2 Pedro 3:15

The longsuffering of our Lord. — Again, as in 2 Pedro 3:9, we are in doubt as to whether God the Father or the Lord Jesus is meant. In neither case is absolute certainty obtainable; but here the balance seems decidedly in favour of the latter meaning. In 2 Pedro 3:8 “the Lord” certainly means God, and not the Lord Jesus (comp. 2 Pedro 2:9; 2 Pedro 2:11). In 2 Pedro 3:18 “our Lord” is expressly stated to be Jesus Christ. The two intermediate 2 Pedro 3:9; 2 Pedro 3:15, are open to dispute. The fact that “our” appears in this verse before “Lord,” as in 2 Pedro 3:18, inclines the balance here towards the meaning in 2 Pedro 3:18. Moreover, had God been meant, it would have sufficed to say, “and account that His long-suffering is salvation.” If this is correct, and “our Lord” means Jesus Christ, “then throughout this weighty passage the Lord Jesus is invested with the full attributes of Deity.” Here, possibly, as also in 2 Pedro 1:1 (see Note), the expression points to the writer’s entire belief in the unity of the two Persons. Account the longsuffering of our Lord salvation instead of accounting it to be “slackness” (2 Pedro 3:9); make use of it for working out your own salvation in fear and trembling, instead of criticising it.

As our beloved brother Paul. — This may possibly mean something more than that St. Paul was a fellow-Christian and a personal friend — viz., that he was a fellow-worker and brother-evangelist. More than this it cannot well mean, though some interpret it “brother-Apostle.” Tychicus is twice called “beloved brother” by St. Paul (Efésios 6:21; Colossenses 4:7), and the addition of “our” here can make no such change of meaning. It is doubtful whether there is any allusion to the dispute between St. Peter and St. Paul (Gálatas 2:11), although an expression of marked affection would be quite in place as evidence that all such differences were now forgotten. In any case the familiarity and equality which the expression “our beloved brother Paul” implies should be noticed. It is in marked contrast to the way in which Clement of Rome, Ignatius, Polycarp, and Clement of Alexandria speak of St. Paul, and in this way is a decided note of genuineness. A writer of the sub-Apostolic age would not easily be able to free himself from the feeling of the age in this respect. Clement of Rome (Corinthians, xlvii. 1), says, “Take up the Epistle of the blessed Paul the Apostle.” Ignatius (Ephesians, 12:2) calls him “Paul the sanctified, the martyred, worthily called blessed.” Polycarp (see next Note) calls him “the blessed and glorious Paul,” or “the blessed Paul.” Clement of Alexandria commonly says simply “the Apostle,” but sometimes “the divine Apostle” or “the noble Apostle.” An imitator in the second century would scarcely have attained to the freedom of “our beloved brother Paul.”

According to the wisdom given unto him. — Comp. 1 Coríntios 3:10; Gálatas 2:9. Polycarp, in his Epistle to the Philippians (2peter iii. 2), says, “Neither I nor any one else like me can equal the wisdom of the blessed and glorious Paul, who... wrote letters to you, into which if ye look diligently, &c. &c.” This seems to show that St. Paul’s letters had already become the common property of the churches.

Hath written unto you. — More literally, wrote to you. What Epistle, or Epistles, are here meant? Few points in this Epistle have been more debated. The following are some of the many answers that have been given to the question: (1) a lost Epistle; (2) Hebrews, because of Hebreus 9:26; Hebreus 10:23; Hebreus 10:37; (3) Galatians, Ephesians, Colossians, because our Epistle is supposed to be addressed to the Christians of Asia Minor; (4) Ephesians only, for the reason just stated, and because Colossians and Galatians contain little or no mention of the day of judgment; also because of Efésios 4:30, and the encyclical character of the Epistle; (5) 1 Corinthians, because of 1 Coríntios 1:7; (6) Romans, because of Romanos 2:4 and Romanos 9:22; (7) 1 and 2 Thessalonians, because of 1 Tessalonicenses 4:14; 1 Tessalonicenses 5:1; 1 Tessalonicenses 5:23, because 2 Pedro 3:10 recalls 1 Tessalonicenses 5:2, also because “things hard to be understood” admirably describes much of 2 Tessalonicenses 2, which treats of the time of Christ’s coming, the very subject here under discussion.

Of these seven theories, (1) can neither be proved nor disproved; (3) and (4) lose much of their weight when we consider that the persons addressed in 2 Peter are nowhere defined, excepting that to some extent they are identical with those addressed in 1 Peter. Of the remaining four, (7) seems to be very probable, both on account of the large amount of coincidence, and also because of the early date of those Epistles, allowing an interval of fifteen years, in which the two Epistles might easily have become well known in other churches. Still it is difficult to find a passage in them about the longsuffering of God, such as Romanos 2:4; Romanos 9:22. And when we consider that Romans also Appears to have been an Encyclical Letter, and was written not so very long after the Epistles to the Thessalonians; that in Romanos 3:8. St. Paul himself tells us that he had been grossly misunderstood; that Romanos 9:3 might easily cause serious misunderstanding, and that Romanos 6:16 seems to be recalled in 2 Pedro 2:19 — it will perhaps be thought that on the whole Romans best answers to the requirements of the context.