You go on to list several reasons why you don't accept it, but do you really think you are in a majority of Christians who reject Peter's epistles? How about within your own Church? Are they dismissed?
We also know from early Apostolic Fathers and early Church Fathers (turn of the century) that the four Gospels were unquestionably considered "sacred writings" (i.e. Scriptures), but not Pauline Epistles.
Even if I put my Apostolic hat on (which I have to borrow :) my answer would be "so what" since we're not talking about an ecumenical Council here. Isn't that the correct way to look at it? :)
But the most compelling reason to dismiss Petrine authorship of 2 Peter is precisely in the paragraph you quote. Peter and Paul died around the same time (64 and 67 AD respectively) and clearly Peter was not in the position to see Paul's collected works, let alone call them "scriptures."
Why is that clear, and why would it be necessary for him to have seen ALL of Paul's works to declare the ones he had seen scriptures?
That is entirely irrelevant to me. Besides, I don't remember the Orthodox Church ever reading from Peter's epistles. I am sure the Church finds them useful for something.
Why is that clear, and why would it be necessary for him to have seen ALL of Paul's works to declare the ones he had seen scriptures?
Do you know of any scripture that is consists of one chapter? Besides, Peter would have said something had it been recognized as scripture. The truth is it wasn't, not until much later.