2 Peter

• Peter wrote it near the end of his life. Held by Michael Green, The Second Epistle General of Peter and the General Epistle of Jude, Tyndale New Testament Commentaries (revised 1987), and by Thomas R. Schreiner, 1, 2 Peter, Jude, New American Commentary (2003).
• A testament written in Peter's name after his death. Held by Richard Bauckham, Jude, 2 Peter, Word Biblical Commentary 50 (1983), and by Werner Georg Kümmel, Introduction to the New Testament (English edition 1975).
• Peter's own teaching set down by another hand. Held by Jerome, Letter 120, to Hedibia, who explains the difference in style between the two letters by the different interpreters Peter used, and by John Calvin, Commentaries on the Catholic Epistles, in his argument to 2 Peter.

What the evidence does not settle: Origen, as Eusebius reports him in the Ecclesiastical History 6.25, says Peter left one letter that is acknowledged and perhaps a second that is disputed. Eusebius lists the letter among the disputed books (Ecclesiastical History 3.25). Athanasius names it among the twenty-seven books in his thirty-ninth Festal Letter of AD 367. The evidence shows the question was asked early and answered in the letter's favour, and it leaves the hand that wrote the Greek open.

• 2 Peter used Jude. Held by Richard Bauckham, Jude, 2 Peter, Word Biblical Commentary 50 (1983).
• Jude used 2 Peter. Held by Martin Luther, Preface to the Epistles of St. James and St. Jude (1522), who calls Jude an extract or copy of 2 Peter, and by Charles Bigg, The Epistles of St. Peter and St. Jude, International Critical Commentary (1901).

What the evidence does not settle: The two letters share the same examples in the same order, set side by side in the figure under How is 2 Peter arranged. The shared order shows that one letter knew the other or both knew a common teaching; which came first is the open question.

• The earth and its works will be found, laid bare. Held by Bruce M. Metzger, A Textual Commentary on the Greek New Testament (second edition 1994), on 3:10, which reports the committee's choice of the reading of Codex Sinaiticus and Codex Vaticanus.
• The earth and its works will be burned up. Held by Albert Barnes, Notes on the New Testament, 1832 to 1851, on 3:10, who reads with the King James Version and the later Greek manuscripts behind it.

What the evidence does not settle: The Berean text reads laid bare (3:10). Codex Sinaiticus and Codex Vaticanus read will be found; the later Greek manuscripts read will be burned up; others read will disappear, and some leave the clause out. Which of these the letter first carried is open.

• The Reformed reading: bought in their own profession, and the patience toward the elect. Held by John Owen, The Death of Death in the Death of Christ (1647), book 4, who reads bought at 2:1 of the teachers' own claim and profession, and the anyone of 3:9 as the you to whom the Lord is patient.
• The Arminian reading: bought by Christ, and the patience toward all. Held by John Wesley, Explanatory Notes upon the New Testament (1755), on 2:1, who takes the Lord that bought them in the widest sense, and on 3:9, who reads any as any soul God has made.

What the evidence does not settle: 2:1 says the Master bought the teachers who deny him, and 3:9 says the Lord wants everyone to come to repentance. What the buying secured, and how the wish of 3:9 stands with those who perish, is where the two readings part.

• The Eastern reading: participation in the life of God. Held by Athanasius, who writes in On the Incarnation 54 that the Word became man so that we might become God, the teaching the Orthodox churches call theosis.
• The Reformed reading: likeness to God in holiness. Held by John Calvin, Commentaries on the Catholic Epistles (1551), on 1:4, who writes that nature here means quality, a likeness to God in holiness.

What the evidence does not settle: The verse ties the sharing to the promises and to the escape from corruption (1:4). How far the sharing reaches is the point the two traditions read differently, and both hold that the creature remains a creature.

• The letters were counted as Scripture within the apostles' lifetime. Held by Thomas R. Schreiner, 1, 2 Peter, Jude, New American Commentary (2003), on 3:16.
• The phrase shows a collection of Paul's letters, and a later date. Held by Werner Georg Kümmel, Introduction to the New Testament (English edition 1975).

What the evidence does not settle: The verse says Paul wrote to these readers, that his letters are hard in places, and that the unstable distort them as they do the rest of the Scriptures (3:15 to 16). Which of Paul's letters the readers held is the open point.

• God's time is his own, and the delay is patience. Held by John Calvin, Commentaries on the Catholic Epistles (1551), on 3:8 to 9.
• A day is a thousand years, and the world runs six days of years. Held by Irenaeus, who writes in Against Heresies 5.28.3 and reads the six days of creation as six thousand years by the rule that a day of the Lord is as a thousand years.

What the evidence does not settle: The letter answers the scoffers with God's measure of time (3:8) and his patience (3:9), and it leaves the hour with God: the day comes like a thief (3:10).