On the basis of both external and internal evidence, the canonicity and the authorship of Second Peter have been attacked more than that of any other New Testament book. However, upon close investigation it can be demonstrated that these rejections rest more upon subjective speculation than upon positive proof.

It is true that second-century Church Fathers did not comment upon the Epistle in their writings, but their silence should not be used as an argument against the nonexistence of the book in their day or against its Petrine authorship. Silence must be looked upon as being neutral. Any suggested reason for their silence must be regarded as plausible speculation. Evangelicals generally explain their silence by the late date of its composition, its brevity, and its limited distribution; however, even this view cannot be proved to the satisfaction of all. Furthermore, no extant third-century writing denied its Petrine authorship. Eusebius quoted Origen as saying "Peter has left one acknowledged Epistle, and perhaps a second, for it is disputed." The names of the disputers were not mentioned, so no one for sure knows who they were. In addition to Origen’s probable acceptance, Methodius and Firmilian attested to its authenticity. Fourth-century writers (Jerome, Athanasius, Augustine, and Ambrose) accepted it and so did the famous church councils at Laodicea (a.d. 372) and Carthage (a.d. 397). Although objective proof in the form of direct patristic quotations is not as extensive as that for other New Testament books, the testimonies do favor the Petrine authorship of the Epistle. The argument of the opposition does not rest upon a variety of firm statements denying its authenticity, but rather upon silence.

In relationship to the internal contents, opponents of Petrine authorship usually point to contrasts of writing style and vocabulary between the two Epistles. This typical liberal argument can usually be explained by the differences in subject matter, in the circumstances that created the writing, and in the use of a different amanuensis. It may even be that Peter used Silvanus to write the First Epistle (5:12) and that the apostle wrote the second one by himself. Arguments based upon style and vocabulary are admittedly subjective. Actually, there is ample similarity between the two Epistles in content, grammar, and use of words to suggest a single author for both of them. Both salutations are identical as far as word choice and order: "Grace to you and peace be multiplied" (literal translation, 1 Peter 1:2; cf. 1:2). Several unique words are common to both books: "precious" (1:1, 4; cf. 1 Peter 1:7, 19; 2:6–7); "put off" or "putting away" (1:14; cf. 1 Peter 3:21); "eyewitness" or "behold" (1:16; cf. 1 Peter 2:12; 3:2); "supply" (1:5, 11; cf. 1 Peter 4:11); "conversation" (2:7; 3:11; cf. 1 Peter 1:15, 18; 2:12; 3:1, 2, 16); and "brotherly kindness" or "love of the brethren" (1:7; cf. 1 Peter 1:22). The phrase "without spot, and blameless" or "without blemish and without spot" occurs in both (3:14; cf. 1 Peter 1:19; see also 2:13).

There is also a striking resemblance between the language of the Second Epistle and that of Peter’s sermons recorded by Luke; "obtained" (1:1; cf. Acts 1:17); "godliness" or "holiness" (1:3, 6, 7; 3:11; cf. Acts 3:12); "unlawful" or "wicked" (2:8; cf. Acts 2:23); "reward of unrighteousness" or "iniquity" (2:13, 15; cf. Acts 1:18); and "the day of the Lord" (3:10; cf. Acts 2:20).

The writer identified himself as "Simon Peter" (1:1). He used Sumeon rather than the common Simon (cf. Matt. 16:17). If this book had been written by a forger or by a person using the pseudonym of Peter, he would have used the common Hebrew designation to avoid drawing attention to himself. Only the real Peter would have identified himself in this way to readers who knew him affectionately by that name. Many critics claim that pseudonymity was a well-known literary practice in the ancient world; however, there is no indication that the church which believed in honesty and truth accepted its use. In fact, many pseudepigrapha ("false writings") bearing the names of the apostles were rejected.

Within the book Peter made several references to his past personal relationships with Christ. He knew that his martyrdom was imminent as predicted by Christ during His postresurrection ministry (1:13–14; cf. John 21:18–19). He spoke of the significance of his eyewitness account of the transfiguration of Christ (1:15–18; cf. Matt. 17:1–13).

Peter identified this letter as his second one: "This second epistle, beloved, I now write unto you" (3:1). The fact that he did not locate the geographical home of his readers (1:1) would cause one to believe that he wrote to those he had addressed in his First Epistle (1:1). The strong authentication of the Petrine authorship of the First Epistle should therefore support his authorship of the second because of the continuity between the two books. They are two volumes of the same set. Jude apparently used Second Peter and recognized its author as an apostle (Jude vv. 17–18; cf. 3:1–3). Actually, the quotation by Jude serves as first-century evidence of the existence and the inspired, authoritative nature of the Epistle. The claim that the false teachers (2:1–3:5) represent second-century heretics cannot be supported objectively. The New Testament constantly warned against the present and future presence of apostates (Acts 20:29–31; Rom. 16:17–18; 1 Tim. 4:1; 2 Tim. 3:8; 1 John 2:18–19; 4:1). Peter was simply describing the false teachers of the middle of the first century.

In conclusion, it can be demonstrated that the alleged attacks upon the Petrine authorship are not as awesome as first voiced. Furthermore, a strong case for his authorship can be established by a careful study of both the patristic writings and the internal contents of the Epistle.

Peter knew that the provinces of Asia Minor would soon be invaded by false teachers (2:1; 3:3). These apostates were known to him and were already influencing Christians in other areas with their moral and doctrinal errors (2:12, 17, 18; 3:5, 16). Their heresy involved a denial of Christ’s deity, His atonement, and His second advent (2:1; 3:4), stemming from intellectual arrogance and immoral living. Peter had to write this Epistle, therefore, to warn the believers. It probably was composed shortly after the First Epistle and just months before his martyrdom, placing it somewhere in the a.d. 64–67 range. There is no indication where Peter was at the time of writing. Since tradition placed his martyrdom in Rome, he may have been in that city at that time.

Peter knew that it was his responsibility to remind his readers of proper Christian doctrine and ethics (1:12–13). However, he also knew that he was about to die (1:14). In order for his readers to have a permanent, written record of his teaching after his decease, he purposed to write (1:15; 3:1). In this Epistle, therefore, he wanted to encourage his readers to grow into Christian maturity (1:1–11), to explain the imminence of his death (1:12–15), to show how the transfiguration of Christ guaranteed His second coming (1:16–18), to inform them that the truth of the second advent was not a human-originated concept (1:19–21), to describe the moral and doctrinal characteristics of the false teachers (2:1–22), to explain the delay in Christ’s return (3:1–9), to describe the destruction of the universe in the Day of the Lord (3:10–14), to elaborate further the doctrinal ignorance of the false teachers (3:15–16), and to stimulate vigilance and growth on the part of his readers (3:17–18).

Peter emphasized knowledge as the best safeguard against the inroads of apostasy. Various cognate forms of the verb "to know" are found sixteen times in the Epistle (1:2, 3, 5, 6, 8, 12, 14, 16, 20; 2:9, 20, 21 [twice]; 3:3, 17, 18).

This Epistle contains one of the two key passages on the inspiration of Scripture (cf. 2 Tim. 3:16):

No doubt Peter had in mind the Old Testament, but the principle underlying the composition of those thirty-nine books also pertains to the New. He linked together the ancient prophets with the present apostles (3:2) and specifically associated Paul’s writings with theirs (3:15–16). Paul stated the fact that the Scripture was God-breathed at the very moment of human composition (2 Tim. 3:16). Peter explained the method by which this could be accomplished. The Bible did not originate within the thought processes or the willful determination of any man or men. Rather, holy men of God (not unholy men or holy men of a false religion) spoke and wrote as they were borne along by the will and activity of the Holy Spirit. Since the Scripture came into being in this way, no one by human determination or intelligence can understand it. The Holy Spirit must direct one in the interpretation of the text as well as in the inspiration of the text.

The book also contains a classic description of the destruction of the heavens and the earth by fire in the Day of the Lord (3:10–13). Jesus said that the heaven and the earth would pass away (Matt. 24:35); this passage gives the method. Astronomers claim that the sun and the stars are burning down and that eventually the entire universe will be cold and lifeless. However, Peter predicted that the world would end by a catastrophic, divine judgment. With the advent of the thermonuclear era, men’s understanding of noise, melting, fervent heat, burning, and fire has increased. It is not unthinkable today to imagine a continuing series of thermonuclear explosions that could destroy the entire earth.

Peter also made a valuable comment upon Paul’s Epistles (3:15–16). His mention of "all his epistles" does not mean that Peter was familiar with all thirteen of Paul’s letters. Even though such was within the realm of human possibility, it is very highly improbable that he could have read all of them. It does reveal that the letters of the apostles were being copied and circulated among the churches even during the lifetime of the apostles. His mentioning "longsuffering" and "salvation" could mean that Peter was referring to First Timothy specifically (cf. 1 Tim. 1:15–16). In accordance with a previously stated principle (1:20–21), he acknowledged that Paul’s spiritual wisdom was given to him by God and that this wisdom produced his writings. He also compared Paul’s Epistles with the other Scriptures, namely the Old Testament. The use of "other" is all-important because this means that Peter regarded Paul’s writings as Scripture, equal in authority and equal in difficulty of interpretation by unsaved men. This demonstrates that one authenticated writer of inspired Scripture recognized the authority of another authenticated writer.

Salutation (1:1–2)

The best defense is a strong offense. Peter illustrated that axiom by calling his readers to a life of maturity as the best safeguard against the inroads of apostasy. Maturity reflects a proper knowledge of Christ (1:2, 3, 5, 6, 8). All believers positionally have obtained like precious faith (1:1), have been given all things that pertain to life and godliness (1:3) and have been given exceeding great and precious promises (1:4). Practically, however, they need to develop these graces: faith, virtue, knowledge, temperance, patience, godliness, brotherly kindness, and love (1:5–7). A maturing Christian will not only produce positive spiritual fruit, but will also protect himself from falling from his steadfastness (1:10; cf. 3:17). Such maturity and vigilance will be rewarded and later manifested in the millennial kingdom (1:11).

Peter followed the pedagogical technique of repetition, even though his readers knew what he was about to reveal and were established doctrinally. He knew that he was to be martyred shortly, and he wanted his readers to have a record of his teaching after his decease (1:12–15). As one proof of the future reality of Christ’s second advent, Peter pointed to his eyewitness experience of the transfiguration of Christ. Christ had said: "There be some standing here, which shall not taste of death, till they see the Son of man coming in his kingdom" (Matt. 16:28). In reflection upon the transfiguration that quickly followed (Matt. 17:1–13), Peter saw in it a premature and miniature picture or preview of Christ’s coming to the earth to establish His kingdom in power and glory (1:16–18). He denied that the second advent concept was a humanly originated fairy tale (1:16).

There was another proof more sure than the empirical eyewitness account of an apostle. Sights and sounds at times are even deceptive to the most honest of men. Peter therefore pointed to inscripturated revelation. The Old Testament originated with the Spirit of God; therefore, its teachings are true. Its very pages are saturated with predictive prophecy about the second advent of the Messiah.

Peter then expressed the purpose of his writing: "But there were false prophets also among the people, even as there shall be false teachers among you …" (2:1). The imminent threat of proselyting apostates prompted Peter to warn his readers. To be forewarned is to be forearmed. He first of all described their methods: false teaching, pernicious ways, evil speaking of the truth, covetousness, feigned words, and merchandise-making of you. Their heresy involved a denial of Christ, probably the deity of His person, the nature of His atonement (2:1), and the reality of His second advent (3:4).

Peter then declared that their judgment was certain (2:1, 3). As proof, he cited the bondage of sinning angels in Tartarus, the destruction of Noah’s generation, and the overthrow of Sodom and Gomorrah. Note that Lot was declared to be just or righteous even though his life was vexed by the immorality of his neighbors. Just as God delivered him, Peter knew that He would deliver his godly readers and that He would judge and punish the moral reprobates or false teachers (2:9).

He then demonstrated that their moral character demanded the judgment of God. They were unjust (2:9), unclean, presumptuous, self-willed (2:10), beastly, ignorant, corrupt (2:12), riotous, spotted, blemished, deceived (2:13), adulterous, cursed (2:14), wells without water, and clouds (2:17). They habitually practiced sin (2:14; cf. 1 John 3:6, 8), forsook the right way, and went astray (2:15). Peter believed that they would be destroyed physically (2:12) and that they would experience eternal darkness (2:17).

These false teachers were not saved men who went astray and subsequently lost their salvation. Rather, they had escaped the pollutions of the world through a change in life-style that was according to the Christian norm. Their practice of life had been affected by Christianity, but their spiritual position remained unchanged. Like the dog and the sow, their inner essence had not been regenerated. Time and the return to the old ways revealed that they had not been saved in the first place.

Again Peter called his readers to the prophetic-apostolic word as the defense against the scoffing, lustful false teachers. The heart of their heresy was a denial of Christ’s second advent. They cited two reasons for their position: the delay in Christ’s return and the permanent, undisturbed nature of creation (3:4). Peter abruptly declared that the critics were ignorant of both God’s Word and His world. The Bible openly declared that the world was convulsed by a cataclysmic flood in Noah’s day (3:5–6; cf. Gen. 6–9). Rock strata and fossil deposits confirm the view of a sudden, unexpected catastrophe that overtook all life forms. Peter then argued that the same God who judged the world in water declared that He would judge it again in fire. This will occur when the judgment of unsaved men takes place (3:7; cf. Rev. 20:11–15). To settle the problem of delay, Peter pointed to the relationship of time to a God of eternity. To God, one day is as a thousand years to man. God does not reckon time as man does. Actually, the delay in Christ’s return is a blessing in disguise to the unsaved because it gives them more time in which to repent. Christ has not forgotten His promise nor is He impotent to fulfill His word; rather, His delay is an expression of grace and longsuffering.

However, just as time (120 years) expired for Noah’s generation, God’s period of longsuffering will end. The Day of the Lord will overtake the future generation by surprise just as the flood caught that ancient world unprepared. The Day of the Lord is any period of special divine blessing or judgment. Here it refers to the destruction of the present universe, polluted by the effects of both human and angelic sin. Since this event is certain, believers should look beyond to an eternity of righteousness and peace and should govern their present lives accordingly (3:13–14).

Just as God saved Paul, a false teacher, in demonstration of His longsuffering, Peter wanted his readers to know that God could also save the mockers of the Second Advent (3:15). At the same time, they needed to know that the false teachers were unlearned, unstable, and unable to perceive the real doctrine of Scripture. He concluded the book by reminding them why he warned them. To keep from falling from their stedfastness, they needed to be aware of doctrinal error and to grow in grace and in knowledge of Christ.