The following is an interesting article
by Michael Kruger defending Petrine authorship of 2 Peter which I read this
morning; while one will disagree with some of his arguments (e.g., I think he
is wrong in his comments on 1 Pet 3:19), but it does present a good case
against 2 Peter being pseudepigraphic:
Michael J. Kruger, “The Authenticity of
2 Peter,” Journal of the Evangelical
Theological Society 42.4 (1999): 645-67
