39 lines
20 KiB
HTML
39 lines
20 KiB
HTML
<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.01 Transitional//EN">
|
|
<head>
|
|
<title>Blue Letter Bible: Text Commentaries</title>
|
|
<script src="../../../js/basepath.js" type="text/javascript"></script>
|
|
<script src="./js/nav.js" type="text/javascript"></script>
|
|
<script src="./js/MainHeader.js" type="text/javascript"></script>
|
|
<script type="text/javascript">
|
|
PriorBook = '1 Peter';
|
|
PriorBookURL = './Comm/jfb/1Pe/1Pe000.html';
|
|
PriorChapter = '1 Peter 5';
|
|
PriorChapterURL = './Comm/jfb/1Pe/1Pe005.html';
|
|
NextBook = '1 John';
|
|
NextBookURL = './Comm/jfb/1Jo/1Jo000.html';
|
|
NextChapter = '2 Peter 1';
|
|
NextChapterURL = './Comm/jfb/2Pe/2Pe001.html';
|
|
Title = 'The Second Epistle General of Peter';
|
|
SubTitle1 = 'Commentary by A. R. FAUSSET';
|
|
SubTitle2 = '';
|
|
SubTitle3 = 'INTRODUCTION';
|
|
SubTitle3Cased = 'Introduction';
|
|
Author = ' Jamieson, Fausset & Brown';
|
|
imageMasthead = 'jfb.gif';
|
|
authorCite = 'Robert Jamieson; A.R. Fausset; and David Brown';
|
|
</script>
|
|
<script src="./js/Comms/JFB.js" type="text/javascript"></script>
|
|
</head><body>
|
|
<p id="Introduction" align="center">Commentary by A. R. FAUSSET<br>INTRODUCTION <p>AUTHENTICITY AND GENUINENESS.—If not a gross imposture, <i>its own internal witness</i> is unequivocal in its favor. It has <i>Peter's</i> name and apostleship in its heading: not only his surname, but his original name <i>Simon,</i> or <i>Simeon,</i> he thus, at the close of his life, reminding his readers who he originally was before his call. Again, in <a onclick="return mV('2Pe',1,'16-18');">2Pe 1:16-18</a>, he mentions <i>his presence at the Transfiguration,</i> and <i>Christ's prophecy of his death!</i> and in <a onclick="return mV('2Pe',3,15);">2Pe 3:15</a>, <i>his brotherhood with Paul.</i> Again, in <a onclick="return mV('2Pe',3,1);">2Pe 3:1</a>, the author speaks of himself as author of the former Epistle: it is, moreover, addressed so as to <i>include</i> (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" (<a onclick="return mV('2Pe',3,15);">2Pe 3:15</a>, "the long-suffering of God," compare <a onclick="return mV('Rom',2,4);">Rom 2:4</a>). This necessarily implies a <i>late date,</i> 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 <i>doubts</i> 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 <i>moved by the Holy Ghost</i> (<a onclick="return mV('2Pe',1,21);">2Pe 1:21</a>). 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 <i>no temptation to pious frauds</i> as in later times. That it must have been written in the earliest age is plain from the <i>wide gulf in style</i> 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."
|
|
<p>Traces of acquaintance with it appear in the earliest Fathers. HERMAS [<i>Similitudes,</i> 6.4] (compare <a onclick="return mV('2Pe',2,13);">2Pe 2:13</a>), <i>Greek,</i> "<i>luxury</i> in the day...luxuriating with their own deceivings"; and [<i>Shepherd, Vision</i> 3.7], "They have left their true way" (compare <a onclick="return mV('2Pe',2,15);">2Pe 2:15</a>); and [<i>Shepherd, Vision</i> 4.3], "Thou hast escaped this world" (compare <a onclick="return mV('2Pe',2,20);">2Pe 2:20</a>). CLEMENT OF ROME, [<i>Epistle to the Corinthians,</i> 7.9; 10], as to <i>Noah's preaching</i> and <i>Lot's</i> deliverance, "<i>the Lord</i> making it known that He does not abandon those that trust in Him, but appoints those otherwise inclined to <i>judgment</i>" (compare <a href= "#" onclick="return mV('2Pe',2,5);">2Pe 2:5</a>, <a onclick="return mV('2Pe',2,6);">6</a>, <a onclick="return mV('2Pe',2,7);">7</a>, <a onclick="return mV('2Pe',2,9);">9</a>). IRENAEUS, A.D. 178 ("the day of the Lord is as a thousand years"), and JUSTIN MARTYR seem to allude to <a onclick="return mV('2Pe',3,8);">2Pe 3:8</a>. HIPPOLYTUS [<i>On Antichrist</i>], seems to refer to <a onclick="return mV('2Pe',1,21);">2Pe 1:21</a>, "<i>The prophets spake not of their own private</i> (individual) ability and <i>will,</i> but what was (revealed) to them alone by God." The difficulty is, neither TERTULLIAN, CYPRIAN, CLEMENT OF ALEXANDRIA, nor the oldest <i>Syriac</i> (<i>Peschito</i>) version (the <i>later Syriac</i> has it), nor the fragment known as <i>Muratori's Canon,</i> mentions it. The first writer who has expressly named it is ORIGEN, in the third century (<i>Homily</i> on Joshua; also <i>Homily 4</i> on Leviticus, and <i>Homily 13</i> on Numbers), who names it "Scripture," quoting <a onclick="return mV('2Pe',1,4);">2Pe 1:4</a> 2:16; however (in EUSEBIUS [<i>Ecclesiastical History,</i> 6.25]), he mentions that the Second Epistle was doubted by some. FIRMILIAN, bishop of Cappadocia, in <i>Epistle to Cyrpian</i> speaks of Peter's <i>Epistles</i> as warning us to avoid heretics (a monition which occurs in the <i>Second,</i> not the <i>First</i> Epistle). Now <i>Cappadocia</i> is one of the countries mentioned (compare <a onclick="return mV('1Pe',1,1);">1Pe 1:1</a>) 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 <i>ought</i> to have been found" [TREGELLES].
|
|
<p>The books disputed (<i>Antilegomena</i>), as distinguished from those universally recognized (<i>Homologoumena</i>), are Epistles Second Peter, James, Second and Third John, Jude, the Apocalypse, Epistle to Hebrews (compare EUSEBIUS [<i>Ecclesiastical History,</i> 3.3,25]). The <i>Antilegomena</i> stand in quite a different class from the <i>Spurious;</i> of these there was no <i>dispute,</i> they were universally rejected; for example, <i>the Shepherd of Hermas, the Revelation of Peter, the Epistle of Barnabas.</i> CYRIL OF JERUSALEM (A.D. 348) enumerates <i>seven</i> Catholic Epistles, including Second Peter; so also GREGORY NAZIANZEN (A.D. 389), and EPIPHANIUS (A.D. 367). The oldest <i>Greek</i> manuscripts extant (of the fourth century) contain the <i>Antilegomena.</i> JEROME [<i>On Illustrious Men</i>], conjectured, from a supposed difference of style between the two Epistles, that Peter, being unable to write <i>Greek,</i> employed a different translator of his <i>Hebrew</i> dictation in the Second Epistle, and not the same as translated the First into <i>Greek.</i> 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 <a onclick="return mV('2Pe',3,'8-10');">2Pe 3:8-10</a>); the inspiration of the prophets (compare <a onclick="return mV('1Pe',1,'10-12');">1Pe 1:10-12</a> 3:2); the new birth by the divine word a motive to abstinence from worldly lusts (<a onclick="return mV('1Pe',1,22);">1Pe 1:22</a> 2:2; compare <a onclick="return mV('2Pe',1,4);">2Pe 1:4</a>); also compare <a onclick="return mV('1Pe',2,9);">1Pe 2:9</a>, both containing in the <i>Greek</i> the rare word "virtue" (<a onclick="return mV('1Pe',4,17);">1Pe 4:17</a>).
|
|
<p>It is not strange that <i>distinctive peculiarities</i> of STYLE should mark each Epistle, the design of both not being the same. Thus the <i>sufferings</i> of Christ are more prominent in the First Epistle, the object there being to encourage thereby Christian sufferers; the <i>glory</i> 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." <i>Hope</i> is characteristic of the First Epistle; <i>full knowledge,</i> of the Second Epistle. In the First Epistle he puts his <i>apostolic authority</i> 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 <a onclick="return mV('1Th',1,1);">1Th 1:1</a> <a onclick="return mV('2Th',1,1);">2Th 1:1</a> <a onclick="return mV('Phl',1,1);">Phl 1:1</a>, with <a onclick="return mV('Gal',1,1);">Gal 1:1</a> <a onclick="return mV('1Cr',1,1);">1Cr 1:1</a>. The reference to Paul's writings as already existing in numbers, and as then a recognized part of <i>Scripture</i> (<a onclick="return mV('2Pe',3,15);">2Pe 3:15</a>, <a onclick="return mV('2Pe',3,16);">16</a>), implies that this Epistle was written at a late date, just before Peter's death.
|
|
<p>Striking verbal coincidences occur: compare <a href= "#" onclick="return mV('1Pe',1,'19-25');">1Pe 1:19-25</a>; "His own," <i>Greek,</i> <a onclick="return mV('2Pe',1,3);">2Pe 1:3</a> <a onclick="return mV('2Pe',2,16);">2Pe 2:16</a> 3:17 . The omission of the <i>Greek</i> article, <a onclick="return mV('1Pe',2,13);">1Pe 2:13</a> 2:4, 5, 7 . Moreover, two words occur, <a onclick="return mV('2Pe',1,13);">2Pe 1:13</a>, "tabernacle," that is, the body, and <a onclick="return mV('2Pe',1,15);">2Pe 1:15</a>, "decease," which at once remind us of the transfiguration narrative in the Gospel. Both Epistles refer to the deluge, and to Noah as the <i>eighth</i> that was saved. Though the First Epistle abounds in <i>quotations</i> of the Old Testament, whereas the Second contains none, yet <i>references</i> to the Old Testament occur often (<a href= "#" onclick="return mV('2Pe',1,21);">2Pe 1:21</a> 2:5-8, 15 3:5, 6, 10, 13). Compare <i>Greek,</i> "putting away," <a onclick="return mV('1Pe',3,21);">1Pe 3:21</a>, with <a onclick="return mV('2Pe',1,14);">2Pe 1:14</a>; <i>Greek,</i> "<i>pass</i> the time," <a onclick="return mV('1Pe',1,17);">1Pe 1:17</a>, with <a onclick="return mV('2Pe',2,18);">2Pe 2:18</a>; "walked in," <a onclick="return mV('1Pe',4,3);">1Pe 4:3</a>, with <a onclick="return mV('2Pe',2,10);">2Pe 2:10</a> 3:3; "called you," <a onclick="return mV('1Pe',1,15);">1Pe 1:15</a> 2:9 5:10 , with <a href= "#" onclick="return mV('2Pe',1,3);">2Pe 1:3</a>.
|
|
<p>Moreover, more verbal coincidences with the speeches of Peter in Acts occur in this <i>Second,</i> than in the <i>First</i> Epistle. Compare <i>Greek,</i> "obtained," <a onclick="return mV('2Pe',1,1);">2Pe 1:1</a>; <i>Greek,</i> "godliness," <a onclick="return mV('2Pe',1,6);">2Pe 1:6</a>, with <a onclick="return mV('Act',3,12);">Act 3:12</a>, the only passage where the term occurs, except in the Pastoral Epistles; and <a onclick="return mV('2Pe',2,9);">2Pe 2:9</a>; "punished," <a onclick="return mV('2Pe',2,9);">2Pe 2:9</a>, with <a onclick="return mV('Act',4,21);">Act 4:21</a>, the only places where the term occurs; the double genitive, <a onclick="return mV('2Pe',3,2);">2Pe 3:2</a>, with <a onclick="return mV('Act',5,32);">Act 5:32</a>; "the day of the Lord," <a onclick="return mV('2Pe',3,10);">2Pe 3:10</a>, with <a onclick="return mV('Act',2,20);">Act 2:20</a>, where only it occurs, except in <a onclick="return mV('1Th',5,2);">1Th 5:2</a>.
|
|
<p><i>The testimony of Jude,</i> <a onclick="return mV('Jud',1,17);">Jud 1:17</a>, <a onclick="return mV('Jud',1,18);">18</a>, 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 <i>apostles</i> of our Lord Jesus Christ; how that they told you <i>there should be mockers in the last time, who should walk after their own ungodly lusts.</i>" Jude, therefore, must have written <i>after</i> 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. <a onclick="return mV('Jud',1,2);">Jud 1:2</a>, compare <a href= "#" onclick="return mV('2Pe',1,2);">2Pe 1:2</a>; <a onclick="return mV('Jud',1,4);">Jud 1:4</a>, compare <a href= "#" onclick="return mV('2Pe',2,1);">2Pe 2:1</a>; <a onclick="return mV('Jud',1,6);">Jud 1:6</a>, compare <a href= "#" onclick="return mV('2Pe',2,4);">2Pe 2:4</a>; <a onclick="return mV('Jud',1,7);">Jud 1:7</a>, compare <a href= "#" onclick="return mV('2Pe',2,6);">2Pe 2:6</a>; <a onclick="return mV('Jud',1,8);">Jud 1:8</a>, compare <a href= "#" onclick="return mV('2Pe',2,10);">2Pe 2:10</a>; <a onclick="return mV('Jud',1,9);">Jud 1:9</a>, compare <a href= "#" onclick="return mV('2Pe',2,11);">2Pe 2:11</a>; <a onclick="return mV('Jud',1,11);">Jud 1:11</a>, compare <a onclick="return mV('2Pe',2,15);">2Pe 2:15</a>; <a onclick="return mV('Jud',1,12);">Jud 1:12</a>, compare <a onclick="return mV('2Pe',2,17);">2Pe 2:17</a>; <a onclick="return mV('Jud',1,16);">Jud 1:16</a>, compare <a onclick="return mV('2Pe',2,18);">2Pe 2:18</a>; <a onclick="return mV('Jud',1,18);">Jud 1:18</a>, compare <a onclick="return mV('2Pe',2,1);">2Pe 2:1</a> 3:3 . Just in the same way Micah, <a onclick="return mV('Mic',4,'1-4');">Mic 4:1-4</a>, 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.
|
|
<p>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 <a onclick="return mV('2Pe',3,'10-13');">2Pe 3:10-13</a> so solemnly calls attention, after Paul's ministry had closed (compare <i>Greek</i> aorist tense, "wrote," past time, <a onclick="return mV('2Pe',3,15);">2Pe 3:15</a>), just before Peter's own death. It was written to <i>include</i> 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" (<a onclick="return mV('2Pe',1,1);">2Pe 1:1</a>), 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 <i>at Rome.</i> 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 <i>its more definite address,</i> was earlier in its general acceptance.
|
|
<p>OBJECT.—In <a onclick="return mV('2Pe',3,17);">2Pe 3:17</a>, <a onclick="return mV('2Pe',3,18);">18</a> 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" (<a onclick="return mV('2Pe',3,18);">2Pe 3:18</a>). The ground on which this <i>knowledge</i> rests is stated, <a onclick="return mV('2Pe',1,'12-21');">2Pe 1:12-21</a>, 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, <a onclick="return mV('2Pe',3,15);">2Pe 3:15</a>, <a onclick="return mV('2Pe',3,16);">16</a>) testified in the same region. The grand antidote is "the <i>full knowledge</i> 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 <i>suffering,</i> as of the future <i>reigning,</i> Saviour, His present <i>power,</i> and future new kingdom. This aspect is taken as best fitted to counteract the <i>theories</i> of the false teachers who should "deny" His <i>Lordship</i> and His <i>coming</i> again, the two very points which, as an <i>apostle and eye-witness,</i> Peter attests (His "power" and His "coming"); also, to counteract <i>their evil example in practice,</i> 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 <i>knowledge of Christ,</i> 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 <a onclick="return mV('2Pe',3,14);">2Pe 3:14</a>, <a onclick="return mV('2Pe',3,18);">18</a>, in both "grace" and "peace" being connected with "the knowledge" of our Saviour; compare also <a onclick="return mV('2Pe',3,17);">2Pe 3:17</a>; and <a onclick="return mV('2Pe',3,18);">2Pe 3:18</a>, "grow in grace and knowledge," with the fuller <a onclick="return mV('2Pe',1,'5-8');">2Pe 1:5-8</a>; and <a onclick="return mV('2Pe',2,21);">2Pe 2:21</a>; and <a onclick="return mV('2Pe',3,13);">2Pe 3:13</a>, "righteousness," with <a onclick="return mV('2Pe',1,1);">2Pe 1:1</a>; and <a onclick="return mV('2Pe',3,1);">2Pe 3:1</a>; and <a onclick="return mV('2Pe',3,2);">2Pe 3:2</a>.
|
|
<p>The <i>germs</i> of Carpocratian and Gnostic heresies already existed, but the actual manifestation of these heresies is spoken of as <i>future</i> (<a onclick="return mV('2Pe',2,1);">2Pe 2:1</a>, <a onclick="return mV('2Pe',2,2);">2</a>, &c.): another proof that this Epistle was written, as it professes, in the apostolic age, before the <i>development</i> 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.
|
|
<p>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 <i>freedom,</i> <a onclick="return mV('1Pe',2,16);">1Pe 2:16</a>, "While they promise them <i>liberty,</i> they themselves are the <i>servants of corruption</i>"; also the caution against <i>pride,</i> <a onclick="return mV('1Pe',5,5);">1Pe 5:5</a>, <a onclick="return mV('1Pe',5,6);">6</a>, "they speak great swelling words of vanity."
|
|
</div></div><div class="return"><a href="#top">Return to Top</a></div>
|
|
<script src="./js/MainFooter.js" type="text/javascript"></script> |