The Letters of 2 Peter and Jude (Pillar New Testament Commentary | PNTC)
Digital Verbum Edition
Overview
Filling a notable gap in scholarship on 2 Peter and Jude, Peter Davids artfully unpacks these two neglected but fascinating epistles that deal with the confrontation between the Greco-Roman world and the burgeoning first-century Jesus communities. Davids firmly grasps the overall structure of these oft-maligned epistles and presents a strong case for 2 Peter and Jude as coherent, consistent documents. Marked by exceptional exegesis and sharp, independent judgments, Davids’ work both connects with the latest scholarship and transforms scholarly insights into helpful conclusions benefiting Christian believers.
- Lays out detailed commentary, based on the original language
- In-depth discussion of textual and critical matters
- Introduction to the authorship, date, purpose, structure, and theology
Top Highlights
“This power is released to believers ‘through our knowledge of him who called us by his own glory and goodness.’” (Page 169)
“The importance of these virtues is clearly underlined by 2 Peter. ‘Make every effort’ is unusual language (the verb occurs only here in the NT and is rare elsewhere in Greek literature), but the meaning is clear. Growth in virtue is of utmost importance and deserves utmost effort. The verb translated ‘to add’ is far more colorful than that translation might indicate. In secular usage it meant ‘to provide at one’s own expense.’ Here it serves as the chaining verb as if one spent the one virtue to gain a supply of the next. So perhaps ‘to supply’ would be more accurate than ‘to add.’ It again notes the expense, the effort involved in this growth in virtue. We do not automatically become more virtuous as if God infused virtue into us intravenously; we need to make plans and expend effort.” (Page 179)
“This means that what is being thought about is most likely not sharing in the Holy Spirit or in Christ,21 nor is the phrase to be read covenantally,22 but rather as sharing some characteristic of God, something that makes the readers more like the world of the divine (including the beings other than God inhabiting that world) than like the world of human beings.” (Pages 173–174)
“What is clear is that this knowledge implies an ethical lifestyle. Therefore the knowledge is not simply intellectual (knowing things about God and Jesus), or even personal in the sense of having met someone, but knowledge that results in committed living.” (Pages 165–166)
In this well-written and informative commentary on 2 Peter and Jude, Peter Davids helps us read these two fascinating letters in light of their Jewish background. He uses his exegetical skill and knowledge of Judaism to provide satisfying explanations of ‘slandering celestial beings’ and the many other difficult-to-understand passages. This outstanding commentary is clearly a ‘top pick’ on these two letters.
—Clinton E. Arnold, Talbot School of Theology, Biola University
A reliable and literate work—knowledgeable without being cluttered, informed without being pedantic. As a traditional commentary, it argues introductory matters well, relies on epistolary and rhetorical insights for structural guides, and is very well informed on Israelite and Greco-Roman background.... Balances the big canvas with smaller cameo scenes.... Should be considered the best of a new wave of commentaries on Jude and 2 Peter.
—Jerome Neyrey, University of Notre Dame
This is an exemplary commentary, marked by the author’s mature scholarship, keen theological insights, and deep pastoral concerns. His thorough exegesis, conducted with a singular combination of rhetorical and narrative analysis as well as other usual critical methods, has produced a most reliable exposition of these neglected epistles.
—Seyoon Kim, Fuller Theological Seminary
A careful and painstaking treatment of the least well known of the General Epistles… The reader’s curiosity is both stimulated and satisfied by this commentary. It will fill a niche in today’s market and be a welcome addition to the libraries of both scholars and pastors. I commend it with enthusiasm.
—Ralph P. Martin, Fuller Theological Seminary
Peter H. Davids is professor of biblical theology at St. Stephen’s University, St. Stephen, New Brunswick. He is also the coeditor of Dictionary of the Later New Testament and Its Developments.
Reviews
6 ratings
Ramon Mendoza
12/17/2015
Faithlife User
7/30/2015
Read my whole review here: http://wp.me/p3JhRp-qD My review for Logos: http://wp.me/p3JhRp-qJ Davids begins the commentary with an introduction to both books. Then Davids starts with Jude. He reasons that since 2 Peter uses Jude, 2 Peter will be looked at after Jude. Jude has his own arguments and perspectives, while 2 Peter digests it and uses it for his own purposes. Davids looks at how 2 Peter differs from 1 Peter’s background, audience, and grammer/syntax, though concluding that the differences don’t mean different authors. Davids’ doesn’t give a definite stance on authorship of either book, but he falls closer to authentic authorship rather than pseudonymous (though I think he should have been more definite given 2 Pet 1.17-19). The Purpose of the letters are “to motivate. It is a….need to exhort…to ‘contend for the faith’” (44) and to be on their guard so as not to be carried away by the error of lawlessness (2 Pet 3.17). There is a serious struggle and it is the readers’ faith that is to be kept safe from the interlopers, whether they have ‘slipped in’ (Jude) or are ‘among the people’ (2 Peter 2). Davids deals with both authors’ use of secondary (apocryphal and Second Temple)literature, saying that “[Jude] did consider it [1 Enoch] authoritative, a true word from God. We cannot tell whether he ranked it alongside other prophetic books such as Isaiah and Jeremiah” (76), and “for the most part canonical consciousness came later than the time of Jude” (76). He brings in some excellent application, and at one point asks if Peter would think the false teachers had won if he saw the lifestyles of many churchgoers. He is very able in showing the flow of the argument. I was disappointed that there was no argumentation against the preterist position, yet Davids’ arguments hold plenty of weight, though they may not convince the ardent preterist. I was surprised at how much I enjoyed reading this commentary. Usually I read though most of the commentary, or main sections to understand how the commentator is writing and what he/she is arguing for. However, in this commentary I actually took out my Bible and took notes through all four (combined) chapters. [Special thanks to Christine at ThinkIVP and those at Logos for allowing me to review this! I was not obligated to provide a positive review in exchange for this book.]
Adrian Tsingaris
5/13/2015
Samuel Cerny
1/13/2015
N/A
11/22/2013
Eduardo Vega
9/25/2013
