2 Peter Chapter 1
MSB Book Intro to 2 Peter
Pretty much unequivocally written by Peter. However, MSB says critics have generated more controversy over 2 Peter's authorship and rightful place in the canon of Scripture than over any other NT book. Wow. I had no idea. The church fathers were slow about accepting it. No church father even mentions 2 Peter until Origen, near the beginning of the third century. (the "200's". At least 100 years after the last apostle died.) Eusebius, an ancient church historian (260-340 AD, more or less), included 2 Peter on his list of disputed books, along with James, Jude, 2 and 3 John.
The books use different Greek styles - but that can be explained by Silvanus being the "amanuensis" of the first letter, and either Peter himself or a different amanuensis helping with the second. Vocabulary is different in the two books because the themes are different. One is written to help suffering Christians , Two is written to expose false teachers. But there are also some important words that are used in both books - that is, the vocabulary also has a number of similarities that point to a common author.
And why would a false teacher spuriously write a letter that condemns false teachers? MSB says no unusual, new, or false doctrines appear in 2 Peter. So if it is a forgery, it is a forgery written by a fool for no reason at all.
Tradition says Peter died during Nero's persecution of Christians, and Nero died in 68 AD. So the epistle may have been written just before Peter's death (see 1:14) in 67 or 68 AD.
This letter expresses Peter's growing concern about false teachers in the church. We don't know where Peter was when he wrote this letter, unlike our information about the first letter, but it is generally believed that he was in prison in Rome, awaiting execution. Also unlike the first letter, Peter doesn't tell us in the introduction to whom he is writing. However, 3:1 indicates this letter was to the same people as the first letter. Peter is writing mostly to Gentiles in churches in various Roman provinces in what is modern-day Turkey.
MSB has this to say - "This book is the most graphic and penetrating expose' of false teachers in Scripture, comparable only to Jude."
MSB goes on to say that Peter is kind of generic about what the false teachers were saying. What he does say is that they teach "destructive heresies", they deny Christ, and twist the scriptures. They bring true faith into disrepute. And they mock the second coming. These are readily identifiable characteristics and should help us to recognize false teachers when we hear them. BUT, Peter was also concerned about the immoral character of the teachers themselves, and so describes the teachers in more detail than he describes the teaching.
Other themes include motivating his readers to continue to develop their Christian character. "In so doing, he explains wonderfully how a believer can have assurance of his salvation." He also shows that apostolic writings are divine in 1:12-21. Peter also shows that knowledge of true doctrine is the best defense against false doctrine. (((Am I always looking for some "special revelation" of scripture I alone can see, when instead, I should be making sure that my own thinking is in conformance with orthodoxy? 2024 - I think we have to do both. God is not afraid of our "exploring" so long as we are seeking only to better know his word. BUT, anything that seems to be "new" should always be compared and contrasted with orthodox teachings, to make sure that what we have "found" is not a "destructive heresy" previously identified, does not deny Christ, twist the scriptures - all the things Peter has just said are characteristic of false teaching. I think about Chitwood. So much twisting...)))
MSB says the most important challenge in the epistle is to rightly interpret 1:19-21, because of its far-reaching implications with regard to the nature and authenticity of Scripture. That passage, along with 2Ti 3:15-17 is vital to a sound view of the Bible's inspiration. Peter says the Lord "bought" false teachers, which poses a challenge interpretively and theologically with regard to the nature of the atonement. We also don't really know who it is that Peter describes as "angels who sinned" (2:4). Many who believe the saved can be lost again use 2:18-22 for their argument. And lastly, whom does God not want to punish? These are all going to be covered in the MSB verse notes.
2022 - Looks like I have extensive notes here from 2021.
The greeting says it is from Simeon Peter, servant and apostle of Jesus Christ. There is only one of these. So in the first line, this is either from Peter, or a blatant forgery.
Then we get to 1:5-11, wherein we can be assured of our salvation, according to MSB. I like the phrasing in ESV here:
5 For this very reason, make every effort to supplement your faith with virtue, and virtue with knowledge, [2Pe 1:5 ESV]
Works are to be seen as a supplement to faith. Strong's says the Greek word here is to supply, furnish, present. So to "present your faith" with virtue, to "supply your faith" with virtue. It also has the sense of nourishment. That is to "feed your faith" with virtuous behavior. Then there is a long list of what I suppose we could call "Christian virtues". How does this relate to assurance of salvation?
2021 - I think it is important to include the progression that comes with attention to supplementing our faith. Here is how it works:
5 For this very reason, make every effort to supplement your faith with virtue, and virtue with knowledge, 6 and knowledge with self-control, and self-control with steadfastness, and steadfastness with godliness, 7 and godliness with brotherly affection, and brotherly affection with love. [2Pe 1:5-7 ESV] This is the path laid out for us, this is the direction we go, this is the straight and narrow. We try to grow, to progress, to "master" these things. We focus on becoming more like God - to mold ourselves into the divine nature - rather than just continuing to do as the corrupt nature of our bodies prefers. We are to overcome the broken flesh - to put what the flesh wants low on the list - and instead strive to be something better than an animal driven by only the most primitive, basest, selfish ambitions that we can have.
2024 - The way to look at these is as a sequence where each thing "fuels" the next. And we start at the end of the list and we work backwards. So the ultimate goal of all this is to increase our faith - to nourish it so it can grow. If we want our faith to grow, we must understand that it is fueled by virtue - in the NT Greek sense of virtue. So starting from the end and working backwards, here is how we might lay out a plan to "restart" this process, or just to grow in each area, but focusing first on the items that fuel that area. So:
It starts with love. That ought not be any surprise. We first "practice" love as a verb. We love our family, even when they mess up. We love our neighbors, even when they don't mow their yard. We work on loving all whom we see or meet, where ever they are. If we do this, work on this, INCREASE in loving others, this will feed brotherly affection within us. That makes sense. If we love others more, then surely our affection for our brothers - I think Christian brothers and sisters are in view - will increase all the more. AND, when we love these more, that will fuel godliness. Because God loves his own enough to look beyond all their faults, their shortcomings and their sins, and love each as much as the other, he blesses all, he plans only good for all. And as godliness abounds, it fuels steadfastness. We can see now how this works. Steadfastness fuels self-control - of course it does! And self-control feeds knowledge. Focus on the task at hand - especially study but as we love those who don't always deserve it, we learn more about how human beings operate and how God works in us all toward his own ends. Knowledge fuels virtue...which is where we started. The more we know about how God operates, which has been opened up to us by foundational love built up into knowledge - which teaches us - which fuels us - to live virtuous lives, and understanding that all that has worked together to build up our faith - in God, and in the process of sanctification that he has laid out so rationally and logically. Here they are, as let's say a pyramid, from top to foundation:
Faith
Virtue
Knowledge
Self-Control
Steadfastness
Godliness
Brotherly Affection
Love
Look at the list...where is my "weak link"? Because where ever that is in the process, the weakness there weakness all that proceeds from it. And note also that Love is the most basic fuel of all.
This verse:
8 For if these qualities are yours and are increasing, they keep you from being ineffective or unfruitful in the knowledge of our Lord Jesus Christ. [2Pe 1:8 ESV]
2023 - Note that this is a two part test. You must have these qualities. They must be increasing. If both these things are true, and I think this says that if they are increasing BECAUSE we know Christ - that is, we are saved - then we are effective and fruitful as we serve Christ. So even though it is not phrased to emphasize that knowledge of Christ is primary, the phrasing does require that such knowledge precede and motivate these qualities. Otherwise, these things can to some extent be attributed to common grace. As worded, there is a presumption that "knowledge" is already present. Further, as worded, this implies that we can have knowledge of Christ though it does not show at all. This is absolutely confirmed in vs 9, below.
2025 - Look at that...finally! IF you do those things, you are NOT unfruitful. You ARE bearing fruit, even if you are not Billy Graham and leading thousands to Christ. This is not a pass saying that you have no responsibility to witness to others, but it does strongly imply, I think convincingly imply, that fruit is not only measured in the souls that convert because of our direct witness to them. If we do the things on Peter's list, we WILL BE effective, and we WILL BE fruitful.
MSB says "When these Christian qualities (5-7) are not present in a believer's life, he will be indistinguishable from an evildoer or a superficial believer. But when these qualities are increasing in a Christian's life, there is the manifestation of the "divine nature" within the believer". Allowance is made that some believers will not exhibit these qualities. They are not "automatic". If they are not there, the believer cannot be effective and fruitful. But he can still be a believer. This verse next:
9 For whoever lacks these qualities is so nearsighted that he is blind, having forgotten that he was cleansed from his former sins. [2Pe 1:9 ESV].
(((2024 - Attempting a FB post using this verse:
I can't speak for anyone else, but I can say that there have been times in my life when this verse was about me. There were years on end when I thought and behaved according to the rules and ways of the world around me. I wasn't a "bad" person, I just wasn't becoming a "better" person. Peter's use of "cleansed from former sins" tells us he means that saved people can sort of "forget" their salvation. We can be born again but in neutral rather than drive. This was me, and it might be you. That ought to give us hope...but here's the bad news. It might be that we aren't growing because we are not saved. Maybe we are lost, yet behave like good people. That can happen too, maybe if we were raised in church, or by good parents or grandparents. We didn't really choose to be good that's just how we were taught to behave. Surely, now, we can see that it is VITAL to know which of these describes us. We must know! Peter says this in the next verse: 10 Therefore, brothers, be all the more diligent to confirm your calling and election, for if you practice these qualities you will never fall. [2Pe 1:10 ESV]. Wow! It's almost like he anticipated our question! If we "think" we're saved, but have no confidence about it, we can find assurance by purposeful, focused attention on growing in the qualities that characterize the saved. If we are saved, this will be successful, and we will have, and recognize, spiritual growth in our lives. We will know! If we make that effort, and there is no progress, then we must decide - is being good "good enough", or do we want the eternal assurance that only true salvation brings? Peter's list is in 2Pet 1:5-7. Start at the end of this - the foundation of the whole thing - and work backwards. Everyone of us ought to do this. It isn't just for doubters. Wouldn't you like to know for sure?)))
2023 - Peter makes it clear that he is speaking of saved people. ONLY the saved can be called "cleansed from sin". Hmm....Peter does not say OR imply that this is a test of whether someone is saved or not. His presumption is that there ARE saved people who are not increasing in these qualities at all. Saved non-performers do exist. He is pretty much saying that faith CAN exist without works. So many issues arise based on the Christians, the saved, the believers, that Peter here describes. If they have actually forgotten their salvation, then how can we possibly tell whether they were ever saved or not? What could we know about them? This sort of assumes that these people at some point DID KNOW they were saved. Over time they have drifted further and further away and they lack the confirming works that ought to be seen in the saved. Note that Peter says they lack these virtues. What he does NOT say is that they are nasty, evil, world-embracing, sinners. Can we assume that there is a discernible difference between these that Peter is describing and those who were never saved at all? Or is he saying that sometimes it is impossible to tell. OR...and this seems like the right way to look at this...is this a SELF test, not an OTHER test? Note that in every case Peter is describing how this will be FROM THE NON-PERFORMERS POV. Peter doesn't say "You can look for this situation in others", he says you look for this situation in your self! Yes. By this we can assure OURSELVES, not OTHERS, of our salvation!!! If you have this firmly in mind, then the MSB note below makes perfect sense.
(((2023 Later - Copied this in from the notes on 1 Jn 3:
Hmm...going back to the context though, Peter is saying a saved person's life may not be characterized by that whole list of good qualities - faith, virtue, knowledge, self-control and so on, if that saved person has gone blind and forgotten....
By contrast, John is not talking about a lack of good things in a persons character, but the presence of continuous repeating sin.
Maybe that it the thing. Someone once saved who is not increasing in good works....not so great. Someone once saved who's life is characterized by repeating sin...never saved in the first place.
AND THAT DOES NOT FLY because by that measure...when was I even saved? Losing my salvation and then getting it back three or four times would be the only way to explain my life! )))
MSB elaborates this way - "A professing Christian who is missing the virtues mentioned above is, therefore, unable to discern his true spiritual condition, and thus can have no assurance of his salvation.
Forgotten, then, in this context means that "The failure to diligently pursue spiritual virtues produces spiritual amnesia. Such a person, unable to discern his spiritual condition, will have no confidence about his profession of faith. He may be saved and possess all the blessings of vv. 3,4, but without the excellencies of vv 5-7, he will live in doubt and fear.
So this is how 5-11 bring assurance to the believer.
2023 - Don't we all know people that "might be" like this? People who were "saved" as children and now act like the last things they ever think about are church and Bible study and being like Jesus. These things often seem to revolt them. Is Peter holding out hope to those who love such people, that perhaps, despite a complete lack of observable godliness, they are still saved? Should we see them as "starving their renewed spirits" rather than as "losing their salvation"? How do "good people" who don't attend church and don't profess to believe fit into this scenario? Is Peter going to tell us later in the book, or do we just "guess" about how to pray for them? Note that MSB qualifies these as "professing Christians" who are missing these Christian virtues. But professing...Maybe that is the key, and if it is, then what of those who no longer even profess?
2023 - Perhaps, what we can do if we know people that we think MIGHT be in this situation - people we KNOW have had a salvation experience but now do not act like it at all - we should first pray that they will be saved if they were not previously, and if they are "Peter's back-sliders", that their renewed spirits, weakened by neglect and lack of nourishment, be strengthened by God. And if they are receptive to us, we can suggest to them, encourage them, remind them of that salvation experience, tell them about this situation that can happen, tell them to do an "experiment" and try reading a chapter a day of John, or Luke, or 2 Peter even, and to say just a short prayer before they do so each day, and then see - with only themselves as judge - if that does or does not "fit" into their lives far better than they think right now that it will.
This needs to be on FB. How many people today are in this boat???? Hopefully millions!!!
A much closer look at each of these Christian virtues would make a good study.
2021 - This is about believers who have slipped so far back from the godly character that should shine in them that they are indistinguishable from the unsaved. In these verses, then, lies hope for every parent and grandparent, every brother and sister who sees those they love best living in a way that gives no sign of an inner change. This was me during college, and right up to the time when we all went back to church - though we did it in a divisive way. This was me again after both kids professed salvation - Kris in her bedroom one night when she prayed the prayer, and Wilson when he went and talked to John St. Clair, and John said he believed Wil was ready to be baptized. Once their salvation was checked off the list I not only quit worrying about them, but I went way backwards myself. After Cherokee Hills - once I left there - I was out in the byways and pastures, away from the straight and narrow, for a very long time. It could be that my kids, Paula's, Martha's, my cousins, my in-laws...It is possible that all of them fall into this situation that Peter is here describing. They have just drifted so far from the truth, and they have made so little effort to "feed and nourish" their faith and so keep it vigorous, healthy, and an obvious part of their lives, that there is no longer a sign of salvation - of a new life within them - and not only can I not recognize that it is there, but neither can they! They have just become so carnal as to be heedless, even deaf to the still small voice. It could be this. Or it could be that they were never saved. All that can be done is to keep praying for them all - though we don't even know how to pray for them. Pray for salvation or for "re-dedication".
2022 - I think it is appropriate here to remember that there is some controversy about whether this book should be canonical. What if - and I don't believe it, but it ought to be considered - this book doesn't belong, and is here only to give us comfort about the observably lost that we would much rather were saved, but don't want to do the knee time and or the confrontational conversations that might lead to true salvation? Since I don't think there is any "non-scripture" included in scripture, a better view is that while this is possible, it is inadvisable to count on it and so lay back and rest. If salvation is there, it ought to be "hungry" for sanctification, and we ought to, we might be able to, nourish and encourage and revitalize this garden choked with weeds. Perhaps "coercing" or "cajoling" such people to come deliver groceries, to come do yard work for the aged and so on, might incidentally replenish the long dormant seeds of sanctification, to the benefit of both encourager and encouraged.
Moving on...but not exactly at light speed:
10 Therefore, brothers, be all the more diligent to confirm your calling and election, for if you practice these qualities you will never fall. [2Pe 1:10 ESV]
Working on these qualities, advancement in these qualities, confirms for us that we are saved, and should embolden us to even greater efforts, knowing that as we progress in these attributes, be are increasingly effective and fruitful - which results in a greater heavenly reward. All this besides the fact that the believer sleeps better when in complete assurance of salvation.
2023 - And here is the endorsement of the approach I recommended above, to encourage practice, encourage "feeding the spirit", and look at this most profound confirmation:
13 I think it right, as long as I am in this body, to stir you up by way of reminder, [2Pe 1:13 ESV]. We ought always to encourage those who once were part of us but who no longer are! We know those who were never part of us because they now "preach" another religion. Wokeness, secular humanism, and all those other names. Yet...even those we can never completely give up on, though if they go far enough, instead of the encouragement above, we are told to treat them as ripe for evangelism, not as backsliders.
2023 - What about the word translated "fall" here in vs 10? Is it a mortal fall? I note first that it is about 50/50 as to whether this is translated fall or stumble. KJV says fall, NKJV says stumble. ESV, as shown above, says fall. The Greek word is "ptaio". The dictionary says this comes from the Greek word "pteron" which means wing. Great. I'm not even sure how to pronounce that. How many words start with a "pt" sound???? Here are a few: ptarmigan, pterodactyl (though this is shown to come from Latin?), ptomain (yes, the poison kind). There are several others but I don't know that I've ever heard the others used in a sentence. Pretty much all of them go back to "wing". The word that Peter uses here is relatively rare in the KJV NT. It only occurs five times and only in four verses. Three of those are translated "offend", once it is stumble, and once it is fall. Since there are so few, here they all are:
11 So I ask, did they stumble in order that they might fall? By no means! Rather, through their trespass salvation has come to the Gentiles, so as to make Israel jealous. [Rom 11:11 ESV]. Israel is in view. They stumbled, but the Bible is full of God's promise to once more restore them. That is, they stumbled, but they are not irrevocably lost.
10 For whoever keeps the whole law but fails in one point has become guilty of all of it. [Jas 2:10 ESV]. ESV translates this fail, KJV says fall. In either case we are talking about how, under the Law, one transgression condemns. Peter, in 1:10, is not speaking at all about what happens under the Law but what happens "in Christ".
2 For we all stumble in many ways. And if anyone does not stumble in what he says, he is a perfect man, able also to bridle his whole body. [Jas 3:2 ESV]. James includes himself with the stumblers. Only the perfect do not stumble. So...if we take James to mean that he has lost and regained his salvation, then EVERYONE who is not perfect has lost/will lose his salvation at some point and have to be saved again. How many times? How would you ever know? I don't think it means this. (Perseverance).
10 Therefore, brothers, be all the more diligent to confirm your calling and election, for if you practice these qualities you will never fall. [2Pe 1:10 ESV]. In context, stumble is a better word here. We know Peter is talking about Christians who have so abandoned the faith that they don't even remember they are saved. But he says to remind them, continually, of their status. He does not say that such are forever gone, but that they cannot themselves determine their state.
Oh my...Sleeps better...How many times do we lie in bed and wonder, just a little or a whole lot, if we are just kidding ourselves about our salvation? It is no sin to wonder this. Peter says here that we need to diligently continually daily confirm our election! We should always be looking for assurance. Have doubts? Pursue the qualities in vvs 5-7, and if we grow stronger in those virtues, this is our visible evidence of salvation! Never be afraid to say you have doubts. You SHOULD have doubts occasionally, but the proper application of that doubt is to spur us on to greater effort in pursuit of Christian virtue!
We need to hear this repeated "early and often" because we are so very prone to forget it!
In 13-15, Peter says the Lord has made clear to him that his life is nearly done. He will soon depart this worldly body. His effort here in this letter is so his readers "may be able at any time to recall these things". Is this not a reference to the purpose of Scripture? Is Peter telling them that what he is writing is to be considered on the same plain as the OT?
2023 - He is telling them that he can remind and encourage them while he is here, but someday soon they will have to manage without him. And then he says he is going to do all that he can to provide a way for them to remind themselves. And then he launches into a defense of the truth of scripture, the truth and reliability and trustworthiness of scripture - AS WRITTEN, NOT AS MODIFIED FOR THE TIMES - in assuring us of our salvation.
In the next verse, 16, Peter makes it clear that his teaching was about what he had seen with his own eyes. Seems to be contrasting this with some of the "fairy tales" and "verbal traditions" recounted by the false teachers. He is saying that testimony from those who were there is far more credible than retelling by those who were not present. By inference, he is elevating the authority of the apostolic writings over the "re-interpretation" of events the false teachers are peddling. Isn't this an accepted, indeed much preferred way, of looking at our own history? This is what's wrong with having a modern scholar tell us what 1776 was about. They were not there. Shouldn't we be putting far more credence in what the writers of that time say it was about, since they were eye-witnesses of those events as Peter was an eyewitness of Jesus' works and teachings? What a fabulous argument this is on so many fronts! Can I reword this for FB? It is such an important point!
2022 - Vs 16 is also important in that the writer here claims to be an eyewitness - as an apostle certainly is - to Jesus' life on earth. So if it is a forgery, this is a horrendous lie. And why would this writer do that, if he isn't trying to gain something for himself? It couldn't be fame, because if people knew who wrote it, they would be angry about his impersonation, not his deep understanding of salvation. No. Very difficult to see this as a forgery. If nothing else, this verse tells us that if it was a forgery, it was deliberately done, at the risk of being ostracized if the truth was discovered.
Peter recounts some things he saw and heard first hand. The voice of God calling Jesus his beloved Son:
17 For when he received honor and glory from God the Father, and the voice was borne to him by the Majestic Glory, "This is my beloved Son, with whom I am well pleased," [2Pe 1:17 ESV]
This was the Mount of Transfiguration. There were only three witnesses to this event. Peter puts himself in a very exclusive group here, pointing to his authority as an apostle, and to what he says over what those not present may say. I also copied this because Islam has a very big problem with Jesus being God's "son". I read in one of the James R. White books that the word "son" is not actually present in some scripture where Jesus is called the only begotten son of God. It only says he is the only begotten, as in he is unique in who he is. But I looked at the interlinear for this verse, and the word Son is most definitely there. I would consider it ill-advised to try and convert a Muslim with incomplete information. Seems to me we are better to define Son in a way that "works" in all quotations, rather than to only point out the places that fit with the point we want to make. With Islam, the point is that God did not have sex with Mary. That's what they claim that Christians claim. They say Jesus was born of Mary while she was a virgin. They don't have a problem with that concept. They do have a problem with him being God's son. I guess by inference they are denying that Jesus could be the son of any male while his mother was still a virgin. So they would have to make him fatherless. Just as unique a thing as only begotten...One of the things I got from the interlinear - in Strong's I think - is that the word used for son is occasionally applied to animals, but most often by a wide margin applies to a human male offspring of a man and a woman. So perhaps the real point being made in calling Jesus the Son of God is that Jesus was a man, a human, in form and function, while still being God in nature and spirit. The point is that Jesus was God in the flesh, born a human child like any other human child. I think this works better.
2023 - Peter's reminders:
First, in 16-18, he tells them they should believe what he says because he was there. He saw Jesus transfigured. He HEARD the voice of God. Therefore, they should believe what he says/what he has written to them.
Second, in 19-21, he tells them that the prophecies in the OT are real, inspired by God, through chosen men, and that those HOLY SCRIPTURES are also reminders of who Jesus is, why he came, what he did.
(This is turning into a long morning session...but I'm not skipping this. Too cold to go outside anyway!)
2022 - And it continues in vs 18:
18 we ourselves heard this very voice borne from heaven, for we were with him on the holy mountain. [2Pe 1:18 ESV]
The writer claims to be either Peter, James, or John, because they were the only three on that mountain with Jesus. This writer claims to be from a very exclusive group indeed. Not just an apostle. One of the three closest. James would have been long dead. He doesn't write anything like John. So this is either Peter, as claimed, or abject forgery.
19 And we have the prophetic word more fully confirmed, to which you will do well to pay attention as to a lamp shining in a dark place, until the day dawns and the morning star rises in your hearts, 20 knowing this first of all, that no prophecy of Scripture comes from someone's own interpretation. 21 For no prophecy was ever produced by the will of man, but men spoke from God as they were carried along by the Holy Spirit. [2Pe 1:19-21 ESV]
I have seen 20-21 quoted over and over. Even had it memorized for a long long time. But I never remember 19 being quoted also to give it context. Peter is saying that as an eye witness and an apostle, what he writes carries a TON of weight. But EVEN MORE, the OT scriptures also - no MORE SO - testify to the truth of Jesus Christ. Look at his description of the OT - a lamp shining in a dark place! If the false teachers deny what the OT says, they are false. A profound test useful in evaluating any teaching.
2023 - These are the verses that MSB calls vitally important for interpretation. These, along with 2 Tim 3:15-17, tell us what we ought to believe about scripture:
15 and how from childhood you have been acquainted with the sacred writings, which are able to make you wise for salvation through faith in Christ Jesus. 16 All Scripture is breathed out by God and profitable for teaching, for reproof, for correction, and for training in righteousness, 17 that the man of God may be complete, equipped for every good work. [2Ti 3:15-17 ESV]
2022 - And here is also one last confirmation of this letter as inspired, or of truly horrible deceit. This last verse affirms the inspired nature of all scripture. Is the point of a "forger" EVER to have his readers dig deep and test severely for legitimacy? Or to have them gloss over and just accept? This writer says test me, test all scripture and apply the tests to me also. It says listen to me, because I was there, and I know, and what I am writing is profound not because it is from me alone, but because it is inspired by the Holy Spirit. To go to such lengths to propagate a forgery implies something quite valuable is in the balance. And what? What is here for a forger to gain? That is MSB's argument, and it surely seems to make sense.