This outline of 2 Peter is intended to assist you as you endeavor to study God’s holy Word — His letter to you. When we come to 2 Peter, we come to the most challenged book of Scripture. If there is any book of disputed position in the holy Scriptures, this is it. I want to set out why I accept its authenticity. First, those who argue against its inclusion note that the book is never mentioned before the third century and was not mentioned in the Western church until the fourth century. It was not included in the early Syriac versions of the Scriptures or in the Old Latin. It first appears in the church fathers with Origen (185-254 A.D.) who noted that there was some doubt concerning the letter. Eusebius, an early church historian (260-340 A.D.) placed 2 Peter as of disputed canonicity, saying, “But the so-called second Epistle we have not received as canonical, but nevertheless it has appeared useful to many, and has been studied with the other Scriptures.” Even Calvin (1509-1564 A.D.) seemed to have some problem with 2 Peter. The main problem with 2 Peter is said to be its failure to be mentioned in the earliest church writings and the difference in style …show more content…
I happen to believe that Jude quotes 2 Peter extensively and references it at Jude 17. Origen, in the first part of the third century, firmly accepted the book as Scripture. There are allusions to 2 Peter from as early as the writings of Pseudo-Barnabas (70-130 A.D.) and Clement of Rome (95-97 A.D.) The Codex Barococcia (206 A.D.) supports the inclusion of 2 Peter in the canon. The Bodmer manuscript(late third century) contains 2 Peter. Methodius, of Olympus (last part of the third century), quotes 2 Peter 3:8 authoritatively. And in the fourth century, the canonical status of 2 Peter was strongly stated by both Athanasius and Augustine. The Council of Laodicea (372 A.D.) included it in the canon, as did Jerome (404
Revised Standard Version Catholic Edition Bible. Eds. Dom Bernand Orchard, Rev. R. V. Fuller. San Francisco: Ignatius Press, 1966. Print.
Scholars of the Pauline writings have divided them into the following categories: (1) those unquestionably by Paul: Romans, I and II Corinthians, Galatians, Philippians, I Thessalonians, and Philemon; (2) a letter that was probably written by Paul, but has had serious questions raised about its' authorship: II Thessalonians; (3) letters that were not actually written by Paul but were developed from his thought: Colossians and Ephesians; (4) letters that bear Paul's name but clearly come from another time and different set of circumstances in the church: I and II Timothy and Titus (the so-called Pastoral Letters); (5) a letter not bearing Paul's name and which evidences a wholly different thought and religious vocabulary from that of Paul: the Letter to the Hebrews (Kee, 5th Ed. 224).
the early church from the time of Jesus' ascension to Paul's arrival as a prisoner in Rome. Acts was written by the author of Luke's gospel, Luke. Although the author does not name himself, evidence from the book itself proves that the author was Luke.
The author of the book is Zechariah, he whom the lord remembers. The book was written to the Jews in Jerusalem that had returned from their captivity in Babylon. The book was written in and around 520 B.C.
New International Version. [Colorado Springs]: Biblica, 2011. BibleGateway.com. Web. 3 Mar 2011. Accessed 22 April 2014.
The letter to the church at Ephesus was written about the same time as the letters to the churches at Colosse and Phillipi. A combination of all of my sources suggests this was somewhere between the years of A.D.60-64.
Grayston, Kenneth. The Letters of Paul to the Philippians and to the Thessalonians. CBC. London: Cambridge U.P., 1967.
New Testament. Vol. 2. Edited by Gerhard Kittel. Translated by Geoffrey W. Bromiley. Grand Rapids, Mich.: Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Co., 1964.
Robinson, B. A. (2008, March 30). Books of the Hebrew Scripture . Retrieved May 7, 2011, from Religious Tolerance: http://www.religioustolerance.org/chr_otb3.htm
New Revised Standard Version. New York: American Bible Society, 1989. Print. The. Russell, Eddie.
In order to comprehend and gleam the theological insights of Philemon, or any Biblical scripture, it is imperative that, at least, a basic understanding of the historical and cultural principles be present in the mind of the reader. Without a comprehension of these truths, a false understanding or misrepresentation of the text may occur. This is not to say that nothing can be obtained from the scripture in and of itself. However, many deeper details may remain hidden without further exploration. As is stated in 2 Timothy 2:15, “Study to show thyself approved unto God, a workman that needeth not to be ashamed, rightly dividing the word of truth.”
The books of I and II Thessalonians, which are in the New Testament, are both letters to a church that Paul the apostle helped establish in the city of Thessalonica. First Thessalonians is agreed by biblical scholars to be written by Paul. The author of II Thessalonians, however, is still being debated about.
Holy Bible: Contemporary English Version. New York: American Bible Society, 1995. Print. (BS195 .C66 1995)
earliest copy was found in 400 BC. This is compared to the New Testament that
However, the essay will start by looking at who the authors of these letters were. Looking at the authors of both the letters of II Peter and Jude, helps in showing the letters similarities. The author of the letter of II Peter was Simon Peter, one of the twelve apostles of Jesus Christ. We know from what the Bible tells us that Peter was close to Jesus, and he was also the first to get the revelation of who Jesus really was, (Matthew 16:16). The author of the letter of Jude was Jude the brother of James.