Peter is dating proly who is mika penniman dating
We can conclude, therefore, that the claim that 2 Peter is pseudepigraphy does matter.Pseudepigraphy of this nature would definitely be considered deceptive and not an accepted characteristic of an inerrant canon. On what basis do the critics derive their conclusions? Longenecker, “Ancient Amanuenses and the Pauline Epistles,” New Dimensions in New Testament Study (Grand Rapids: Zondervan Publishing House, 1974), p. Origen himself mentions that there were some doubts as to its authenticity, but he himself did not deal with the problem which seems to imply that he didn’t take the doubts seriously. 35 Farkasfalvy, “The Ecclesial Setting of Pseudepigraphy,” p. The Muratorian Canon did not contain 2 Peter, but it also omits 1 Peter, so this is not a decisive factor. Claims that personal references prove forgery are based purely on prejudice because unless the ink is still wet and the author long dead, it cannot be proved to be false. Charles Bigg says, “As regards what an author says about himself, we can ask only whether…it is possible or impossible. They base this claim on the fact that it is typical pseudepigraphal genre similar to that done in the pastoral epistles.
Therefore, this would seem to strengthen Petrine authorship.
Eusebius rejected it but indicated that the majority accepted the epistle, including James and Jude. It seems that the reason there were doubts about 2 Peter is because Gnostics were circulating letters with Peter’s name on them to try to gain acceptance for their doctrines.
Consequently, the orthodox church was probably suspicious of any letter attributed to Peter.
That this is true is evident by the statement at the end of verse 4, “from the beginning of creation.” “Father Adam” certainly fits better in the setting of creation than “father Paul.” The critics need to look at the context to determine the meaning and not try to impose a unique interpretation on a passage to support their view.
Another criticism of this reference to Old Testament fathers is the OT fathers would not have anticipated Jesus’ second coming.
There has been much debate over the authorship of 2 Peter.