Who Wrote 2 Peter?
Introduction
The authorship of 2 Peter is one of the most debated questions in New Testament studies. Unlike 1 Peter, which enjoyed early and widespread acceptance, 2 Peter was received more cautiously in the early church. At the same time, the letter explicitly claims to be written by the apostle Peter. Evaluating this claim requires careful attention to the letter’s internal evidence, early church testimony, and modern scholarly assessment.
Internal Evidence from the Letter
The author identifies himself as “Simon Peter, a servant and apostle of Jesus Christ” (2 Peter 1:1). He speaks as an eyewitness of Jesus’ majesty, recalling the transfiguration: “We ourselves heard this voice come from heaven, while we were with him on the holy mountain” (2 Peter 1:16–18). This appeal to direct experience strongly aligns the author with Peter’s role in the Gospel narratives.
The letter also reflects an awareness of impending death: “I know that the putting off of my body will be soon, as our Lord Jesus Christ has made clear to me” (2 Peter 1:14). This echoes Jesus’ words to Peter in John 21:18–19 and suggests a final testament written near the end of Peter’s life.
Relationship to Other New Testament Writings
2 Peter shows literary and thematic overlap with the Epistle of Jude, particularly in its treatment of false teachers (2 Peter 2; Jude 4–18). Some scholars argue that 2 Peter depends on Jude, while others suggest the reverse or a shared tradition. Literary dependence, however, does not preclude apostolic authorship, as early Christian writers frequently reused and adapted existing material.
The letter also refers to Paul’s letters as a recognized collection of Scripture, noting that “there are some things in them hard to understand” (2 Peter 3:15–16). This indicates a relatively developed stage of the early church but does not necessarily require a late, post-apostolic date.
Early Church Reception
Early Christian testimony regarding 2 Peter is cautious but ultimately affirmative. Origen acknowledged doubts about the letter while still treating it as Petrine. Eusebius categorized 2 Peter among the disputed writings but emphasized that it was widely read and accepted by many churches. By the fourth century, figures such as Athanasius and Jerome affirmed its place in the New Testament canon.
Importantly, even early hesitation focused on questions of authenticity and circulation rather than proposing an alternative author. No competing attribution appears in early Christian literature.
Language, Style, and Authorship Questions
One of the chief arguments against Petrine authorship is the difference in style between 1 and 2 Peter. While 1 Peter is rhetorically polished, 2 Peter is more uneven and dense. Some scholars view this contrast as evidence of different authors. Others point out that differences in genre, purpose, audience, and the use of secretaries can reasonably account for stylistic variation.
The absence of an explicitly named secretary in 2 Peter does not rule out the use of assistance, nor does it require pseudonymous authorship. Ancient letters often varied significantly depending on context.
Scholarly Assessment
Modern scholarship remains divided. Many critical scholars regard 2 Peter as pseudonymous, often dating it to the early second century. Others argue that the internal claims, theological coherence, and early acceptance support Petrine authorship or at least Petrine authority. Richard Bauckham notes that the letter functions as a testament, a recognized literary form used near the end of a leader’s life. Michael Kruger emphasizes that early doubts did not prevent eventual canonical recognition, suggesting that the church found the letter’s apostolic claim credible.
Conclusion
2 Peter stands as a letter that openly claims apostolic authorship and bears the marks of a final pastoral exhortation. While questions about style and reception remain, the absence of rival authorship claims, the letter’s self-identification, and its eventual acceptance into the canon support reading 2 Peter as authentically connected to the apostle Peter. The letter’s enduring authority rests not on modern certainty alone but on the careful discernment of the early church.
Works Consulted
Bauckham, Richard. Jude, 2 Peter. Word Biblical Commentary. Waco: Word Books, 1983.
Kruger, Michael J. Canon Revisited: Establishing the Origins and Authority of the New Testament Books. Wheaton: Crossway, 2012.
Brown, Raymond E. An Introduction to the New Testament. New Haven: Yale University Press, 1997.
Eusebius of Caesarea. Ecclesiastical History.
Jerome. On Illustrious Men.
