Comparison to Other New Testament Writings

1 Peter

Much has been made over the differences between 1 Peter and 2 Peter. In fact, the primary reason given for doubt by the early church appears to be the large difference in both style and vocabulary between the two. There are also differences in the theological content and this we will consider first. The major complaints are as follows: there is too much emphasis on human effort,²⁸ salvation is mostly in the future sense, and the major themes in 1 Peter (the cross, resurrection,²⁹ ascension, baptism, and prayer) do not occur in 2 Peter.³⁰ Due to space all of these objections cannot be considered, but all of them can be accounted for by considering an author writing two separate letters for two separate problems. The content is admittedly different, but nothing in 2 Peter falls outside of orthodox teaching and there is nothing in 2 Peter that makes it so incompatible with 1 Peter that the same man could not have penned both works. Further, had 2 Peter been too similar to 1 Peter in theological content, some may have used this as evidence of pseudepigraphy.

The stylistic differences are more problematic. Grammarians agree that, in general, 2 Peter is of a rougher style and that its vocabulary is less refined and more “grandiose” than 1 Peter.³¹ The most common explanation for this is that either Peter used two difference amanuenses or that an amanuensis wrote 1 Peter while Peter himself wrote 2 Peter. 1 Peter 5:2 says that the epistle was written “with the help of Silas” who may have cleaned up Peter’s grammar. Paul also used amanuenses (Rom. 16:22 cf. Col. 4:18) and the early church considered this to be the reason for the difference in style.³²

Although the vocabulary is notably different between the two epistles, the difference appears exaggerated when compared to other New Testament writings clearly written by the same hand. While not all scholars agree that Paul wrote 1 & 2 Timothy and Titus, the scholars do agree that all three letters were written by the same hand. Yet in comparing 1 Timothy and Titus, we find nearly as many differences in vocabulary as between 1 and 2 Peter.³³ Much like the differences in theology, the differences in style between 1 and 2 Peter are not enough to conclusively say both epistles could not have been written by the same hand.

Jude

The most peculiar problem with 2 Peter is its inclusion of 21 of the 24 verses in Jude. The content is arranged differently in Peter and Jude, with Peter holding to the chronology of the Old Testament. Many attempts have been made to show one author’s literary dependence on the other and while most agree that 2 Peter is dependant on Jude, there are respected works arguing for Jude’s dependence on 2 Peter.

If Jude’s date can be shown to be any later than the death of Peter (A.D. 64) and that 2 Peter is dependant on Jude, then the author of 2 Peter obviously could not have been Peter. Unfortunately, the evidence for Jude’s dating is no better than for 2 Peter and it remains possible that Jude could be written after 2 Peter. With no conclusive evidence either way, we are left to speculate on why either author may have used so much of the other. Probably, the best ideas propose that Peter included Jude’s content because Jude’s epistle was not widely known, either because it was rejected for some reason or because it only had a limited circulation at the time of 2 Peter’s writing.³⁴

Speeches in Acts

Lastly, some work has been done to consider any links between Peter’s speeches recorded in Acts and his epistles. All that can be said is that some general similarities exist and these similarities are enough to assume that the man speaking in Acts could have written 1 & 2 Peter.