PETER (1st Epistle)

The author claims to be the apostle Peter (1 Peter 1:1). The authenticity of this letter is demonstrated by its content and by the testimony of numerous writers from the beginning of the Christian era. The epistle is addressed to the expatriates of the dispersion in Pontus, Galatia, Cappadocia, Asia and Bithynia (1 Pet. 1:1).

There are expositors who maintain that it is a letter addressed mostly to believers who emerged from paganism, relying on certain allusions of the apostle (1 Pet. 1:14; 2:9, 10; 3:6; 4:3). Other expositors, however, argue incisively that the letter was addressed to Jews who had come to believe in the Lord Jesus. Indeed:
(A) Peter’s ministry was officially directed toward “circumcision” (cf. Gal. 2:7).

(B) The allusions cited to support the position that the recipients came from Gentiles are applicable to Jews unaware of the Gospel. In particular, the passage most cited to support the position that these were Gentiles, 1 Pet. 2:10, “you who once were not a people,” is fully explainable with reference to the sentence passed by God on the people. Jew: “You are not my people” (Hos. 1:9); Only by their adherence to the Messiah would they once again be the people of God, and those Jews who confessed the Lord Jesus became the first fruits of that glorious fulfillment at the second coming of the Lord when the Jewish people, “lo-ammi” (not my people ), will once again be people of God (cf. Hos. 2:23), and children of the living God (cf. 1:10).

(C) Although it is true that Peter mentions that the conversion of his recipients was due to others (1 Pet. 1:12, 25), it does not constitute proof that they were converts of the apostle Paul among the Gentiles; This is apart from the fact that Paul had also preached in the synagogues of the Jews, as seen throughout Acts. In Acts. 8:4 states that “those who were scattered went everywhere proclaiming the gospel” after Stephen’s martyrdom. This first evangelization was carried out exclusively among Jews and Samaritans, with the exception of proselytes, such as the case of the Ethiopian eunuch (Acts 8:26-39).

In this epistle the regions of the recipients are mentioned from east to west, which is an indication that the letter was possibly written from the East. The allusion to the church in Babylon, in the greetings, supports this hypothesis (1 Pet. 5:13). The use made by the author of the Epistle to the Ephesians and the time of Peter’s death allow us to place the date of writing between the year 63 and 67; It is very likely that it was the year 64 or 65. A passage from the Second Epistle of Peter (2 Pet. 3:1, cf. 1:1) testifies that the first letter is from this apostle.

As for the external evidence of the authenticity of this letter, it is irrefutable. Authors as diverse as Clement of Alexandria, Irenaeus of Lyons, Tertullian of Carthage, affirm that it is Peter’s. Eusebius affirms that Papias and Polycarp knew her and cited her. Thus, from the beginning, this epistle has been confirmed by indisputable evidence. It has been objected that believers had not been persecuted “as Christians” (1 Pet. 4:16) until a later time.

However, this objection is worthless. Stephen had already died for the faith (Acts 6; 7), and numerous local and individual persecutions had already occurred long before the generalized persecutions, ordered by the emperors, were unleashed. Nor can it be objected that Peter did not know Greek, having Mark and Silvanus as assistants (1 Pet. 5:12-13).

Primera Pedro’s style is natural, pathetic, vehement. Peppered with sudden transitions, it admirably reflects the author’s character. The form is characteristic of Pedro; The doctrine is harmonious with that of Paul’s epistles, with a particular insistence on the grace of God, and the glorious hope of the Parousia. The text contains numerous reminiscences of the epistles to the Romans, the Ephesians, and the epistle of James (1 Pet. 2:6, 8, cf. Rom. 9:32, 33; 1 Pet. 2:5; 3 :8, 9; 4:7-11, cf. Rom. 12:1, 16, 17, and 3:6; 1 Pet. 2:18 and 3:1-7, cf. Eph. 5:22, 23 ; 6:5; 1 Pet. 1:1, 6, 7, 23 and 5:6, cf. James 1:1, 2, 3, 18 and 1 Pet. 4:10). The epistle is distinguished by its depth and beauty in the expression of the teaching.

Analysis:
Greetings (1 Pet. 1:1 2).
Introduction (1 Pet. 1:3-12), in which Peter thanks God for the blessings that flow from salvation.
The body of the epistle (1 Pet. 1:13-5:11) contains:
(A) Exhortations to holiness (1 Pet. 1:13-25)

(B) The Church, a living temple, of which Christ is the cornerstone (1 Pet. 2:1-8); the church as a royal priesthood (1 Pet. 2:9-10)

(C) Social duties of the Christian pilgrim, of the servant, of the spouses (1 Pet. 2:11-3:7)

(D) Communion with Christ in prayer, service, suffering, shame (1 Pet. 3:8-4:19)

(E) Duties of the elderly and the young. Greetings (1 Pet. 5:1-14)

Pedro vigorously highlights:
the sufferings of Christ and the atoning value of him (1 Pet. 1:11-19; 2:21-25; 3:18; 4:1, 13; 5:1);
the believer’s suffering with his Lord (1 Pet. 1:6, 7; 2:18-21; 3:13-18; 4:1-2, 12-19; 5:9-11);
regeneration (1 Pet. 1:3, 23-25; 2:2);

the Church and the priesthood of all believers (1 Pet. 2:4-10);
the resurrection and glorious coming of Christ (1 Pet. 1:3-5, 7-9, 11, 13, 21; 3:18, 21-22; 4:5, 13; 5:1, 4, 10- eleven).
All these doctrines, as well as the exhortations that accompany them, are clear and precise; They are consistent with the practical character that has to render, like Peter after Pentecost, a clean testimony about his Savior.

PETER (2nd Epistle)
The author of this second epistle names himself “Simon Peter, a servant and apostle of Jesus Christ” (2 Pet. 1:1); he claims to have witnessed the Transfiguration (2 Pet. 1:16), and to have received from Christ the prediction of his martyrdom (2 Pet. 1:14; cf. Jn. 21:19). He puts himself on an equal footing with Paul (2 Pet. 3:15).

The style presents a certain lack of simplicity and ease, which contrasts with the fluid and natural style of the first. From the time of Jerome this difference of expression became the argument of those who raised objections against the authenticity of the epistle. Jerome believes that these dissimilarities are due to Peter’s “secretaries-interpreters,” and it is quite possible that this was the case (cf. MARK).

Many modern critics attribute the letter to an anonymous author of the post-apostolic period, who would have written it under the name of Peter about a century after the latter’s death. However, while there are some differences in vocabulary, there are also compelling similarities. Nothing in the text gives any indication of a forgery. The autobiographical allusions are accurate; no imaginary details or anachronisms appear. Second Peter is totally different from apocryphal works such as “The Gospel of Peter” and the “Revelation of Peter.”

It has been stated that our epistle had been written at a later time when heresies were taking place that sought to rely on Paul’s writings (cf. 2 Pet. 3:15-16). However, in this passage there is actually an allusion to the epistle that Paul wrote to the Hebrews (see HEBREWS [EPISTLE TO THEM]), with an additional mention of the other epistles (a lit. translation of the passage would be: “According to the wisdom given to him, Paul wrote to you, as well as in all his epistles”) (emphasis on “in all his epistles” added).

The language mentions that Paul had written to “them”, evidently Peter’s Judeo-Christian recipients, and takes the opportunity to mention “also… all his epistles” written even then. In any case, this passage does not imply that there was a collection as such of Paul’s epistles, but that it was notorious that they had been written and that they were well known and, in certain cases, distorted and manipulated in their doctrinal and practical application. .

As for the apostasy that Peter combats, it cannot be said that it is more advanced than what Paul combated. Other internal evidence further corroborates the authenticity of the letter. Characteristic features of Peter and analogies with his speeches are found in it (cf. Acts). Like the First, the Second Epistle features a good number of singular words and the custom of presenting the negative and positive sides of a thought (e.g.: 1 Pet. 1:12, 14, 15, 18 and 2 P. 1:16, 21; 2:4, 5; 3:9, 17).

During the first two centuries, mentions regarding the use of the Second Epistle are infrequent and not very direct; but at the beginning of the third century, Origen alludes to the use of it in the churches, and speaks about Peter of the “two trumpets of his epistles.” Eusebius affirms that Second Peter, James and Jude are accepted by the majority, but that there were some who considered them “doubtful” (“antilegomena”).

The canon was created little by little, with great caution, at a time when there were a large number of false writings. If in the course of the 3rd and 4th centuries unanimity was reached to include Second Peter, as well as James, Jude and Revelation, in the formal canon, we can be certain that there was overwhelming proof, from both the internal and external aspects. , to lead to said unanimity (see CANON).

In fact, the objections that have been raised to the authenticity of the Second Epistle do not stand up to historical scrutiny. The author addresses, in a general way, “to those who have achieved… a faith equally precious as ours”; but 2 Pet. 3:1 shows that the recipients were the same as those of the First, or a group from among them.

The place of writing cannot be determined exactly. If the allusion in 2 Pet. 1:14 implies that Peter was about to be put to death, the place of writing could be placed in Rome, and the date of the epistle assigned to AD 68 or 67. Arguments in favor of these dates: the nature of the false doctrines denounced in the Second Epistle; the use that this epistle makes of that of Jude (or that which Jude makes of the epistle of Peter); the mention of the First Epistle of Peter.

Chapter 2 of Second Peter manifestly resembles the Epistle of Judas (cf. 2 Pet. 2:2, 4, 6, 11, 17). Regarding this, it is stated in many quarters that Judas borrowed from Peter, or vice versa. It is undeniable that one of them could have read the other’s Epistle, and it cannot be refuted that one wrote after the other.

However, the differences are as notable as the similarities. Peter is referring to evil, and God’s action against it in his government. Jude deals with apostasy as such. Thus, Peter refers to “the angels who sinned,” while Jude refers to “the angels who did not keep their dignity,” abandoning the place that God had appointed them (cf. 2 Peter 2:4; Jude 6). ).

Many other characteristics allow us to affirm a basic independence of Peter and Judas under inspiration, covering different objectives (cf. J. N. Darby, “The Similarity of the Epistle of Jude and one part of the Second Epistle of Peter”, in The Collected Writings of J. N. Darby , vol. 13, pp. 216-231).

Purpose of the letter, according to 2 Pet. 3:1, 17, 18: To remind the recipients of the teachings they had received, in order to warn them against the false doctrines then in vogue, and to facilitate their growth in the grace and knowledge of Jesus Christ, the Lord and Savior. This epistle was written to refute the Gnosticism that was already infiltrating the churches, and to strengthen Christians in sound doctrine and moral purity.

Content:
Apostolic greetings (2 Pet. 1:1, 2).
Solemn exhortations to grow spiritually and intellectually (2 Pet. 1:3-11).
Foundations on which knowledge rests, and which is the basis of piety (2 Pet. 1:12-21).
Condemnation of false doctors (2 Pet. 2:1-22).

Remembrance of the teachings of Jesus Christ, the prophets and the apostles regarding the coming of the Lord and the end of the world (2 Pet. 3:1-13). Exhortations to grow in holiness, ready to receive the Lord upon his return. Allusion to the value of Paul’s Epistles as Scripture.
Final doxology (2 Pet. 3:14-18).