J AMES. 1 PETER. i, 2) 3. de Gy ts 1 Oss 1, 24, ahs het eet iv. 6, 10. v. 5, 6. vy. 20, iy. 8.
Paun. 1 Peter. Rom. xii. 2. i. 14, Rom. iv. 24. hale Rome xu. L dD. Rom. ix. 33. ii. 6-8. Rom. ix. 25, 26. ig AGS Rom. xiii. 1-4. sly die3y5 nee Gal. v. 13. ii. 16. Rom. vi. 18. ji. 24, Rom. xii. 17. iii. 9. Rom. xii. 6, 7. iy. 10, 11. Rom. viii. 18. Wands Rom. ii. 7, 10. ete Rom. viii. 17. iv. 13. Rom. xii. 13. iy. 9. Rom. i 13. iv. 3. Rom. xiii. 14. ayaa de 1 Thess. v. 6. v. 8. 1 Cor. xvi. 20. v. 14.
Nor are such resemblances wanting in the second epistle, though they are resemblances in tone, subject, and spirit, rather than verbal. It is in this epistle that Peter designates Paul’s writings as scripture (iii. 16). Compare
Pavt. 2 PETER. Rom. i. 28; iii. 20. ye 1 Tim. 4. 4; iv. 7. i, 16. tein yas iG, ie 11; ios 1 Cor. x. 29 ; -Gal. v. 13. 11, 19. Rom. ii. 4; ix. 22. iii. 15. Gal. ii. 4. Tt,
Into the much-vexed question of the authenticity of the sec- ond epistle we are not called upon to enter. The point of dif- ferences of style between the two epistles is a fair one. There
are such differences, and very decided ones, though perhaps — they are no more and no greater than can be explained by diversity of subject and circumstances, and the difference in the author’s age. Some of the expressions peculiar to the second epistle are—granting things which pertain unto life and godli- ness (i. 8); precious and exceeding great (i. 4); adding all dili- gence, and supply virtue (i. 5); an entrance richly supplied (i. 11); receiving forgetfulness (i. 9); sects of perdition (ii. 1); cast down to Turtarus (ii.4); the world compacted out of water and by means of water (iii. 5), ete.
But, while allowing for these differences, and recognizing the weakness of the external evidence for the authenticity of the epistle, the internal evidence of style and tone seems to us to outweigh the differences, and to show that both epistles were from the same hand. There is the same picturesqueness of diction, and a similar fertility of unusual words. Of the one hundred and twenty words which occur only in the writings of Peter, fifty-seven are peculiar to the second epistle ; and, what is still more noteworthy, only one of these words, a7réIeaxs, putting off, is common to the two epistles—a fact which tells very strongly against the hypothesis of a forgery. That hypoth- esis, it may be observed, is in the highest degree improbable. The Christian earnestness, the protest against deception, the tender and adoring reminiscence of Christ, the emphasis upon the person and doctrine of the Lord Jesus which mark this epistle, imply a moral standard quite inconsistent with the per- petration of a deliberate forgery.
Comparisons of expressions in this epistle with those used or inspired by Peter in the Acts of the Apostles exhibit a close correspondence ; and a correspondence, which, however, must not be too strongly pressed, appears on a comparison with cer- tain passages in the gospels. Thus the verb dapéa, to give, occurs only in Mark xv. 45, and 2 Pet. i. 3, 4 (see Introduction to Mark, on the relations between Mark and Peter) ; and the recurrence of the words exodus, or decease, and tabernacle in the same connection (2 Pet. i. 13-15, 17, 18) is very striking from the pen of one who, at the Transfiguration, heard the heavenly visitants conversing of Christ’s decease, and who pro-