1:12-15, Peter offers the reasons for writing the letter, which is to remind readers of what they had been taught before. In this reminder, the testamental nature of the writing comes through as the author indicates that his life is nearly over. Referring to his body as a “tent” (lit.; NRSVue “death,” 1:14) is a common Hellenistic image, as is euphemistically describing death as the “removal of my tent.” Death is called a departure (Gk. exodus, 1:15), contrasting with entry (eisodos) into Christ’s kingdom (1:11).

Peter offers his recollection of Jesus’ transfiguration (see Matt 17:1-8) to substantiate his divine authority in contrast to the false teachers he is about to discuss (2:1). In addition to Peter’s testimony about the transfiguration are his reasons for the trustworthiness of ancient Israel’s Scriptures. Indeed, 1:20-21 are about the Old Testament (OT) and not about contemporary biblical studies. Peter is not describing how modern readers are to go about doing exegesis. “Peter’s concern is not proper interpretation of the Scriptures; it is authentication of the prophetic voice” (Charles: 219). This is to say that Peter emphasizes how the OT is not a mere human endeavor but a work superintended by the Holy Spirit.

After establishing his apostolic authority and the authority of the OT’s “prophetic message,” Peter proceeds to indict false teachers (2:1-22) and scoffers (3:1-13) with words and images similar to those found in Jude 4-18. As is typically the case in the NT, the false teachers are not named, but we assume that the first readers of the letter understood who Peter was targeting. The false teachers who will emerge are like false prophets found in the OT, and their behaviors stand in stark contrast to the moral, ethical, and physical purity described in 1:3-7. The fate of the false teachers is prefigured in the punishment of people from Genesis in ancient Israel’s history, specifically fallen angels (2:4; see Gen 6:1-4), Noah’s contemporaries (2:5; see Gen 6:5-12), and the people of Sodom and Gomorrah in the days of Lot (2:6-8; see Gen 19:1-29). Peter’s indictment of false teachers not only depicts their punishment using OT examples but elaborates on the nature of their evil in 2:10-22. He refers to opponents as slanderers (2:10-12), irrational animals (2:12), debauched revelers who distort the Christians’ love feasts (agapais, a var. rdg. in Vaticanus, et al.; see Jude 12) for their own pleasures (apatais, 2:13, a pun on agapais), sexually depraved (2:14), and greedy (2:14). These opponents are apostate, having abandoned the way of Jesus, and Balaam provides a precedent as “a bad example of self-seeking and greed” (Charles: 238; see Num 22–25). Balaam was a prophet who led Israelites astray (Num 31:16) and was rebuked by a donkey whom God empowered to speak (Num 22:21-35).

The false teachers are pictured as deceptive enslavers who are ironically enslaved themselves (2:18-20). The invective against the false teachers ends with proverbial sayings illustrating the disgusting tendencies of two animals. Dogs might return to their own vomit (2:22; see Prov 26:11), and washed pigs find comfort in mud. The images are meant to be repulsive and “The effect is to jolt the audience into seeing the sobering nature of apostasy: a willful departure from revealed truth” (Charles: 240).

Chapter 3 commences with the author acknowledging a previous letter (a reference to 1 Peter) and another mention of his goal being to remind readers of things they had been taught before, particularly through OT prophets and the apostles of Jesus Christ. Eschatology is in the background of 3:1-13, but these verses also deal with the opponents, now referred to as scoffers (3:3), who mock the parousia—the second coming of Christ—which is built from OT teaching concerning God’s visitation in judgment (i.e., “day of the Lord” passages such as Isa 13:6, 9; Ezek 30:3; Joel 2:1, 11, 31, and many others). The scoffers assert that God will not intervene in human affairs because life continues as it always has (3:4). But Peter responds in 3:5 with a charge that the opponents overlook (“deliberately ignore” in NRSVue; Gk. lanthanō) God’s creative acts in Genesis 1 and God’s judgment in the Great Flood of Genesis 6–8. Peter’s readers, however, must not overlook (Gk. lanthanō, v. 8 as in v. 5) that God’s timing is different, as a day is like a thousand years, and vice versa (see Ps 90:4). What might appear as a delay is evidence of God’s forbearance, allowing time for repentance (see Bauckham: 312). Peter assures his readers that Jesus will return—the NT version of the OT’s “day of the Lord”—using the image of a thief (v. 10; see Matt 24:43-44; Luke 12:39-40; 1 Thess 5:2; Rev 3:3; 16:15) and catastrophic loud noise (1 Thess 4:16).

Final Exhortations, Benediction, and Doxology (3:14-18)

Peter’s final exhortations echo earlier ones, particularly his invitation to peace (see 1:2), his plea for purity (see 1:3-7), and his admonition for readers to understand God’s patience (forbearance) as liberative (see 3:9). The mention of God’s forbearance along with liberation or salvation (Gk. sōtēria) prompts a comment about the apostle Paul (although Peter does not explicitly refer to Paul as an apostle). The reference to Paul is noteworthy for several reasons:

1. Peter has previously made several references to the OT but neither quoted nor cited specific authors or texts, yet here he explicitly names Paul and his writings.
2. There is no unambiguous reference in Paul’s letters to the Lord’s patience as salvation (v. 15, although Rom 2:4 comes close; see 2 Pet 3:9), so it is hard to know what writings Peter had in mind.
3. As Peter refers to Paul in Pauline language as “beloved brother” (v. 15, despite their confrontation in Gal 2:11-16, which stands apart from Paul’s otherwise positive references to Peter, as in 1 Cor 3:22; 9:5; 15:5; Gal 1:18), he seems to be appealing to Paul as a source of authority even though “Peter’s authority was uncontested at the time of the Pauline mission, while Paul’s required constant justification” (Frey: 423).
4. It seems that Paul’s letters were available as a collection to the readers (note the phrase, “in all his letters,” v. 16). Many scholars find it difficult to imagine that such a collection existed before Paul’s martyrdom in the early 60s (with Peter’s death close in time to Paul’s).
5. Paul’s writings are referred to as “scripture” (v. 16), granting them the same reverence as the OT. It is unclear when and on what basis early Christians referred to Christian writings as “scripture.”

With verse 17, Peter once again warns against falling victim to false teaching, then goes on to offer a doxology in verse 18. Most biblical doxologies are addressed to God, but some in the NT—as here—are addressed to Jesus Christ (see 2 Tim 4:18; Rev 1:5-6). The closing doxology affirms the coming parousia (cited as “the day of eternity”) and affirms that Jesus Christ is worthy of honor now and forevermore.

Conclusion and the Anabaptist Tradition

Although scholars have long questioned whether the apostle Peter wrote 2 Peter, Christians throughout the centuries have found themes that resonate with their life situations. The letter simultaneously urges virtuous living while strongly denouncing unnamed false teachers. Along the way, the letter affirms the second coming of Christ and responds to critics who cast doubt on the Lord’s return.

Anabaptists have long stressed some of the central concepts that appear in 2 Peter, such as rejecting sinful impurity and false teaching, guarding against apostasy, and affirming expectations regarding Christ’s second coming. For example, Dirk Philips frequently cites 2 Peter 1:4—specifically the claim that we may become “participants of the divine nature”—to assert that those who have experienced the new birth are new creatures with new capacities rooted in the divine nature. In Philips’s discussion of Christ’s incarnation, he writes, “all believers are participants of the divine nature, yes, and are called gods and children of the Most High, 2 Pet 1:4; Acts 17:28; Ps 82:6, and are in the world as Christ was in in the world, and shall become like him at his coming, John 10:34; 1:12” (Philips: 145.)

Pilgram Marpeck also appealed to 2 Peter to denounce apostasy and, like Peter, offers Old Testament illustrations; he also references 2 Peter 3 (Marpeck: 58). Balthasar Hubmaier likewise urges fidelity to the faith, noting, “we should not sin so that we do not make ourselves unworthy of this mercy and fall under the judgment of God, from which also the angels are not exempted, 2 Pet 2:4” (Hubmaier: 471).

Recommended Essays in the Commentary

The Ethical List as a Teaching Device
Virtue as a Theme of 2 Peter

Bibliography

• Bauckham, Richard. Jude, 2 Peter. Word Biblical Commentary 50. Waco, TX: Word, 1983.

• Blomberg, Craig L. A New Testament Theology. Waco, TX: Baylor University Press, 2018.

• Charles, J. Daryl. “2 Peter, Jude,” 201–341, in Erland Waltner and J. Daryl Charles, 1-2 Peter, Jude. Believers Church Bible Commentary. Scottdale, PA: Herald, 1999.

• Davids, Peter H. The Letters of 2 Peter and Jude. The Pillar New Testament Commentary. Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 2006.

• deSilva, David A. An Introduction to the New Testament: Contexts, Methods and Ministry Formation. 2d ed. Downers Grove, IL: IVP Academic, 2018.

• Frey, Jörg. The Letter of Jude and the Second Letter of Peter : A Theological Commentary. Waco, TX: Baylor University Press, 2018.

• Green, Gene L. Jude and 2 Peter. Baker Exegetical Commentary on the New Testament. Grand Rapids: Baker Academic, 2008.

• Hubmaier, Balthasar. Balthasar Hubmaier, Theologian of Anabaptism. Translated and edited by H. Wayne Pipkin and John Howard Yoder. Classics of the Radical Reformation 5. Walden, NY: Plough, 2019.

• Lockett, Darian R. Letters for the Church: Reading James, 1-2 Peter, 1-3 John, and Jude as Canon. Downers Grove, IL: IVP Academic, 2021.

• Marpeck, Pilgram. The Writings of Pilgram Marpeck. Translated and edited by William Klassen and Walter Klaassen. Classics of the Radical Reformation 2. Walden, NY: Plough, 2019.

• Neyrey, Jerome H. 2 Peter, Jude: A New Translation with Introduction and Commentary. Anchor Bible 37C. New York: Doubleday, 1993.

• Philips, Dirk. The Writings of Dirk Philips, 1504–1568. Translated and edited by Cornelius J. Dyck, William E. Keeney, and Alvin J. Beachy. Classics of the Radical Reformation 6. Walden, NY: Plough, 2019.

• Reese, Ruth Anne. 2 Peter and Jude. The Two Horizons New Testament Commentary. Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 2007.

• The SBL Study Bible. New York: HarperCollins, 2023.

• Smith, Shively T. J. Interpreting 2 Peter through African American Women’s Moral Writings. Early Christianity and Its Literature 32. Atlanta: SBL Press, 2023.

• Watson, Duane F., and Robert L. Webb, eds. Reading Second Peter with New Eyes: Methodological Reassessments of the Letter of Second Peter. Library of New Testament Studies 382. London, New York: T & T Clark, 2010.

—Dennis R. Edwards

—Published BCBC commentary by J. Daryl Charles