 |  |
in such passages as Deut. 30: 4, Neh. 1: 9, Psa. 147: 2 diaspora is used of the
`outcasts of Israel'.
As we shall have occasion to compare some of the language of Peter with the Gospel
according to Mark, it will be well to make sure that the reader is aware of the close
association of these two servants of the Lord.
From Acts 12: 12 we learn that Peter was friendly with Mark's mother and in
I Pet. 5: 13 he speaks of "Marcus my son". Jerome speaks of both Paul and Peter with
their assistants thus:
"Therefore he (Paul) had Titus for a Secretary, as the blessed Peter, had Mark, whose
Gospel was composed by him after the dictation of Peter."
To this may be added the testimony of Eusebius:
"After the departure of Peter and Paul, Mark the disciple and secretary (hermeneutes
or `interpreter') of Peter, transmitted to us in writing what Peter had preached."
The four Gospels therefore stand related to one another as follows:
A |
Matthew.
Independent.
B
| Mark.
Interpreter of Peter.
B
| Luke.
Fellow-worker with Paul.
A |
John.
Independent.
We are now free to examine II Pet. 3:, and we shall remember as we do it, that Peter,
the minister of the circumcision, admits in the same chapter that the Apostle Paul has
many things to say which were hard to be understood both by himself (Peter) and his
hearers, and we shall not expect to find the sweep backward beyond Gen. 1: 2 in Peter's
most far flung statement, that we find in Paul's great epistles of the Mystery. We must
make a preliminary enquiry into the testimony of II Pet. 3: 1-14 and discover the scope
of Peter's Ministry and Epistle. We note that chapters 1: and 2: must be considered as
introductory, for it is chapter 3: that opens with the words "This second Epistle,
beloved, I now write unto you", and the burden of the chapter is the denial by scoffers of
the possibility of the Lord's return by an appeal to the supposed "Uniformity of Natural
Law", and the exposure of the weakness of this objection by the Apostle. An
examination of the first chapter will show that this was prominently in his mind all the
time. II Pet. 1: 16-21 is an anticipation of II Pet. 3: 2, 3 and II Pet. 2: 1-22 is an
anticipation of II Pet. 3: 3-13 and corresponds in the structure which will be given later.
These selfsame scoffers, or their predecessors, have evidently charged the believer who
expected the personal return of the Lord with following `cunningly devised fables'
(II Pet. 1: 16), and from this he proceeds to the nature and trustworthiness of prophecy,
recalling in passing the conviction he himself had received of its truth when upon the
Mount of Transfiguration.
The structure of the passage is as follows: