2 Pedro 1:1

(1) Simon Peter. — The marginal reading “Symeon” is to be preferred. “Simon” has probably been substituted as being more usual. The Geneva Bible, which our translators unfortunately sometimes follow when it is misleading, has “Simeon.” “Symeon,” of St. Peter, occurs elsewhere only Atos 15:14, in a speech of the strongly Jewish St. James. As being the more Jewish form of the name, it points to a Jewish Christian as the author; and as being unusual, it shows that the writer, if not the Apostle, is no slavish imitator. As coming from St. Peter, the Apostle of the circumcision, it is natural enough. The differences between this opening and that of 1 Peter are instructive. There, as approaching communities which might seem to belong to St. Paul, he carefully suppresses everything personal; he calls himself merely “Peter,” the name which Christ Himself had given him along with his high commission (Mateus 16:18), and “Apostle,” the title which stated his commission. Here, as coming a second time to those who now know him better (both through his former Epistle and through Silvanus), he adds personal designations. There, as if not venturing to depart greatly from his own peculiar field, he addresses himself mainly to the Jewish converts. Here, with more boldness, the natural result of increased familiarity, he addresses Gentile converts chiefly. (See Note on 1 Pedro 1:1.)

A servant and an apostle. — De Wette suspects a combination of 1 Pedro 1:1 with Judas 1:1. The coincidence is too slight to argue upon. (See Romanos 1:1 and Note on Judas 1:1.) The amount of similarity between the opening verses of Jude and those of this Epistle is too small for any conclusions as to the dependence of one on the other. Although the word for “servant” strictly means slave, the English version is quite correct. (See on Romanos 1:1.)

To them that have obtained. — The Greek word implies that they have not won it or earned it for themselves, but that it has been allotted to them. Comp. Atos 1:17, where the same word (rare in the New Testament) occurs in a speech of St. Peter. (See Note on “godliness,” 2 Pedro 1:3.) Another coincidence to be noticed is the way in which St. Peter speaks of the Gentile Christians (Atos 11:17) when charged with having visited “men uncircumcised,” and again (Atos 15:8) at the Council of Jerusalem; both remarkable parallels to this.

Like precious faith with us. — Not that all had an equal amount of faith, which would scarcely be possible; nor that their faith gave all an equal right to salvation, which the Greek could scarcely mean; but that all believed the same precious mysteries. (Comp. 1 Pedro 1:7.) It is delicately implied that “we as well as you have had it allotted to us; it is no credit to us; we are not superior to you.” “Us” may mean either the Apostles, or (more probably) the first Christians, as distinct from those converted later, i.e., Jewish as distinct from Gentile Christians. This shows that Gentile converts are chiefly addressed in this Epistle, as Jewish in the First Epistle. Gentiles would be more likely to be doubters respecting Christ’s return to judgment, than Jews well acquainted with Hebrew prophecies on the subject. Gentiles also would be more likely than Jews to fall into the excesses denounced in the second chapter, which bear a strong resemblance to the catalogue of heathen vices given by St. Paul in Romanos 1 The idea that Christians are the antitype of the chosen people is prominent in St. Peter’s writings. (Comp. 2 Pedro 2:1, and 1 Pedro 1:10.) Note that no particular churches are mentioned. The Second Epistle is more “general” or “catholic” in its address than the First. Here again we have a mark of independence. A writer personating St. Peter, and referring to the former Letter (2 Pedro 3:1), would probably have taken care to make the address of the second letter tally exactly with that of the first.

Through the righteousness. — Better, in the righteousness. So Wiclif, Tyndale, and Rheims version. “Righteousness” is variously explained. Perhaps the best interpretation is “fairness, justice.” He has no respect of persons, and hence has given to all Christians, early or late, Jew or Gentile, a “like precious faith.”

Of God and our Saviour Jesus Christ. — Better, of our God and (our) Saviour Jesus Christ. Here, as in Tito 2:13 (comp. 2 Tessalonicenses 1:12), we are somewhat in doubt as to whether we have one or two Persons of the Trinity mentioned. Rigid grammar would incline us to make “God” and “Saviour” both apply to Christ. But rigid grammar alone is not always the safest guide in interpreting Scripture. The very next verse, independently of other considerations, seems to determine that both the Father and the Son are here mentioned. The mode of expression which causes doubt on the subject, perhaps indicates the writer’s perfect belief in the oneness of the Father with the Son. The addition of “Saviour” to the name of Jesus Christ is very frequent in this Epistle (2 Pedro 1:11; 2 Pedro 2:20; 2 Pedro 3:18; comp. 2 Pedro 3:2). It shows how completely “Jesus” had become a proper name, the exact signification of which was becoming obscured. “Saviour” does not occur in 1 Pet., but the cognate “salvation” does (2 Pedro 1:5; 2 Pedro 1:9; 2 Pedro 2:2). Both words point onwards to safety from perdition at the last. (Comp. St. Peter’s speech, Atos 5:31.)