Peter 1 and 2 – The Way

This is a very long page with that addresses many issues with these two books.

Extracts from Hugo Medez’s slide from Lesson 25: The Other Apostles Speak, II: The Letters of Peter of his course at BSA The New Testament: Exploring the Christian Bible.

1 Peter

The letter also inhabits a very broad context temporally, making it a difficult letter to date more precisely. – It positions itself at the end of time. “The end of all things is at hand; therefore keep sane and sober for your prayers.” (1Peter 4:7)

Like James, 1 Peter also shows knowledge of Paul’s letters, but it draws on those letters positively-approvingly. In many ways, the letter feels “Pauline” in tone and language. There are “dozens” of parallels like below.

“…if the first word ‘Peter’ were missing from our ‘letter,’ nobody would have guessed it
might have been authored by Peter.” (A. Jülicher and E. Fascher, Einleitung in das NT; tr.
Ehrman, Forgery and Counterforgery)
– 1 Peter uses many expressions from Paul’s writings, of which these are a small sample:
“In Christ” language (3:16; 5:10, 14)
“Do not return evil for evil” (3:9; cf. Rom. 12:17)
Basic Christian teaching as “milk” (2:2; cf. 1 Cor. 3:2)

1 Peter also seems to strangely presuppose something that feels more like it comes from the life of Paul than the life of Peter.

Addresses a region connected with Paul’s known missions (not those of Peter): i.e. Asia Minor.
Associates Peter with companions of Paul: Silvanus and Mark 5:12–13; cf. 1 Thess. 1:1; Acts 12:25.

Quote from Bart Ehrman, Forgery and Counterforgery, pg. 259.

“1 Peter is a book that shows Peter and Paul standing face-to-face and agreeing point-by-point. of the ultimate leaders of the church—the apostles themselves—is particularly important. To show the deeply rooted harmony of the church in the face of ongoing opposition, an unknown author wrote a book of encouragement, claiming to be Peter, but sounding like Paul.”

2 Peter

Like 1 Peter, 2 Peter presents itself as one written by Jesus’ disciple:

“Simon Peter, a servant and apostle of Jesus Christ” (2 Peter 1:1)
“For we did not follow cleverly devised myths when we made known to you the power and coming of our Lord Jesus Christ, but we were eyewitnesses of his majesty. For when he received honor and glory from God the Father and the voice was borne to him by the Majestic Glory, “This is my beloved Son, with whom I am well pleased,” we heard this voice borne from heaven, for we were with him on the holy mountain.” (2 Peter 1:16–18; cf. Mark 9:2–8)
2 Peter presents itself quite explicitly as a letter written after 1 Peter:
But 2 Peter has a character all its own. It is, in essence, Peter’s last will and testament, written shortly before his death (cf. Paul and 2 Timothy).
Interestingly, 2 Peter has a special, peculiar relationship with another Catholic epistle: Jude. Both are strikingly similar in structure and wording. 2 Peter is more or less a condensation of Jude. The two even presuppose the same situation: they warn about the rise of false teachers (again, in remarkably similar terms).
The letter seems to have been written at a time when Christians were increasingly uncomfortable with the delay of Jesus’ return. “In the last days scoffers will come, scoffing and indulging their own lusts and saying, “Where is the promise of his coming? (2 Pet. 3:4)
In the letter, the voice of Peter endorses Paul’s writings as scripture. “So also our beloved brother Paul wrote to you according to the wisdom given him, speaking of this as he does in all his letters. There are some things in them hard to understand, which the ignorant and unstable twist to their own destruction, as they do the other scriptures.” (2 Pet. 3:15–16)

Notes from Bart Ehrman’s podcast here.

He does not believe Peter wrote either gospel and said most scholars agree he did not write 2 Peter.
The literary style between the two is quite different.
1 Peter is in a very sophisticated Greek.
The writer of 1 Peter is using the Septuagint and does not appear to know Hebrew much less Aramaic.
1 Peter’s theology is very close to Paul’s.
1 Peter ends with reference to the writer being in “Babylon”. That is understood to be a code word for Rome used by many after 70 CE. Peter was not alive then. Hugo says that Babylon destroyed the 1st temple like Rome destroyed the 2nd temple and hence Babylon means “temple destroyer”.

From Bart’s post titled “1 and 2 Peter and Jude “At a Glance” here.

1 Peter at a Glance

1 Peter claims to be written by Simon Peter, the close disciple of Jesus. Modern scholars have shown reasons to doubt this ascription.
It may have been written in Peter’s name by a later Christian living near the end of the first century. If so, it is one of a number of early Christian pseudepigrapha allegedly written by Peter.
The book is addressed to Christians in Asia Minor who have been experiencing persecution.
The book is written to encourage them in their suffering, to explain why it is happening to them, and to urge them to remain faithful to God in the midst of it so that they may earn an eternal reward for their wrongful mistreatment.

2 Peter at a Glance

Among the writings of the New Testament is the one most widely believed to be pseudepigraphic – that is, not written by the person the author claims to be.
It is stylistically very different from 1 Peter, almost certainly coming from a different (pseudonymous) author.
The author harshly opposes a group of Christians that he considers false teachers, but unfortunately he does not indicate what they actually taught.
He is particularly concerned to show that even though the “end” was supposed to arrive “soon” but had not, in fact, yet appeared, it really was to be expected soon – God had put off the end for a while, and in any case the prediction meant “soon” according to God’s way of judging time, not humans’.

From OpenAI. (2024). ChatGPT [Large language model]. https://chatgpt.com, 11/10/2024

First Prompt – What are the themes of the bible books 1 Peter and 2 Peter. Cite verses using the NSRV that reflect Jesus’ teaching and those that reflect Paul’s teaching. List all sources at the end of the response.

The books of 1 Peter and 2 Peter emphasize faithfulness under persecution, living a godly life, and being vigilant against false teachings, drawing from both the teachings of Jesus and Paul. Here’s a breakdown of the main themes in each book with related verses that reflect these influences.

Themes in 1 Peter

1. Suffering and Perseverance:
1 Peter addresses a community facing persecution, encouraging them to persevere in faith, as Christ suffered for righteousness.

“For it is better to suffer for doing good, if suffering should be God’s will, than to suffer for doing evil.” (1 Peter 3:17, NRSV)
Jesus’ teaching influence is seen in the emphasis on suffering for righteousness, echoing the Sermon on the Mount (Matthew 5:10-12).

2. Holiness in Conduct:
Peter calls believers to live holy and set-apart lives in response to God’s calling, mirroring Paul’s themes of holiness and sanctification.

“Instead, as he who called you is holy, be holy yourselves in all your conduct; for it is written, ‘You shall be holy, for I am holy.’” (1 Peter 1:15-16, NRSV)
Paul’s influence is evident here, especially in 1 Thessalonians 4:7, which stresses that God called believers to live a holy life.

3. Christian Community and Mutual Love:
The letter emphasizes community support and love among believers, especially in times of hardship.

“Above all, maintain constant love for one another, for love covers a multitude of sins.” (1 Peter 4:8, NRSV)
This reflects both Jesus’ commandment to love one another (John 13:34) and Paul’s instructions to bear each other’s burdens (Galatians 6:2).

Themes in 2 Peter

1. Warning Against False Teachers:
A central theme in 2 Peter is vigilance against false teachings and heresies that could mislead believers.

“But false prophets also arose among the people, just as there will be false teachers among you, who will secretly bring in destructive opinions.” (2 Peter 2:1, NRSV)
Paul also warned of false teachers in the early church, as seen in 2 Corinthians 11:13-15 and 1 Timothy 4:1.

2. The Return of Christ and Final Judgment:
2 Peter highlights the certainty of Christ’s return and the final judgment, urging believers to live in anticipation.

“But the day of the Lord will come like a thief, and then the heavens will pass away with a loud noise, and the elements will be dissolved with fire, and the earth and everything that is done on it will be disclosed.” (2 Peter 3:10, NRSV)
This echoes Jesus’ warnings about the suddenness of his return (Matthew 24:43-44) and Paul’s teaching on the “day of the Lord” (1 Thessalonians 5:2).

3. Spiritual Growth and Knowledge of God:
Peter stresses the importance of growing in grace and knowledge to remain steadfast in faith.

“But grow in the grace and knowledge of our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ.” (2 Peter 3:18, NRSV)
This aligns with Paul’s emphasis on maturing in faith, as seen in Ephesians 4:13-15.

Summary of Influence

Both letters of Peter draw from the teachings of Jesus and the Apostle Paul, blending exhortations to endure hardship, live holy lives, and guard against false teachings. Peter’s writings affirm the importance of steadfastness, communal love, and spiritual growth while anticipating Christ’s return.

Sources

The Holy Bible, New Revised Standard Version (NRSV)
Commentary on the New Testament by Robert H. Gundry
The First Epistle of Peter and the Second Epistle of Peter in The New Interpreter’s Bible Commentary

2nd Prompt – Do bible scholars believe that 1 Peter and 2 Peter support Paul’s theology or Jesus’?

Bible scholars have debated whether 1 Peter and 2 Peter align more closely with Paul’s theology or directly with Jesus’ teachings. Overall, many scholars conclude that both epistles are generally supportive of Paul’s theology, though they also reflect early Christian perspectives influenced by Jesus’ teachings.

1 Peter and Paul’s Theology

1 Peter shares thematic overlap with Paul’s letters, particularly in its emphasis on submission, suffering, and the role of Christians within society (e.g., 1 Peter 2:13-25). These topics align with Paul’s themes, especially his teachings on enduring hardship and modeling Christ’s humility (e.g., Philippians 2:5-11). Many scholars suggest that 1 Peter draws on Pauline ideas, especially since both letters emphasize a Christ-centered approach to suffering and salvation, though 1 Peter’s tone tends to be more pastoral.

2 Peter and Paul’s Theology

2 Peter has an even clearer connection to Paul. In fact, it explicitly references Paul, referring to his writings as “Scriptures” and acknowledging some of Paul’s teachings as difficult to understand (2 Peter 3:15-16). This mention is often seen as evidence of respect and continuity with Paul’s theology. Scholars view 2 Peter as affirming Paul’s teachings, particularly on the themes of divine judgment, the certainty of Christ’s return, and warnings against false teachers.

The Influence of Jesus’ Teachings

Both epistles also reflect Jesus’ teachings in their moral instructions and call for righteous living. The writers appeal to the ethical teachings of Jesus, emphasizing humility, love, and perseverance. This alignment shows that while Peter’s epistles may support and develop Pauline theology, they are not devoid of Jesus’ teachings and moral principles.

Scholarly Consensus

Most scholars agree that 1 Peter and 2 Peter support Paul’s theological framework, presenting it as compatible with Jesus’ teachings, rather than positioning one against the other. Thus, these epistles serve as a bridge, harmonizing Paul’s theology with the moral and ethical teachings that Jesus himself promoted.

From ChatGPT on 6/18/2025.

There are no early historical records confirming that the apostle Peter dictated the two New Testament letters bearing his name (1 Peter and 2 Peter) to John Mark around AD 53, nor that both were written from Rome near the end of his life. However, this idea combines traditional Christian claims with later church tradition and assumptions, which critical scholars examine with caution. Here’s a breakdown:

Traditional View (Church Tradition)

1 Peter:
- Claims authorship by “Peter, an apostle of Jesus Christ” (1 Peter 1:1).
- Mentions “Babylon” (1 Peter 5:13) — often interpreted as a code for Rome.
- Early church tradition (e.g., Papias, Irenaeus, and Eusebius) associates John Mark as Peter’s interpreter or scribe.
- Many church fathers believed Peter wrote 1 Peter through Mark, perhaps toward the end of his life (mid-60s AD).
2 Peter:
- Claims to be from “Simon Peter, a servant and apostle of Jesus Christ” (2 Peter 1:1).
- Highly disputed in authorship — many critical scholars consider it pseudepigraphal (written in Peter’s name by someone else, likely in the early 2nd century).
- No early external attestations that Mark had anything to do with 2 Peter.

What Do Critical Bible Scholars Say?

1 Peter:

Date: Usually dated to early 60s AD if authentic.
Authorship: Many critical scholars doubt Peter himself wrote it, mainly because:
- The Greek is very sophisticated for a Galilean fisherman.
- The context fits better with a Gentile Christian audience in Asia Minor — which might not have been Peter’s direct mission field.
Some propose a secretary (like Silvanus or Mark) could have polished Peter’s thoughts (cf. 1 Peter 5:12).
A minority of scholars accept Petrine authorship, partly based on the Mark connection (per Papias).

2 Peter:

Date: Commonly dated to 110–140 AD by critical scholars.
Authorship: Widely considered not by Peter:
- Style and vocabulary differ strongly from 1 Peter.
- Echoes of later church structure and literary dependence on Jude (which is also late).
- References to a growing corpus of Pauline letters as “scripture” (2 Peter 3:15–16), suggesting later development.

Sources of the John Mark Dictation Tradition:

Papias (early 2nd century, cited by Eusebius) claimed Mark was Peter’s interpreter and recorded his teachings (usually applied to the Gospel of Mark, not the epistles).
Eusebius, Ecclesiastical History 2.15–16, 3.39.
Irenaeus, Against Heresies 3.1.1 — says Mark wrote what Peter preached.
These do not mention Peter dictating 1 or 2 Peter to Mark — only possibly the Gospel of Mark.

Summary:

No early source says Peter dictated 1 and 2 Peter to John Mark around AD 53.
1 Peter may have used a secretary or scribe (like Silvanus or possibly Mark), but this is speculative.
2 Peter is likely not written by Peter, according to most modern critical scholars.
The idea that both were written from Rome near the end of Peter’s life is based on later tradition, not direct evidence.

Here is a timeline showing how the idea that Peter wrote (or dictated) the letters of 1 Peter and 2 Peter developed — tracing from early Christian tradition through modern critical scholarship.

Timeline: Development of Petrine Authorship Tradition

30s–60s AD: Peter’s Active Ministry

Peter is a key leader in the Jerusalem church (Acts 1–15).
No surviving letters or documents from Peter confirmed to be written during this time.
He reportedly travels (Antioch, Corinth, possibly Rome) — Mark is occasionally associated with him (1 Peter 5:13; Acts 12:12, 15:37–39; Colossians 4:10).

c. 64–67 AD: Death of Peter (Traditional View)

According to later tradition (e.g., Eusebius quoting Origen), Peter is martyred in Rome under Nero.
No contemporary source records this directly — the earliest hints are decades later.

c. 70–90 AD: Gospel of Mark Written

Papias (c. 110) later claims that Mark served as Peter’s interpreter and wrote his memories down, resulting in the Gospel of Mark.
This leads later generations to believe Peter could have dictated other writings.

c. 80–110 AD: 1 Peter Possibly Written

Many scholars date 1 Peter to this range — possibly during Peter’s life (if authentic), or by a disciple after his death.
The letter mentions “Babylon” (likely a symbolic term for Rome), and is written in high Greek.
If Peter used a secretary or scribe, this may explain the polished language.

c. 110–140 AD: 2 Peter Likely Composed

Majority of modern scholars view 2 Peter as pseudepigraphal:
- Possibly written to preserve or promote Peter’s authority.
- References Pauline letters as “scripture” (2 Peter 3:15–16) — indicating a later canon consciousness.

c. 110–140 AD: Papias’ Testimony

Papias (quoted by Eusebius) claims that Mark wrote down Peter’s teachings — no mention of Peter’s letters.
Sets foundation for later belief in a Mark-Peter literary connection.

180 AD: Irenaeus

Affirms that Mark wrote what Peter preached (Against Heresies 3.1.1).
Says nothing specific about 1 or 2 Peter.

c. 200–250 AD: Origen and Others

Origen accepts 1 Peter as genuine but is unsure about 2 Peter.
First to report that Peter was crucified in Rome, giving rise to the image of Peter’s martyrdom under Nero.

c. 300 AD: Eusebius of Caesarea

Ecclesiastical History:
- Accepts 1 Peter as authentic.
- Says 2 Peter is disputed and rarely cited by early sources.
- Asserts that Mark wrote down Peter’s preaching (gospel), not epistles.

367 AD: Athanasius’ Festal Letter

Lists both 1 Peter and 2 Peter in the canonical New Testament.
By this point, both letters are considered Scripture by most of the church, despite lingering doubts about 2 Peter.

Modern Critical Scholarship (19th–21st c.)

1800s–present:

1 Peter:
- Possibly authentic, though many believe it was written by a follower of Peter using his name and authority.
- May have used a secretary, such as Silvanus (named in 1 Peter 5:12).
- Stylistic polish and theological maturity raise questions of direct authorship.
2 Peter:
- Largely rejected as authentic by critical scholars.
- Seen as a late, pseudonymous work addressing concerns of the early 2nd century.
- Language, theology, and literary dependence on Jude suggest a different author.
Connection to John Mark:
- Remains unconfirmed.
- Based on early tradition about Mark’s Gospel, not the epistles.

Summary Table

Time Period	View on 1 Peter	View on 2 Peter	Mark’s Role
60s AD	Possibly written by Peter	Not written yet	Traveling companion of Peter
110–200	Possibly written by Peter or follower	Possibly pseudonymous	Said to record Peter’s preaching (not letters)
200–300	Widely accepted	Still disputed	Associated with Peter’s gospel teachings
Post-300	Both letters canonical	Doubts fade	Tradition links Mark to Peter in Rome
Modern Era	Authorship debated	Widely seen as pseudepigraphal	No evidence Mark wrote the epistles