2 Peter and Jude
2 Peter and Jude
Technical

2 Peter and Jude

in Word Biblical Commentary

by Richard J. Bauckham

4.92 Rank Score: 7.8 from 17 reviews, 10 featured collections, and 25 user libraries
Pages 388
Publisher Thomas Nelson
Published 1983
ISBN-13 9780849902499

Collections

This book appears in the following featured collections.

Reviews

Add Your Review

G Ware G Ware February 15, 2018
The best option on a pair of texts which get less attention. Bauckham's expertise in Jewish and Christian apocalyptic and eschatalogical texts makes him the best person I can think of to write this commentary. Even after 35 years, it's still the best.
Princeton Seminary Princeton Seminary December 2, 2017
 
Robert M. Bowman, Jr Robert M. Bowman, Jr December 10, 2016
One of the most often-cited commentaries on the epistles, and justly so; worthy of being on this list although it is now somewhat dated. [Full Review]
Tim Challies Tim Challies December 16, 2013
While Bauckham’s commentary is not quite the consensus favorite, it is unanimously held up as a brilliant and helpful treatment. Yet every commentator on the commentaries critiques it for one small but important eccentricity: Bauckham does not believe that Peter wrote 2 Peter! That detail aside, the experts all agree this commentary is a must-read for the pastor and scholar. D.A. Carson says, “[T]his point should not put anyone off using what has been and will be the standard in the field for decades to come.” [Full Review]
Phillip J. Long Phillip J. Long August 7, 2012
This commentary is the most important contribution on these two letters in modern times. All commentaries after Bauckham will need to deal with his understanding of the letters. The introductions to the letters are perhaps more important that the commentary sections. Bauckham treats Jude first because he dates the book very early, no later that A.D. 50. He does not see any evidence of “Paulinism” nor the “early catholicism” found in later letters. Jude is the brother of Jesus and the letter reflects an apocalyptic Palestinian Judaism. Whether this is really Jesus’ brother or someone writing in his name is an open question for Bauckham, but he thinks that all the evidence is “consistent with authorship by Jude the brother of Jesus” (16). Second Peter, on the other hand, Bauckham thinks is a pseudonymous example of the literary genre testament. Like the Testament of the Twelve Patriarchs, 2 Peter was written using the character Peter in order to give a moral exhortation to a new generation of believers. He argues that the original audience would have understood this as a common literary convention. The readers (living at the end of the first century) would have expected the writer to do an accurate job of reporting “the essence of Peter’s teaching” but they would not have expected that Peter wrote the letter himself (134). Bauckham is an expert in the literature of the Second Temple Period and he uses this literature to interpret these two letters as apocalyptic literature consistent with the literature being produced by Jews in the middle of the first century. His section on 2 Peter’s literary influences is excellent. The commentary proceeds phrase by phrase through the Greek text without transliteration. As expected, the commentary interested in the various allusions to the Hebrew Bible or other literature. This makes for a challenging read, but ultimately rewarding to the diligent student. [Full Review]
Scot McKnight Scot McKnight December 18, 2009
R Bauckham's commentary on 2 Peter and Jude was ground-breaking in completeness and sensitivity to the Jewish context, drawing these two letters out of worn down theological diatribes and back into original contexts [Full Review]
Marcus Maher Marcus Maher October 20, 2009
Bauckham's commentary is undoubtedly the best commentary for academic work on Jude. In particular, his excursus on Jude's usage of the Testament of Moses was a masterpiece of scholarship, and I found his reconstruction of the general contents of the lost ending of the Testament of Moses to be very convincing. His notes on textual variants were also very helpful (there are a couple of very difficult readings in Jude). The whole commentary was a model of detail and thoroughness. My only complaint is that I wish he had written a little more for the 'Explanation' section of the commentary. 5 stars out of 5. [Full Review]
Many rank Bauckham's work as the best commentary on these two biblical books. Unfortunately (and without sufficient reason) Bauckham concludes that Peter was not the author of 2 Peter. Although most critical scholars would agree with Bauckham on this point, it is a significant mistake that mars a work containing some very helpful insights. For helpful responses to the arguments Bauckham presents, see the commentaries by Green and Davids. [Full Review]
Derek Thomas Derek Thomas September 21, 2008
Does not believe Peter wrote it!
John Glynn John Glynn September 20, 2008
Jim Rosscup Jim Rosscup September 20, 2008
Unattributed-m Unattributed-m May 26, 2008
Unnatributed-d Unnatributed-d May 26, 2008
D. A. Carson D. A. Carson May 26, 2008