Biblical commentary on the New Testament - The Christian ...

7
THE SECOND EPISTLE OF PETER. XCVU
is, not so much whether they are genuine or spurious, as who was
their author, in regard to the second Epistle of Peter, the question
is, in truth, whether the Apostle Peter composed it, or some other
Peter, or somebody of another name, who meant no harm, but still
purposely endeavoured to deceive his readers into the belief that it
was written by Simon Peter, the Apostle of our Lord. In the first
place, the author of the Epistle not only expressly appropriates
Peter's name and title, " Simon Peter, a servant and apostle of
Jesus Christ" (2 Pet. i. 1), but he also states particulars respecting
his own life, which can have been true only of Peter. He says, for
instance, " For we have not followed cunningly-devised fables, when
we made known unto you the power and coming of our Lord Jesus
Christ, but were eye-witnesses of his majesty. For he received
from Grod the Father honour and glory, when there came such a
voice to him from the excellent glory, This is my beloved Son, in
whom I am well pleased. And this voice, which came from heaven,
we heard, lohen we ivere ivith him in the holy mount," (2 Pet. i. 16
— 18). These words, it is clear, refer to the transfiguration on the
mount (Matt. xvii. 1, seq.) But, besides James and John, the two
sons of Zebedee, no one was a spectator of this transfiguration ex-
cept the Apostle Peter. If, therefore, the Apostle Peter was not
the author of this letter, the man who not only presumed to take
upon himself the name of an apostle, but designedly endeavoured to
make his readers think that he was the Apostle Peter, must have
been a downright shameless imposter ; and his production should by
no means retain its place in the canon, but it is necessary that it
should be at once thrust out of it.
It is for this very reason, viz., because the necessity of which we
have spoken has been sensibly felt, that the friends of the work have
so zealously prosecuted the investigation respecting it ; though certainly
not alwevs with due impartiality and coolness. It has been
forgotten that in truth very important objections may be urged
against the Petrine origin of this second Epistle, and it has been
attempted to establish its genuineness as firmly and incontrovertibly
as it is possible to establish that of other writings. The best
weapon, however, which can be used in defence of God's word, is
always truth ; and this compels us to admit that it is impossible to
attain so firm and certain proof of the genuineness of the second
Epistle of Peter, as of that of other books of the New Testament.
But certainly the opponents of the Epistle err greatly when they
assert that the spuriousness of the Epistle can be fully established.
Such an assertion cannot but be denied with all earnestness, even
though, as is often the case, it be connected with the opinion, that
the Epistle may notwithstanding retain its place in the canon as
hitherto, and be cited by preachers of the Gospel in their pulpit in-
VoL. L—