Showing posts with label Second Epistle of Peter. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Second Epistle of Peter. Show all posts

Monday, June 20, 2011

Dr Ben Witheringing III on "Who Wrote 2 Peter"

The key as symbol of St. PeterImage via WikipediaYou may or may not be aware of  a comment thread a few weeks ago between myself and Ryan Anderson regarding whether or not 2 Peter was written by the Apostle Peter. Anderson argued that Peter could not have written the epistle and because it says he did, the letter is a lie and unreliable. He quoted Dr. Ben Witherington III as a source and an example of a scholar who is a Christian who does not believe 2 Peter was written by the apostle. He later backed off it a little bit and conceded that Wirtherington actually believes the Peter wrote the first part of the letter. I decided to see if I could get in contact with Dr Witherington himself and see what he thought. I sent him to the following e-mail:

Hello, Dr Witherington.

I am a great fan of your work regarding Jesus and your apologetic material. Thank you!!!

A few weeks ago I responded to a blog post that asserted that Jesus told his disciples that he would return in their lifetimes and because he didn't Jesus is no better than Harold Camping.  You can see my post on that here: http://mmcelhaney.blogspot.com/2011/05/facepalm-of-day-81-debunking.html


Of course I disagreed and an atheist kept the conversation going in the comments. To make the story shorter, one of the arguments  I gave was that Peter in 2nd Peter explains what Jesus meant by "soon" and that he didn't understand Jesus to be saying what the atheists were saying Jesus said. The atheist argued against me by saying that most Biblical scholars, including you, don't believe that the Apostle Peter wrote most if not all of the epistles attributed to him. He then concluded that who ever wrote the letters lied and both epistles should by tossed because the author was a liar.  Of course I disagree. I was wondering if you could point out any papers/books you have written about 1 & 2 Peter's authorship, reliability, and if you consider these letters scripture every bit as much as the rest the New Testament?

On another blog, there was a good article about why some Biblical scholars think that there is good evidence that Apostle Peter wrote the epistles written for them: http://beggarsallreformation.blogspot.com/2011/06/good-evidence-for-2-peter-as-written-by.html
  I was wondering what your take on that is? Thanks for your time and I thank God for how God has used you. You have been a blessing to me and many, many others!
Marcus McElhaney
Thankfully, Dr Witherington was gracious enough to respond.

Hi Marcus:

Thanks for this.   You can always read my Letters and Homilies for Hellenized Christians Volume 2 on 1-2 Peter for more info.  The short answer is that 2 Peter is a composite book.  It contains a large chunk of Jude in it, it contains Pauline traditions in chapter three, and it contains some authentic Petrine material in Chapter One.  It follows the tradition of attributing a document to its first and most famous source, in this case Peter.  I think the story of the Transfiguration does go back to Peter himself.  I would say this document was assembled at the end of the first century when there was actually a collection of Paul's letters circulating in the church (see 2 Peter 3).    If you want to see my rebuttal to Ehrman's Forged, I posted a whole series of blog posts on this on my blog back in the spring.   A composite document attributed to one of its genuine sources is no forgery.  But the ancient concept of what counted as authorship is different from ours.

Blessings

Ben W.

Dr. Ben Witherington, III
Amos Professor of NT for Doctoral Studies
Asbury Theological Seminary
Wilmore Ky.
Doctoral Faculty St. Mary's College, St. Andrews University, Scotland
I've heard of much the same argument made for authorship of Isaiah and other Old Testament texts. I think that this explanation is viable, buyt I believe I need to do more research into this. Witherington is not by any means saying toss out 2 Peter or calling it worthless as Andrerson seemed like he was trying suggest. If anyone else is interested in Dr Witherington's rebuttal of  Dr. Ehrman's "Forged" use the link below.


http://www.patheos.com/community/bibleandculture?s=forged

Thank you, Dr. Ben Witherington III.
Enhanced by Zemanta

Saturday, June 18, 2011

Beggars All: Reformation And Apologetics: Good Evidence for Historical Reliability for 2 Peter as written by Peter Himself

Over at Beggars All blog, Ken has posted a very interesting article that will be very helpful to me and a lot of people. You may know that I've had sharp disagreement with Ryan Anderson regarding whether or not 2 Peter was really written by the Apostle Peter. Anderson uses the idea that because a consensus of scholars don't believe that Peter wrote 2 Peter, Peter did not write it. He accepts their arguments and therefore it's proof to him that the Bible is not inspired and not true. He went as far as calling 1st and 2nd Peter lies because the letters say they were written by Peter but he didn't write them. Of course I disagree. Ken has summarized a lot of good evidence and comments from scholars, like Dan Wallace and James White, who disagree with the "consensus" and affirm that these letter were written by the Apostle himself.

Dr. James White has a little article with an excellent graphic of an ancient manuscript of P-72
which has both I and 2 Peter (and Jude) in it.
One of the pages of this manuscript shows the end of 1 Peter and the beginning of 2nd Peter and this manuscript called P-72 is dated at around 200 AD. That is very good early dating for a copy of one of the most attacked books of the NT by skeptics, atheists, and Muslims and others, sometimes by good scholars. (the Muslims like to use Bruce Metzger as authoritative evidence that 2 Peter was not written by the apostle Peter. But many other conservative scholars and all Christians who believe in inerrancy believe that 2 Peter is "God-breathed" and was written by Peter. ( 2 Timothy 3:16-17; 2 Peter 1:20-21)


So what about scholars like Bruce Metzger and Ben Witherington III? Are they wrong to conclude that Peter did not write 2 Peter? I'm not sure. Does that mean that they are going to hell ("went" in Metzger's case given that he died) because they did not think that Peter wrote all of  2 Peter? Nope. What one believes about authorship is not a litmus test for orthodoxy. What is important is what you believe about Jesus - is He Lord of your life or not? Do you accepts his propitiatory sacrifice on your behalf and live submitted to Him? That is how you know you are born-again.

I highly recommend this article and hope that anyone who has doubts that Peter wrote 2 Peter or that the Bible is in anyway reliable will read this article along with their own research for the truth.

Beggars All: Reformation And Apologetics: Good Evidence for Historical Reliability for 2 Peter as written by Peter Himself
Enhanced by Zemanta