Saint Peter

Further Detail on the Authenticity of 2 Peter

There was controversy over the book in the Western Church until the early 4th century over the authenticity of 2 Peter (that is, that Peter was the author). In the East as well, the work was not accepted universally for an even longer period; the Syriac Church only admitted it into the canon in the 6th century.

~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~

It is to be noted, however, that the church historian Eusebius remarks on Origen's reference to the epistle before 250. In the collection of Cyprian's letters, the Bishop Firmilian speaks in favor of authenticity. Many scholars have noted the similarities between pseudo-2 Clement (1st century - related to Clement of Rome) and 2 Peter. Several early church writers, the author of the Epistle of Barnabas and the Shepherd of Hermas among others, make allusions to the letter, which may give it an earlier priority.

~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~

2 Peter may be earlier than 250 AD, but there is no reference to it dating back to the first century or even the early second century. The strongest evidence that it is a late forgery is the reference in 3:15 to "our beloved brother Paul," and to Paul's writings as "Scriptures." Many historians believe that relations between Paul and Peter were tense, even antagonistic (see Galatians 2:11), and it would thus be impossible that Simon considered his opponent's letters as "Scripture." In fact, even for followers of Paul, the elevation of the Pauline epistles to scriptural status would have been far more gradual and slow.

~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~