Text -- 2 Peter 3:5 (NET)

3:5 For they deliberately suppress this fact, that by the word of God heavens existed long ago and an earth was formed out of water and by means of water.

Commentary -- Word/Phrase Notes (per phrase)

Robertson: 2Pe 3:5

For this they wilfully forget ( lanthanei gar autous touto thelontas ).

Literally, "for this escapes them being willing."See this use of lanthanō (old verb, to escape notice of, to be hidden from) in Act 26:26. The present active participle thelontas (from thelō , to wish) has almost an adverbial sense here.

Robertson: 2Pe 3:5

Compacted ( sunestōsa ).

See Paul’ s sunestēken (Col 1:17) "consist."Second perfect active (intransitive) participle of sunistēmi , feminine singular agreeing with gē (nearest to it) rather than with ouranoi (subject of ēsan imperfect plural). There is no need to make Peter mean the Jewish mystical "seven heavens"because of the plural which was used interchangeably with the singular (Mat 5:9.).

Robertson: 2Pe 3:5

Out of water and amidst water ( ex hudatos kai di' hudatos ).

Out of the primeval watery chaos (Gen 1:2), but it is not plain what is meant by di' hudatos , which naturally means "by means of water,"though dia with the genitive is used for a condition or state (Heb 12:1). The reference may be to Gen 1:9, the gathering together of the waters.

Robertson: 2Pe 3:5

By the word of God ( tōi tou theou logōi ).

Instrumental case logōi , "by the fiat of God"(Gen 1:3; Heb 11:3 rēmati theou ).

Vincent: 2Pe 3:5

This they willingly are ignorant of ( λανθάνει αὐτους τοῦτο θέλοντας )

Lit., this escapes them of their own will. Rev., this they wilfully forget.

Vincent: 2Pe 3:5

The heavens were

But the Greek has no article. Render, there were heavens. So, too, not the earth, but an earth, as Rev.

Vincent: 2Pe 3:5

Standing ( συνεστῶσα )

Incorrect; for the word is, literally, standing together; i.e., compacted or formed. Compare Col 1:17, consist. Rev., compacted.

Vincent: 2Pe 3:5

Out of the water

Again no article. Render out of water; denoting not the position of the earth, but the material or mediating element in the creation; the waters being gathered together in one place, and the dry land appearing. Or, possibly, with reference to the original liquid condition of the earth - without form and void.

Vincent: 2Pe 3:5

In the water ( δὶ ὕδατος )

Omit the article. Διά has its usual sense here, not as Rev., amidst, but by means of. Bengel: " The water served that the earth should consist." Expositors are much divided as to the meaning. This is the view of Huther, Salmond, and, substantially, Alford.

Wesley: 2Pe 3:5

They do not care to know or consider.

Wesley: 2Pe 3:5

Which bounds the duration of all things, so that it cannot be either longer or shorter.

Wesley: 2Pe 3:5

Before the flood. The aerial heavens were, and the earth - Not as it is now, but standing out of the water and in the water - Perhaps the interior globe of earth was fixed in the midst of the great deep, the abyss of water; the shell or exterior globe standing out of the water, covering the great deep. This, or some other great and manifest difference between the original and present constitution of the terraqueous globe, seems then to have been so generally known, that St. Peter charges their ignorance of it totally upon their wilfulness.

JFB: 2Pe 3:5

Refutation of their scoffing from Scripture history.

JFB: 2Pe 3:5

Wilfully; they do not wish to know. Their ignorance is voluntary.

JFB: 2Pe 3:5

In contrast to 2Pe 3:8, "Be not ignorant of this." Literally, in both verses, "This escapes THEIR notice (sagacious philosophers though they think themselves)"; "let this not escape YOUR notice." They obstinately shut their eyes to the Scripture record of the creation and the deluge; the latter is the very parallel to the coming judgment by fire, which Jesus mentions, as Peter doubtless remembered.

JFB: 2Pe 3:5

Not by a fortuitous concurrence of atoms [ALFORD].

JFB: 2Pe 3:5

Greek, "from of old"; from the first beginning of all things. A confutation of their objection, "all things continue as they were FROM THE BEGINNING OF CREATION." Before the flood, the same objection to the possibility of the flood might have been urged with the same plausibility: The heavens (sky) and earth have been FROM OF OLD, how unlikely then that they should not continue so! But, replies Peter, the flood came in spite of their reasonings; so will the conflagration of the earth come in spite of the "scoffers" of the last days, changing the whole order of things (the present "world," or as Greek means, "order"), and introducing the new heavens and earth (2Pe 3:13).

JFB: 2Pe 3:5

Greek, "consisting of," that is, "formed out of the water." The waters under the firmament were at creation gathered together into one place, and the dry land emerged out of and above, them.

JFB: 2Pe 3:5

Rather, "by means of the water," as a great instrument (along with fire) in the changes wrought on the earth's surface to prepare it for man. Held together BY the water. The earth arose out of the water by the efficacy of the water itself [TITTMANN].

Clarke: 2Pe 3:5

For this they willingly are ignorant of - They shut their eyes against the light, and refuse all evidence; what does not answer their purpose they will not know. And the apostle refers to a fact that militates against their hypothesis, with which they refused to acquaint themselves; and their ignorance he attributes to their unwillingness to learn the true state of the case

Clarke: 2Pe 3:5

By the word of God the heavens were of old - I shall set down the Greek text of this extremely difficult clause: Ουρανοι ησαν εκπαλαι, και γη εξ ὑδατος και δι ’ ὑδατος συνεστωσα, τῳ του Θεου λογῳ· translated thus by Mr. Wakefield: "A heaven and an earth formed out of water, and by means of water, by the appointment of God, had continued from old time."By Dr. Macknight thus; "The heavens were anciently, and the earth of water: and through water the earth consists by the word of God."By Kypke thus: "The heavens were of old, and the earth, which is framed, by the word of God, from the waters, and between the waters."However we take the words, they seem to refer to the origin of the earth. It was the opinion of the remotest antiquity that the earth was formed out of water, or a primitive moisture which they termed ὑλη, hule , a first matter or nutriment for all things; but Thales pointedly taught αρχην δε των παντως ὑδωρ ειναι, that all things derive their existence from water, and this very nearly expresses the sentiment of Peter, and nearly in his own terms too. But is this doctrine true? It must be owned that it appears to be the doctrine of Moses: In the beginning, says he, God made the heavens and the earth; and the earth was without form and void; and darkness was upon the face of the deep. Now, these heavens and earth which God made in the beginning, and which he says were at first formless and empty, and which he calls the deep, are in the very next verse called waters; from which it is evident that Moses teaches that the earth was made out of some fluid substance, to which the name of water is properly given. And that the earth was at first in a fluid mass is most evident from its form; it is not round, as has been demonstrated by measuring some degrees near the north pole, and under the equator; the result of which proved that the figure of the earth was that of an oblate spheroid, a figure nearly resembling that of an orange. And this is the form that any soft or elastic body would assume if whirled rapidly round a center, as the earth is around its axis. The measurement to which I have referred shows the earth to be flatted at the poles, and raised at the equator. And by this measurement it was demonstrated that the diameter of the earth at the equator was greater by about twenty-five miles than at the poles

Now, considering the earth to be thus formed εξ ὑδατος, of water, we have next to consider what the apostle means by δι ’ ὑδατος, variously translated by out of, by means of, and between, the water

Standing out of the water gives no sense, and should be abandoned. If we translate between the waters, it will bear some resemblance to Gen 1:6, Gen 1:7 : And God said, Let there be a firmament in the midst of, בתוך bethoch , between, the waters; and let it divide the waters from the waters: and God divided the waters which were under the firmament from the waters which were above the firmament; then it may refer to the whole of the atmosphere, with which the earth is everywhere surrounded, and which contains all the vapours which belong to our globe, and without which we could neither have animal nor vegetative life. Thus then the earth, or terraqueous globe, which was originally formed out of water, subsists by water; and by means of that very water, the water compacted with the earth - the fountains of the great deep, and the waters in the atmosphere - the windows of heaven, Gen 7:11, the antediluvian earth was destroyed, as St. Peter states in the next verse: the terraqueous globe, which was formed originally of water or a fluid substance, the chaos or first matter, and which was suspended in the heavens - the atmosphere, enveloped with water, by means of which water it was preserved; yet, because of the wickedness of its inhabitants, was destroyed by those very same waters out of which it was originally made, and by which it subsisted.

Calvin: 2Pe 3:5

5.For this they willingly are ignorant of By one argument only he confutes the scoff of the ungodly, even by this, that the world once perished by a deluge of waters, when yet it consisted of waters. (Gen 1:2.) And as the history of this was well known, he says that they willingly, or of their own accord, erred. For they who infer the perpetuity of the world from its present state, designedly close their eyes, so as not to see so clear a judgment of God. The world no doubt had its origin from waters, for Moses calls the chaos from which the earth emerged, waters; and further, it was sustained by waters; it yet pleased the Lord to use waters for the purpose of destroying it. It hence appears that the power of nature is not sufficient to sustain and preserve the world, but that on the contrary it contains the very element of its own ruin, whenever it may please God to destroy it.

For it ought always to be borne in mind, that the world stands through no other power than that of God's word, and that therefore inferior or secondary causes derive from him their power, and produce different effects as they are directed. Thus through water the world stood, but water could have done nothing of itself, but on the contrary obeyed God's word as an inferior agent or element. As soon then as it pleased God to destroy the earth, the same water obeyed in becoming a ruinous inundation. We now see how egregiously they err, who stop at naked elements, as though there was perpetuity in them, and their nature were not changeable according to the bidding of God.

By these few words the petulance of those is abundantly refuted, who arm themselves with physical reasons to fight against God. For the history of the deluge is an abundantly sufficient witness that the whole order of nature is governed by the sole power of God. (Gen 7:17.)

Defender: 2Pe 3:5

It is remarkable that such a universally dominating theory of origins, meaning and destiny could be based on absolutely no genuine evidence. There is no scientific or historical evidence that any significant evolutionary changes have ever taken place, and the most basic laws of science (the laws of probability and thermodynamics) prove that genuine macroevolution could not happen at all. As Peter prophesied, this belief would be based on "wilful ignorance." They are "without excuse" (Rom 1:20).

Defender: 2Pe 3:5

Evolutionists, whether they are atheistic, pantheistic, deistic, or theistic evolutionists, willingly ignore God's testimony that the heavens and the earth did not evolve by continuing natural processes but were called into existence by God's omnipotent Word, fully complete and functioning from the beginning (Genesis 1:1-2:3; Exo 20:8-11; Psa 33:6-9; Heb 4:3, Heb 4:10; Heb 11:3). The only reason God took as long as six natural days to finish the whole creation was to serve as a pattern for man's six-day work week (Exo 20:8-11). The various theories of cosmic evolution, stellar evolution and planetary evolution are all unproven and internally destructive, as are the various theories of chemical evolution, organic evolution, human evolution and cultural evolution. There are now thousands of fully qualified scientists, some from every field of science, who have studied the scientific evidence, pro and con, who have come to the conviction that the Biblical record of earth history is precisely correct and that evolutionary theory is totally false.

Defender: 2Pe 3:5

In the first stage of creation, after the second day, the primeval earth material was surrounded by vast "waters above the firmament" and suspended in other "waters under the firmament" (Gen 1:7). The waters beneath the "firmament" (the "expanse" of the troposphere) later were either formed into seas or confined in a great deep beneath the earth's crust. This regime apparently continued until the time of the great Flood when they all came together again. Until then the earth was "standing" (Greek sunistemi - that is, being "sustained" in and by the waters). The earth is, in fact, uniquely, the "water planet.""

TSK: 2Pe 3:5

they willingly : Pro 17:16; Joh 3:19, Joh 3:20; Rom 1:28; 2Th 2:10-12

by the word : Gen 1:6, Gen 1:9; Psa 24:2, Psa 33:6, Psa 136:6; Heb 11:3

standing : Gr. consisting, Col 1:17

Commentary -- Word/Phrase Notes (per Verse)

Barnes: 2Pe 3:5

For this they willingly are ignorant of - Λαιθάνει γὰρ αὐτοὺς τοῦτο θέλοντας Laithanei gar autous touto thelontas . There is some considerable variety in the translation of this passage. In our common version the Greek word ( θέλοντας thelontas ) is rendered as if it were an adverb, or as if it referred to their "ignorance"in regard to the event; meaning, that while they might have known this fact, they took no pains to do it, or that they preferred to have its recollection far from their minds. So Beza and Luther render it. Others, however, take it as referring to what follows, meaning, "being so minded; being of that opinion; or affirming."So Bloomfield, Robinson (Lexicon), Mede, Rosenmuller, etc. According to this interpretation the sense is, "They who thus will or think; that is, they who hold the opinion that all things will continue to remain as they were, are ignorant of this fact that things have not always thus remained; that there has been a destruction of the world once by water."

The Greek seems rather to demand this interpretation; and then the sense of the passage will be, "It is concealed or hidden from those who hold this opinion, that the earth has been once destroyed."It is implied, whichever interpretation is adopted, that the will was concerned in it; that they were influenced by that rather than by sober judgment and by reason; and whether the word refers to their "ignorance,"or to their "holding that opinion,"there was obstinacy and perverseness about it. The "will"has usually more to do in the denial and rejection of the doctrines of the Bible than the "understanding"has. The argument which the apostle appeals to in reply to this objection is a simple one. The adversaries of the doctrine affirmed that the laws of nature had always remained the same, and they affirmed that they always would. The apostle denies the fact which they assumed, in the sense in which they affirmed it, and maintains that those laws have not been so stable and uniform that the world has never been destroyed by an overwhelming visitation from God. It has been destroyed by a flood; it may be again by fire. There was the same improbability that the event would occur, so far as the argument from the stability of the laws of nature is concerned, in the one case that there is in the other, and consequently the objection is of no force.

That by the word of God - By the command of God. "He spoke, and it was done."Compare Gen 1:6, Gen 1:9; Psa 33:9. The idea here is, that everything depends on his word or will. As the heavens and the earth were originally made by his command, so by the same command they can be destroyed.

The heavens were of old - The heavens were formerly made, Gen 1:1. The word "heaven"in the Scriptures sometimes refers to the atmosphere, sometimes to the starry worlds as they appear above us, and sometimes to the exalted place where God dwells. Here it is used, doubtless, in the popular signification, as denoting the heavens as they "appear,"embracing the sun, moon, and stars.

And the earth standing out of the water and in the water - Margin, "consisting."Greek, συνεστῶσα sunestōsa . The Greek word, when used in an intransitive sense, means "to stand with,"or "together;"then tropically, "to place together,"to constitute, place, bring into existence - Robinson. The idea which our translators seem to have had is, that, in the formation of the earth, a part was out of the water, and a part under the water; and that the former, or the inhabited portion, became entirely submerged, and that thus the inhabitants perished. This was not, however, probably the idea of Peter. He doubtless has reference to the account given in Gen. 1: of the creation of the earth, in which water performed so important a part. The thought in his mind seems to have been, that "water"entered materially into the formation of the earth, and that in its very origin there existed the means by which it was destroyed afterward.

The word which is rendered "standing"should rather be rendered "consisting of,"or "constituted of;"and the meaning is, that the creation of the earth was the result of the divine agency acting on the mass of elements which in Genesis is called "waters,"Gen 1:2, Gen 1:6-7, Gen 1:9. There was at first a vast fluid, an immense unformed collection of materials, called "waters,"and from that the earth arose. The point of time, therefore, in which Peter looks at the earth here, is not when the mountains, and continents, and islands, seem to be standing partly out of the water and partly in the water, but when there was a vast mass of materials called "waters"from which the earth was formed. The phrase "out of the water"( ἐξ ὕδατος ex hudatos ) refers to the origin of the earth. It was formed "from,"or out of, that mass. The phrase "in the water"( δἰ ὕδατος di' hudatos ) more properly means "through"or "by."It does not mean that the earth stood in the water in the sense that it was partly submerged; but it means not only that the earth arose "from"that mass that is called "water"in Gen. 1, but that that mass called "water"was in fact the grand material out of which the earth was formed. It was "through"or "by means of"that vast mass of mingled elements that the earth was made as it was. Everything arose out of that chaotic mass; through that, or by means of that, all things were formed, and from the fact that the earth was thus formed out of the water, or that water entered so essentially into its formation, there existed causes which ultimately resulted in the deluge.

Poole: 2Pe 3:5

For this they willingly are ignorant of they will not know what they ought to know, and, if they would search the Scripture, might know.

That by the word of God the command of God, or word of his power, as it is called, Heb 1:3 : see Gen 1:6,9 Ps 33:6 148:5 .

The heavens were were created, or had a being given them, Gen 1:6 .

Of old from the beginning of the world.

And the earth the globe of the earth, which comprehends likewise the seas and rivers, as parts of the whole.

Standing out of the water and in the water: according to our translation, the sense of these words may be plainly this, that the earth, standing partly out of the water, (as all the dry land doth, whose surface is higher than the water), and partly in the water, (as those parts do which are under it), or in the midst of the water, as being covered and encompassed by seas and rivers. But most expositors follow the marginal reading, and render the Greek word by consisting; and then the meaning may be, either:

1. That the earth consisting of water, as the matter out of which it was formed, (Moses calling the chaos which was that matter, waters, Gen 1:2 ), and by water, from which it hath its compactness and solidity, and without which it would be wholly dry, mere useless dust, unfit for the generation and production of natural things. If we understand the words thus, the argument lies against the scoffers; for the earth thus consists of and by water, yet God made use of the water for the destroying of the world; and so natural causes are not sufficient for its preservation without the power of God sustaining it in its being; and whenever he withdraws that power, in spite of all inferior causes, it must perish. Or:

2. The words may thus be read, the heavens were of old, and the earth (supply from the former clause) was out of the water, and consisting by, or in, the water; and the meaning is, that the earth did emerge, or appear out of, or above, the water, viz. when God gathered the waters together, and made the dry land appear; and doth consist by, or among, or in, the midst of the waters, as was before explained.

Haydock: 2Pe 3:5

For this they are wilfully ignorant of. The ignorance of these unbelievers is wilful and inexcusable, when they question the existence of a Supreme Being, of a future state, wherein God will reward the good and punish the wicked; when they laugh at all the miracles, and all the extraordinary effects of God's power and justice, such as was the general flood or deluge, by which God destroyed the wicked by an inundation of waters. And as our blessed Saviour said of those, who would not believe in the days of Noe [Noah], "They were eating and drinking, marrying, and giving in marriage,...and they knew not till the flood came, and took them all away: so shall also the coming of the Son of man be." (Mattew xxiv. 38. 39.) (Witham)

Gill: 2Pe 3:5

For this they willingly are ignorant of,.... Namely, what follows; for as these men were such as had professed Christianity, and had the advantage of revelation, and had the opportunity of reading the Scriptures, they might have known that the heavens and the earth were from the beginning; and that they were made by the word of God; and that the earth was originally in such a position and situation as to be overflowed with a flood, and that it did perish by a general inundation; and that the present heavens and earth are kept and reserved for a general burning; and it might be discerned in nature, that there are preparations making for an universal conflagration; but all this they chose not to know, and affected ignorance of: particularly

that by the word of God the heavens were of old: not only in the times of Noah, but "from the beginning"; as the Ethiopic version reads, and which agrees with the account in Gen 1:1; by "the heavens" may be meant both the third heaven, and the starry heavens, and the airy heavens, with all their created inhabitants; and especially the latter, since these were concerned in, and affected with the general deluge; and these were in the beginning of time, out of nothing brought into being, and so were not eternal, and might be destroyed again, or at least undergo a change, even though they were of old, and of long duration: for it was "by the word of God" that they at first existed, and were so long preserved in being; either by the commanding word of God, by his powerful voice, his almighty fiat, who said, Let it be done, and it was done, and who commanded beings to rise up out of nothing, and they did, and stood fast; and so the Arabic version renders it, "by the command of God"; or by his eternal Logos, the essential Word of God, the second Person in the Trinity, who is often in Scripture called the Word, and the Word of God, and, as some think, by the Apostle Peter, 1Pe 1:23, and certain it is that the creation of all things is frequently ascribed to him; see Joh 1:16; wherefore by the same Word they might be dissolved, and made to pass away, as they will:

and the earth standing out of the water and in the water; that is, "by the Word of God"; for this phrase, in the original text, is placed after this clause, and last of all; and refers not only to the being of the heavens of old, but to the rise, standing, and subsistence of the earth, which is here particularly described for the sake of the deluge, the apostle afterwards mentions: and it is said to be "standing out of the water", or "consisting out of it"; it consists of it as a part; the globe of the earth is terraqueous, partly land and partly water; and even the dry land itself has its rise and spring out of water; the first matter that was created is called the deep, and waters in which darkness was, and upon which the Spirit of God moved, Gen 1:2; agreeably to which Thales the Milesian asserted ^t, that water was the principle of all things; and the Ethiopic version here renders the words thus, "and the Word of God created also the earth out of water, and confirmed it": the account the Jews give of the first formation of the world is this ^u;

"at first the world was מים במים, "water in water"; what is the sense (of that passage Gen 1:2;) "and the Spirit of God moved upon the face of the waters?" he returned, and made it snow; he casteth forth his ice like morsels, Psa 147:17; he returned and made it earth; "for to the snow he saith, Be thou earth", Job 37:6, and the earth stood upon the waters; "to him that stretched out the earth above the waters", Psa 136:6;''

however, certain it is, that the earth was first covered with water, when at the word, and by the command of God, the waters fled and hasted away, and were gathered into one place, and the dry land rose up and appeared; and then it was that it "stood out of the water"; see Gen 1:9; moreover, the earth consists, or is kept and held together by water; there is a general humidity or moisture that runs through it, by which it is compacted together, or otherwise it would resolve into dust, and by which it is fit for the production, increase, and preservation of vegetables and other things, which it otherwise would not be: and it is also said to stand "in the water", or by the water; upon it, according to Psa 24:2; or rather in the midst of it, there being waters above the firmament or expanse; in the airy heavens, in the clouds all around the earth, called the windows of heaven; and water below the firmament or expanse, in the earth itself; besides the great sea, a large body of waters is in the midst of the earth, in the very bowels of it, which feed rivers, and form springs, fountains and wells, called "the fountains of the great deep", Gen 7:11; and in this position and situation was the earth of old, and so was prepared in nature for a general deluge, and yet was preserved firm and stable by the word of God, for a long series of time; so the Arabic version renders it, "and the earth out of the water, and in the water, stood stable, by the command of God"; but when it was his pleasure, he brought the flood on the world of the ungodly, of which an account follows.

Commentary -- Verse Notes / Footnotes

NET Notes: 2Pe 3:5

¹ tn The Greek is difficult at this point. An alternative is “Even though they maintain this, it escapes them that…” Literally the idea seems to be: “For this escapes these [men] who wish [it to be so].”

² tn The word order in Greek places “the word of God” at the end of the sentence. See discussion in the note on “these things” in v. 6.

³ tn Or “land,” “the earth.”

Geneva Bible: 2Pe 3:5

^{( 4 )} For this they willingly are ignorant of, that by the word of God the heavens were of old, and the ^{( b )} earth standing out of the water and in the water:

^{( 4 )} He sets against them the creation of heaven and earth by the word of God, which these men are willingly ignorant of.

^{( b )} Which appeared, when the waters were gathered together into one place.

Commentary -- Verse Range Notes

TSK Synopsis: 2Pe 3:1-18

1 He assures them of the certainty of Christ's coming to judgment, against those scorners who dispute against it;

8 warning the godly, for the long patience of God, to hasten their repentance.

10 He describes also the manner how the world shall be destroyed;

11 exhorting them, from the expectation thereof, to all holiness of life;

16 and again to think the patience of God to tend to their salvation, as Paul wrote to them in his epistles.

MHCC: 2Pe 3:5-10

Had these scoffers considered the dreadful vengeance with which God swept away a whole world of ungodly men at once, surely they would not have scoffed at his threatening an equally terrible judgment. The heavens and the earth which now are, by the same word, it is declared, will be destroyed by fire. This is as sure to come, as the truth and the power of God can make it. Christians are here taught and established in the truth of the coming of the Lord. Though, in the account of men, there is a vast difference between one day and a thousand years, yet, in the account of God, there is no difference. All things past, present, and future, are ever before him: the delay of a thousand years cannot be so much to him, as putting off any thing for a day or for an hour is to us. If men have no knowledge or belief of the eternal God, they will be very apt to think him such as themselves. How hard is it to form any thoughts of eternity! What men count slackness, is long-suffering, and that to us-ward; it is giving more time to his own people, to advance in knowledge and holiness, and in the exercise of faith and patience, to abound in good works, doing and suffering what they are called to, that they may bring glory to God. Settle therefore in your hearts that you shall certainly be called to give an account of all things done in the body, whether good or evil. And let a humble and diligent walking before God, and a frequent judging of yourselves, show a firm belief of the future judgment, though many live as if they were never to give any account at all. This day will come, when men are secure, and have no expectation of the day of the Lord. The stately palaces, and all the desirable things wherein wordly-minded men seek and place their happiness, shall be burned up; all sorts of creatures God has made, and all the works of men, must pass through the fire, which shall be a consuming fire to all that sin has brought into the world, though a refining fire to the works of God's hand. What will become of us, if we set our affections on this earth, and make it our portion, seeing all these things shall be burned up? Therefore make sure of happiness beyond this visible world.

Matthew Henry: 2Pe 3:3-7

To quicken and excite us to a serious minding and firm adhering to what God has revealed to us by the prophets and apostles, we are told that there will be scoffers, men who will make a mock of sin, and of salvation from it. God's way of saving sinners by Jesus Christ is what men will scoff at, and that in the last days, under the gospel. This indeed may seem very strange, that the New Testament dispensation of the covenant of grace, which is spiritual and therefore more agreeable to the nature of God than the Old, should be ridiculed and reproached; but the spirituality and simplicity of New Testament worship are directly contrary to the carnal mind of man, and this accounts for what the apostle seems here to hint at, namely, that scoffers shall be more numerous and more bold in the last days than ever before. Though in all ages those who were born and walked after the flesh persecuted, reviled, and reproached those who were born and did walk after the Spirit, yet in the last days there will be a great improvement in the art and impudence of bantering serious godliness, and those who firmly adhere to the circumspection and self-denial which the gospel prescribes. This is what is mentioned as a thing well known to all Christians, and therefore they ought to reckon upon it, that they may not be surprised and shaken, as if some strange thing happened unto them. Now to prevent the true Christian's being overcome, when attacked by these scoffers, we are told,

I. What sort of persons they are: they walk after their own lusts, they follow the devices and desires of their own hearts, and carnal affections, not the dictates and directions of right reason and an enlightened well-informed judgment. This they do in the course of their conversation, they live as they list, and they speak as they list; it is not only their inward minds that are evil and opposite to God, as the mind of every unrenewed sinner is (Rom 8:7), alienated from God, ignorant of him, and averse to him; but they have grown to such a height of wickedness that they proclaim openly what is in the hearts of others who are yet carnal; they say, "Our tongues are our own, and our strength, and time, and who is lord over us? Who shall contradict or control us, or ever call us to an account for what we say or do?"And, as they scorn to be confined by any laws of God in their conversation, so neither will they bear that the revelation of God should dictate and prescribe to them what they are to believe; as they will walk in their own way, and talk their own language, so will they also think their own thoughts, and form principles which are altogether their own: here also their own lusts alone shall be consulted by them. None but such accomplished libertines as are here described can take a seat, at least they cannot sit in the seat of the scornful. "By this you shall know them, that you may the better be upon your guard against them."

II. We also are forewarned how far they will proceed: they will attempt to shake and unsettle us, even as to our belief of Christ's second coming; they will scoffingly say, Where is the promise of his coming? 2Pe 3:4. Without this, all the other articles of the Christian faith will signify very little; this is that which fills up and gives the finishing stroke to all the rest. The promised Messiah has come, he was made flesh, and dwelt among us; he is altogether such a one as in stated before, and has done all that for us which has been before taken notice of. These principles the enemies of Christianity have all along endeavoured to overturn; but as these all rest upon facts which are already past, and of which this and the other apostles have given us the most sure and satisfying evidence, it is probable that they will at last grow weary of their opposition to them; and yet, while one very principal article of our faith refers to what is still behind, and only has a promise to rest upon, here they will still attack us, even to the end of time. Till our Lord shall have come, they will not themselves believe that he will come; nay, they will laugh at the very mention of his second coming, and do what in them lies to put all out of countenance who seriously believe and wait for it. Now therefore let us see how this point stands, both on the believer's part and on the part of these seducers: the believer not only desires that he may come, but, having a promise that he will come, a promise that he himself has made and often repeated, a promise received and reported by faithful witnesses, and left upon sure record, he is also firmly and fully persuaded that he will come: on the other hand, these seducers, because they wish he never may, therefore do all that in them lies to cheat themselves and others into a persuasion that he will never come. If they cannot deny that there is a promise, yet they will laugh at that very promise, which argues much higher degrees of infidelity and contempt: Where is the promise, say they, of his coming?

III. We are also forewarned of the method of their reasoning, for while they laugh they will pretend to argue too. To this purpose they add that since the fathers fell asleep all things continue as they were from the beginning of the creation, 2Pe 3:4. This is a subtle, though not a solid way of reasoning; it is apt to make impressions upon weak minds, and especially upon wicked hearts. Because sentence against them is not speedily executed, therefore they flatter themselves that it never will, whereupon their hearts are fully set in them to do evil (Ecc 8:11); thus they act themselves, and thus they would persuade others to act; so here, say they, " The fathers have fallen asleep, those are all dead to whom the promise was made, and it was never made good in their time, and there is no likelihood that it ever will be in any time; why should we trouble ourselves about it? If there had been any truth or certainty in the promise you speak of, we should surely have seen somewhat of it before this time, some signs of his coming, some preparatory steps in order to it; whereas we find to this very day all things continue as they were, without any change, even from the beginning of the creation. Since the world has undergone no changes in the course of so many thousand years, why should we affright ourselves as if it were to have an end?"Thus do these scoffers argue. Because they see no changes, therefore they fear not God, Psa 55:19. They neither fear him nor his judgments; what he never has done they would conclude he never can do or never will.

IV. Here is the falsehood of their argument detected. Whereas they confidently had said there had not been any change from the beginning of the creation, the apostle puts us in remembrance of a change already past, which, in a manner, equals that which we are called to expect and look for, which was the drowning of the world in the days of Noah. This these scoffers had overlooked; they took no notice of it. Though they might have known it, and ought to have known it, yet this they willingly are ignorant of (2Pe 3:5), they choose to pass it over in silence, as if they had never heard or known any thing of it; if they knew it, they did not like to retain it in their knowledge; they did not receive this truth in the love of it, neither did they care to own it. Note, It is hard to persuade men to believe what they are not willing to find true; they are ignorant, in many cases, because they are willing to be ignorant, and they do not know because they do not care to know. But let not sinners think that such ignorance as this will be admitted as an excuse for whatever sin it may betray them into. Those who crucified Christ did not know who he was; for had they known they would not have crucified the Lord of glory (1Co 2:8); but, though ignorant, they were not therefore innocent; their ignorance itself was a sin, willing and wilful ignorance, and one sin can be no excuse for another. So it is here; had these known of the dreadful vengeance with which God swept away a whole world of ungodly wretches at once, they would not surely have scoffed at his threatenings of any after equally terrible judgment; but here they were willingly ignorant, they did not know what God had done because they had no mind to know it. Now therefore we shall proceed to consider the representation which the apostle here lays down both of the destruction of the old world by water and that which awaits this present world at the final conflagration. He mentions the one as what God has done, to convince and persuade us the rather to believe that the other both may be and will be.

1. We begin with the apostle's account of the destruction which has once already come upon the world (2Pe 3:5, 2Pe 3:6): By the word of God the heavens were of old, and the earth standing out of the water and in the water, whereby the world that then was, being overflowed with water, perished. Originally the world was otherwise situated, the waters were most wisely divided at the creation and most beneficially for us; some of the waters had proper repositories above the firmament, here called the heavens (as it is also Gen 1:8), and others, under the firmament, gathered together unto one place; there were then both sea and dry land, commodious habitation for the children of men. But now, at the time of the universal deluge, the case is strangely altered; the waters which God had divided before, assigning to each part its convenient receptacle, now does he, in anger, throw together again in a heap. He breaks up the fountain of the great deep, and throws open the windows ( that is, the clouds ) of heaven (Gen 7:11), till the whole earth is overflowed with water, and not a spot can be found upon the highest mountains but what is fifteen cubits under water, Gen 7:20. Thus he made known at once his terrible power and his fierce anger, and made an end of a whole world at once: The world that then was, being overflowed with water, perished, 2Pe 3:6. Is not here a change and a most awful change! And then it is to be observed that all this was done by the word of God; it was by his powerful word that the world was made at first, and made in so commodious and beautiful a frame and order, Heb 11:3, Katērtisthai . He said, Let there be a firmament, etc., Gen 1:6, Gen 1:7. And let the waters under the heaven be gathered together unto one place, etc., Gen 1:9, Gen 1:10. Thus he spoke, and it was done, Psa 33:9. Thus, says our apostle, by the word of the Lord the heavens were, as they were of old (that is, at first creation) and the earth (as it was at first a terraqueous globe) standing out of the water and in the water. Not is it only the first frame and order of the world that is here said to be by the word of God, but the after-confusion and ruin of the world, as well as the utter destruction of its inhabitants, were also by the same word; none but that God who stretched out the heavens and laid the foundation of the earth could destroy and overthrow such a vast fabric at once. This was done by the word of his power, and it was also done according to the word of his promise; God had said that he would destroy man, even all flesh, and that he would do it by bringing a flood of waters upon the earth, Gen 6:7, Gen 6:13, Gen 6:17. This was the change which God had before brought upon the world, and which these scoffers had overlooked; and now we are to consider,

2. What the apostle says of the destructive change which is yet to come upon it: The heavens and the earth, which now are, by the same word are kept in store, reserved unto fire against the day of judgment and perdition of ungodly men, 2Pe 3:7. Here we have an awful account of the final dissolution of the world, and which we are yet more nearly concerned in. The ruin that came upon the world and its inhabitants by the flood, we read, and hear, and think of, with concern, though those who were swept away by it were such as we never knew; but the judgment here spoken of is yet to come, and will surely come, though we know not when, nor upon what particular age or generation of men; and therefore we are not, we cannot be, sure that it may not happen in our own times: and this makes a very great difference, though it should be admitted that they were equal in every other respect, which yet must not be allowed, for there were some, though very few, who escaped that deluge, but not one can escape in this conflagration. Besides, we were not in reach of the one, but are not sure that we shall not be included in the other calamity. Now therefore to see the world to which we belong destroyed at once - not a single person only, not a particular family only, nor yet a nation (even that which we are most nearly interested in and concerned for), but the whole world, I say, sinking at once, and no ark provided, no possible way left of escaping for any one from the common ruin, this makes a difference between the desolation that has been and what we yet are to expect. The one is already past, and never to return upon us any more (for God has said expressly that there shall never any more be a flood to destroy the earth, Gen 9:11-17); the other is still behind, and is as certain to come as the truth and the power of God can make it: the one came gradually upon the world, and was growing upon its inhabitants forty days, before it made an utter end of them (Gen 7:12, Gen 7:17); this other will come upon them swiftly and all at once (2Pe 2:1): besides, there were in that overthrow (as we have said) a few who escaped, but the ruin which yet awaits this world, whenever it comes, will be absolutely a universal one; there will not be any part but what the devouring flames will seize upon, not a sanctuary left any where for the inhabitants to flee to, not a single spot in all this world where any one of them can be safe. Thus, whatever differences may be assigned between that destruction of the world and this here spoken of, they do indeed represent the approaching as the most terrible judgment; yet that the world has once been destroyed by a universal deluge renders it the more credible that it may be again ruined by a universal conflagration. Let therefore the scoffers, who laugh at the coming of our Lord to judgment, at least consider that it may be. There is nothing said of it in the word of God but what is within reach of the power of God, and, though they still should laugh, they shall not put us out of countenance; we are well assured that it will be, because he has said it, and we can depend upon his promise. They err, not knowing (at least not believing) the scriptures, nor the power of God; but we know, and we do or ought to depend upon, both. Now that which he has said, and which he will certainly make good, is that the heavens and the earth which now are (which we are now related to, which still subsist in all the beauty and order in which we see them, and which are so agreeable and useful to us, as we find they are) are kept in store, not to be, what earthly minds would wish to have them, treasures for us, but to be what God will have them, in his treasury, securely lodged and kept safely for his purposes. It follows, they are reserved unto fire. Observe, God's following judgments are more terrible than those which went before; the old world was destroyed by water, but this is reserved unto fire, which shall burn up the wicked at the last day; and, though this seems to be delayed, yet, as this wicked world is upheld by the word of God, so it is only reserved for the vengeance of him to whom vengeance belongs, who will at the day of judgment deal with an ungodly world according to their deserts, for the day of judgment is the day of the perdition of ungodly men. Those who now scoff at a future judgment shall find it a day of vengeance and utter destruction. "Beware therefore of being among these scoffers; never question but the day of the Lord will come; give diligence therefore to be found in Christ, that that may be a time of refreshment and day of redemption to you which will be a day of indignation and wrath to the ungodly world."

Barclay: 2Pe 3:5-6

Peter's first argument is that the world is not eternally stable. The point he is making is that the ancient world was destroyed by water, just as the present world is going to be destroyed by fire. The detail of this passage is, however, difficult.

He says that the earth was composed out of water and through water. According to the Genesis story in the beginning there was a kind of watery chaos. "The Spirit of God moved over the face of the waters.... God said, Let there be a firmament in the midst of the waters, and let it separate the waters from the waters" (Gen 1:2, Gen 1:6). Out of this watery chaos the world was formed. Further, it is through water that the world is sustained, because life is sustained by the rain which comes down from the skies. What Peter means is that the world was created out of water and is sustained by water; and it was through this same element that the ancient world was destroyed.

Further to clarify this passage we have to note that the flood legend developed. As so often in Second Peter and Jude the picture behind this comes not directly from the Old Testament but from the Book of Enoch. In Enoch 83: 3-5 Enoch has a vision: "I saw in a vision how the heaven collapsed and fell to the earth, and, where it fell to the earth, I saw how the earth was swallowed up in a great abyss." In the later stories the flood involved not only the obliteration of sinners but the total destruction of heaven and earth. So the warning which Peter is giving may be put like this: "You say that as things are, so they have ever been and so they ever will be. You build your hopes on the idea that this is an unchanging universe. You are wrong, for the ancient world was formed out of water and was sustained by water, and it perished in the flood."

We may say that this is only an old legend more than half-buried in the antiquities of the past. But we cannot say that a passage like this has no significance for us. When we strip away the old Jewish legend and its later development, we are still left with this permanent truth that the man who will read history with open eyes can see within it the moral law at work and God's dealings with men. Froude, the great historian, said that history is a voice sounding across the centuries that in the end it is always ill with the wicked and well with the good. When Oliver Cromwell was arranging his son Richard's education, he said, "I would have him know a little history." In fact, the lesson of history is that there is a moral order in the universe and that he who defies it does so at his peril.

Constable: 2Pe 3:1-16

V. THE PROSPECT FOR THE CHRISTIAN 3:1-16

Peter turned from a negative warning against false teachers to make a positive declaration of the apostles' message to help his readers understand why he wrote this letter. His language had been strong and confrontive, but now he spoke with love and encouragement in gentle and endearing terms.

"While in chapter 2 the writer delivered a fervid denunciation of the false teachers and their immorality, in this section he renews his pastoral concern to fortify his readers in regard to another aspect of the danger facing them, namely, the heretical denial of Christ's return."¹²⁹

"In the third chapter Peter refutes the mockers' denial of Christ's return (vv. 1-7), presents the correct view concerning Christ's return (vv. 8-13), and concludes with timely exhortations to his readers in view of the dark and dangerous days facing them (vv. 14-18)."¹³⁰

Constable: 2Pe 3:3-6

B. Scoffing in the Last Days 3:3-6

Peter warned his readers about the activity of mockers preceding the Lord's return to enable them to deal with this test of their faith.

"Peter finally brings together two of the most important issues in the letter: the false teachers' skepticism about the return of Christ in glory (see 1:16-21) and their disdain for holiness (chap. 2)."¹³⁴

3:3 "First of all" means of primary importance (cf. 1:20). The "last days" Peter referred to here are the days before Jesus Christ's return at the Rapture. This is the same way other writers of Scripture used the phrase "last days" (cf. 2 Tim. 3:1-5; 1 John 2:18-19). What the mockers said follows in verse 4. Here the emphasis is on their attitude of intellectual superiority and disdain of scriptural revelation. This attitude led them to immoral conduct.

"The adversaries who denied the Parousia were themselves a proof of its imminence."¹³⁵

"A scoffer is someone who treats lightly that which ought to be taken seriously."¹³⁶

3:4 One could hardly find a better summary anywhere of the philosophy of naturalism that so thoroughly permeates modern western civilization than what this verse contains (cf. Jer. 17:15; Mal. 7:10). Peter referred to a denial of supernaturalism and an assertion of uniformitarianism. In particular, the scoffers denied the promise of the Lord Jesus that He would return (John 14:1-3; Acts 1:11; et al.). They assumed that God does not intervene in the world.

"Those who give way to their own lusts will always mock at any incentive to noble living."¹³⁷

The "fathers" are probably physical forefathers, more likely the Old Testament patriarchs rather than the first generation of Christians. This is the normal use of the word in the New Testament.

Peter proceeded to answer the second statement in this verse in verses 5-7 and then responded to the scoffers' rhetorical question in verses 8-10. So this section has a somewhat chiastic structure.

3:5 "Escapes their notice" in the Greek means forgets purposely by disregarding information. Peter cited two events in the creation of the cosmos that show things have not always been as they are. God did intervene in the world in the past. When God spoke, the universe came into existence (Gen. 1:6-8; cf. Heb. 11:3). God spoke again and the dry land separated from ("out of") the waters (Gen. 1:9-10). Thus God used water to form the dry land.¹³⁸

3:6 The flood in Noah's day was Peter's third example. God spoke again and the earth flooded. "Through which" (a plural relative pronoun in Greek) probably refers to "the Word of God" and "water" (v. 5).

". . . in 3:6 his [the writer's] emphasis is on the Flood as a universal judgment on sinful men and women. But he evidently conceives this judgment as having been executed by means of a cosmic catastrophe which affected the heavens as well as the earth."¹³⁹

College: 2Pe 3:1-18

2 PETER 3

C. THE NECESSITY OF BELIEVING IN CHRIST'S RETURN (3:1-13)

1. The False Teaching (3:1-7)

¹ Dear friends, this is now my second letter to you. I have written both of them as reminders to stimulate you to wholesome thinking. ² I want you to recall the words spoken in the past by the holy prophets and the command given by our Lord and Savior through your apostles.

³ First of all, you must understand that in the last days scoffers will come, scoffing and following their own evil desires. ⁴ They will say, ''Where is this 'coming' he promised? Ever since our fathers died, everything goes on as it has since the beginning of creation." ⁵ But they deliberately forget that long ago by God's word the heavens existed and the earth was formed out of water and by water. ⁶ By these waters also the world of that time was deluged and destroyed. ⁷ By the same word the present heavens and earth are reserved for fire, being kept for the day of judgment and destruction of ungodly men.

As Peter begins to close his letter, he returns to his earlier emphasis on strengthening the faith of his readers. He reminds them of the many reasons for believing that Jesus is indeed coming back in judgment. It is here that he most clearly reveals the arguments of the false teachers. They teach that Christ will not return, because he has not yet returned as expected, and because the world has continued without change since the creation. Peter reminds the readers that God created the world by his word, then destroyed the world by his word, and that he certainly can and will destroy it again by his word. Destruction awaits the ungodly.

3:1 Dear friends, this is now my second letter to you. I have written both of them as reminders to stimulate you to wholesome thinking.

Peter seems to know his readers well, as he calls them "loved ones" (ajgaphtoiv, agapçtoi). (The NIV's "friends" is not strong enough.) Since he calls this his "second" letter to these Christians, it is probable that the first was the letter we call 1 Peter. This is not certain, though, since 1 Peter could have been sent to a different group of Christians. Peter probably wrote many more letters than these two.

His purpose for both, "to stimulate you to wholesome thinking," is stated very generally. Since both letters deal with the ethical obligations of Christians, the description is an accurate one. The term translated "wholesome" refers to purity or a lack of contamination. Peter's fear at the time of this writing is, of course, that the false teachers will contaminate the thinking of his readers.

3:2 I want you to recall the words spoken in the past by the holy prophets and the command given by our Lord and Savior through your apostles.

Just as he did in 1:16-21, Peter reminds these believers that his words are based on the words of the prophets and the apostles, who passed on what Jesus taught them. He speaks of "your apostles," probably referring to the apostles who first taught these readers.

The content of the "words" and the "command" is somewhat difficult to determine. Peter may be discussing the demand for holy living preached by the prophets and by Jesus. The word "command" (ejntolhv, entolç) would seem to support this view. Yet he may be looking forward to the following verse, suggesting that the prophets and Jesus predicted that false teachers would come and lead people into apostasy. Or he may be writing about the future coming of Jesus in judgment, also taught by the prophets and by Jesus himself. This would be supported by the primary teaching of the whole letter, especially the similar section in 1:16-21. It is impossible to rule out any of these as possibilities, and it may be best to assume Peter has in mind all three. Jesus and the prophets spoke of the need for holy living to escape the final judgment at the final coming of God's Messiah. They also knew that some would deny these truths.

3:3 First of all, you must understand that in the last days scoffers will come, scoffing and following their own evil desires.

The phrase, "first of all," indicates that these Christians must first understand that Jesus and the prophets knew of these "scoffers" long ago. In other words, Peter's readers should not be alarmed or swayed by these men - they knew they were coming. As discussed above, Peter may use the future tense here (scoffers will come) because the false teachers have only begun their destructive program, which will get worse. Or it may be that he is in essence quoting the words of Jesus and the prophets to which he has just alluded. Matthew 24:5 is a good example: "Many will come in my name, claiming, 'I am the Christ,' and will deceive many."

The words, "in the last days," have been taken in two different ways. Some think that this writer believes that the final days are just arriving at this time, the false teachers themselves being the proof. However, the most common understanding in the New Testament is that Jesus inaugurated the last days and that all Christians are therefore living in the last days. It does not refer to the last few days before the end but rather the last period of history in terms of God's dealings with humans.

Throughout the Bible, "scoffers" are those who ridicule the teachings of God. They tend to discount the spiritual world, making their judgments based on worldly wisdom. In this case they are ridiculing the idea of the Second Coming. Peter ties their scoffing to their sinful lifestyles - they scoff at God's ways and follow "their own evil desires."

3:4 They will say, ''Where is this 'coming' he promised? Ever since our fathers died, everything goes on as it has since the beginning of creation."

The form of the ridicule of the false teaching is a fairly common one in the Old Testament. Peter's use of this form puts these men in the same category as those who asked Jeremiah, for example, "Where is the word of the Lord? Let it now be fulfilled!" The question, "Where is this 'coming'?" is asked with sarcasm, and it means, "He did not return as he said he would, did he?"

The last part of the verse, the reasoning behind the scoffing, is subject to two major interpretations. The first is that there will be no complete destruction of the world because such a thing never has happened - not since the beginning of the world. (This interpretation will be discussed below.) The second and most common interpretation among modern commentators is that the scoffers contended that Jesus promised to come back during the lifetime of his early disciples. They would have gotten this idea from such passages as Matthew 16:28: "I tell you the truth, some who are standing here will not taste death before they see the Son of Man coming in his kingdom." It is just such an expectation that has led the false teachers to mention the death of "our fathers." According to this view the "fathers" here must be the fathers of the Christian faith, the earliest generation of disciples or even the apostles themselves.

This view is not without merit. It is at least understandable that believers would think that Jesus promised to return before the death of some who were present during his ministry. After the early disciples died, the mockery was inevitable. However, there are a few problems with this reading. First, it is not at all clear that Jesus promised to return during the lifetime of his disciples. The texts that may appear to teach this are certainly subject to other understandings. Not only have they been interpreted in other ways for 1,900 years; it is also quite doubtful that the Gospel writers so understood them as they penned these words toward the end of that first generation.

Second, the term "fathers" is nowhere else used to describe the early Christians. It is often used, however, to speak of the Old Testament "fathers of the faith," as in Romans 9:5; 11:28; 15:8; Acts 7:2,32. There the term refers to Abraham and his near descendants. The phrase, "since the beginning of creation," also leads the reader to assume the fathers are the ancient heroes of the faith because it is parallel to the phrase "since our fathers died."

Third, the writer (whether Peter or not) never really answers the charge that the early Christians have died before the return of Jesus. His answer is much better suited to the understanding of the scoffers' charges presented below. He answers that the Lord has reasons for waiting, not that the Lord never imposed a time limit or that he changed the limit. Surely the writer would have attempted to answer the question directly if he understood it that way.

The better view seems to be that which understands the term "our fathers" to refer to the Old Testament patriarchs, its more normal connotation. The scoffers' reasoning is, then, "It has been several decades now and Jesus still has not returned, as he promised. In fact, the world continues upon its course just the way it has since the time of Abraham. Only dreamers would think that it is about to change."

Unfortunately, we cannot know precisely what has led these false teachers to such a position. They apparently see themselves as Christians, so they must have respect for Jesus. It is, in fact, odd that they seem to deny the coming he promised. Perhaps it means "the coming that some say he promised." What has led them to deny the Second Coming? First, there is little doubt that their sinful lifestyles have influenced their thinking. It is a fact that behavior influences thinking as often as thinking influences behavior. Humans have an amazing ability to rationalize their behavior. But how did the false teachers support their denial of the Second Coming on an intellectual level? This verse may give the clearest hint, since Peter quotes them as contending that, "everything goes on as it has since the beginning of creation." Their statement seems to imply a philosophy of history. Perhaps these teachers blended Christianity with Greco-Roman philosophical thought. The Epicureans believed that the gods existed but that there was nothing to fear from them. The gods could do nothing to hurt people. More likely, though, the false teachers were simply typical Greek thinkers who believed time moves in a continuous cycle and not toward an end. "Everything goes on as it has." The concept of an end to the world may not have made any sense to these people. It has been that way "since the beginning of creation," and it will always be that way.

Excursus: The Imminent Coming of Jesus

It must be admitted that the early Christians seem to have expected Jesus to return within a generation or so. This is the reason for the crisis at Thessalonica that Paul responds to in 1 Thessalonians 4:13-18. Some in that church became concerned when loved ones began to die and Jesus had not returned. This suggests that they expected him back by that time. It does not prove that he had promised to come back by that time. Paul's response is, of course, that the dead will be raised when Jesus returns, so that their loved ones would not miss out on Jesus' return.

A number of other New Testament texts also seem to assume that Jesus would be back "soon." In 1 Corinthians 7:29,31, Paul writes that, "The time is short. From now on those who have wives should live as if they had none; . . . For this world in its present form is passing away." James writes, "Be patient and stand firm, because the Lord's coming is near" (Jas 5:8).

There are several answers to this "problem." First, it must be remembered that Jesus said that, "No one knows about that day or hour, not even the angels in heaven, nor the Son, but only the Father. Be on guard! Be alert! You do not know when that time will come" (Mark 13:32). If the early church expected Jesus back during the first generation, it was their opinion and not inspired prophecy. Second, it may be that the New Testament writers were trying to convey the idea of imminence. That is, everything is ready for the Second Coming, so that it could arrive at any moment. In that sense it is "near." Third, the present passage in 2 Peter offers the most satisfying answer in the New Testament. If it seems that God is slow, it is not slowness but patience. And besides, human beings are incapable of understanding God's timetable. "With the Lord a day is like a thousand years, and a thousand years are like a day" (2 Pet 3:8).

3:5 But they deliberately forget that long ago by God's word the heavens existed and the earth was formed out of water and by water. 3:6 By these waters also the world of that time was deluged and destroyed.

Peter accuses these men of having a selective memory. They "deliberately forget" that the world was created by "God's word," and that it was also by his word that it was destroyed. The point is that God can (and will) do it again. In other words, their assumption that the world will simply continue without change ignores two important facts: God created the world, and God once destroyed the world. That destruction by water serves as an example, a reminder and an assurance that God will again destroy the ungodly.

The statement that heaven and earth were formed "out of water and by water" is somewhat perplexing. Probably its meaning is that God formed the heavens and the earth out of "the deep" (Gen 1:2) and that he made them by water when he separated and gathered the waters. Separating the waters above from the waters below formed the sky (heavens), and gathering together the waters below created dry ground (Gen 1:6-10).

Even if the precise meaning of the discussion of "water" here is difficult, the reason for it is clear enough. God once destroyed the world with water, but he will destroy it with fire the next time. And it too will be by the power of his word. A better translation for the NIV's "by these waters" would be simply "by these," referring to the waters and the word of God. Perhaps the false teachers doubted God's ability to bring about catastrophic change in the world. Peter assures his readers that God need only speak the word.

3:7 By the same word the present heavens and earth are reserved for fire, being kept for the day of judgment and destruction of ungodly men.

The all-powerful word of God has already decreed that "the present heavens and earth" will be destroyed by fire. Since God has spoken, it will occur. The only unknown factor is the time. The teaching that the world will be destroyed by fire is taught only here in the New Testament. Peter is very likely referring here to the words of the prophets, such as those of Malachi: "'Surely the day is coming; it will burn like a furnace. All the arrogant and every evildoer will be stubble, and that day that is coming will set them on fire,' says the LORD Almighty" (4:1). This passage from Malachi and others like it from the Old Testament do not envision a fiery destruction for the whole creation but rather only for ungodly people. In fact, only in 2 Peter is it taught that "the heavens and earth" will be consumed by fire. This undoubtedly looks forward to the "new heaven and new earth" of verse 13, where we will discuss it further.

The coming fiery day is "the day of judgment," when all will be judged. It will therefore also be the day of "destruction of ungodly men," such as the false teachers.

2. The Sure Return of Christ (3:8-10)

⁸ But do not forget this one thing, dear friends: With the Lord a day is like a thousand years, and a thousand years are like a day. ⁹ The Lord is not slow in keeping his promise, as some understand slowness. He is patient with you, not wanting anyone to perish, but everyone to come to repentance.

¹⁰ But the day of the Lord will come like a thief. The heavens will disappear with a roar; the elements will be destroyed by fire, and the earth and everything in it will be laid bare. ^a

a 10 Some manuscripts be burned up

In this section Peter answers the false teachers' fundamental doctrinal error. There were very good reasons that Christ had not yet returned. But make no mistake - he will return, and the world as presently known will be no more.

3:8 But do not forget this one thing, dear friends: With the Lord a day is like a thousand years, and a thousand years are like a day.

In response to the scoffers' teaching that Jesus had not returned when expected, Peter offers his first response. He addresses his readers again as "loved ones" (agapçtoi, not simply "friends") and encourages them not to "forget," as the false teachers "deliberately forget" (verse 5). He uses the language of Psalm 90:4, as he argues that the Lord does not view time as humans view time.

The fundamental thought here is that people, given their limited perspective, cannot possibly understand God's time-table. What seems an eternity to humans is only a brief moment to an eternal God. Several decades seemed to the early Christians a very long time to wait for the return of Jesus. In fact, Peter implies, this may be a very short time from God's perspective.

It is unusual that Peter writes not only that "a thousand years are like a day" (as in Psalm 90:4) but also that "a day is like a thousand years." The reversed statement (which is the first) is probably just for rhetorical effect. However, it is possible that Peter means that God delays too long in the eyes of some, and that God acts too quickly in the eyes of others.

3:9 The Lord is not slow in keeping his promise, as some understand slowness. He is patient with you, not wanting anyone to perish, but everyone to come to repentance.

Peter now explains why it is that the Lord has not yet returned. While from a human perspective he seems "slow in keeping his promise," the apparent delay has nothing to do with being slow. The "some" who accuse God of "slowness" are undoubtedly the scoffing teachers.

Far from showing a lack of concern for people, the Lord is actually showing mercy. The theme is a common one in the Old Testament, as time and again God waits to execute his judgment in order to give people a chance to repent. Joel 2:13 provides an excellent example: "Return to the LORD your God, for he is gracious and compassionate, slow to anger and abounding in love, and he relents from sending calamity." Peter does not deny that from a human point of view the return of Jesus seems delayed; but that apparent delay is actually patience, allowing for repentance.

The statement that God does not want "anyone to perish, but everyone to come to repentance," has always created problems for certain theologians. Those who believe that God has chosen some to be saved (and not others) have trouble explaining why God wants all to be saved but has chosen only some. A standard response is to ask who is actually included by the words "anyone" and "everyone." Since Peter writes that God is patient "with you ," suggesting that some of his readers were in need of repentance, it is argued that Peter means "any of you" and "all of you." That is, God wants all those he has chosen to repent and therefore shows patience in sending Jesus. However, it must be noted that some are apparently in real danger of being caught unrepentant when Christ comes "as a thief in the night." And it is far from clear that "anyone" and "everyone" refer to God's chosen ones. For what sense does it make to say that God wants his saved ones to repent so they can be saved? Surely it is more reasonable to think that God wants everyone to repent and be saved.

As explained above, Peter does use the language of "election" in order to reassure his readers (see comments on 1:3). However, this letter as a whole tends to resonate better with a free-will doctrine rather than that of predestination.

3:10 But the day of the Lord will come like a thief.

If Peter has hinted that God has delayed his promised activity (and that is debatable), he wants to ensure that all know that the delay will not last. The verb "will come" begins the sentence in Greek. Christ will return, and he will do so at an unexpected time.

The term "day of the Lord" is an Old Testament phrase, commonly used by the prophets to speak of the coming judgment against sinful people and salvation for the people of God. In the New Testament it is used, as here, to warn of the return of Christ (1 Thess 5:4; Rom 2:5). The fact that it "will come like a thief" is based on Jesus' use of this metaphor (see Matt 24:43; Luke 12:39). The idea is, of course, that the thief breaks into the house when he is unexpected. Here it has great importance because it is the answer to the question of the scoffers (v. 4). The passage of time has led them not to expect the Second Coming. They will be surprised by the one who will come like a thief.

The heavens will disappear with a roar; the elements will be destroyed by fire, and the earth and everything in it will be laid bare.

Returning to the earlier teaching that all will be destroyed by fire, Peter envisions the "roar" of the flames that will consume "the heavens." Jesus spoke of the future passing away of the heavens and the earth (Matt 5:18; 24:35), and Peter most likely gets this teaching from him. He also clearly alludes to Isaiah 34:4: "All the stars of the heavens will be dissolved and the sky rolled up like a scroll; all the starry host will fall like withered leaves from the vine . . . ." Here "the heavens" probably refer to the physical heavens, most likely the sky, rather than the abode of God. "The elements" (stoicei'a, stoicheia ) are best understood to refer to the heavenly bodies, such as the sun, moon, and stars. The fact that they will "melt" (v. 12) seems to support this understanding. It also seems to recall Isaiah 34:4 with its dissolved stars.

After describing both areas above the earth (sky and space), Peter speaks of what will happen to the earth itself. Oddly, he writes that "the earth and everything in it will be laid bare ." Assuming that the image of a fiery destruction is still in Peter's mind, it is probable that he is writing about refinement, or purification by fire (see 1 Pet 1:7). The fire will determine what is pure and what is not. (Paul uses similar imagery in 1 Corinthians 3:13.)

3. Christian Living in Light of Christ's Return (3:11-13)

¹¹ Since everything will be destroyed in this way, what kind of people ought you to be? You ought to live holy and godly lives ¹² as you look forward to the day of God and speed its coming. ^a That day will bring about the destruction of the heavens by fire, and the elements will melt in the heat. ¹³ But in keeping with his promise we are looking forward to a new heaven and a new earth, the home of righteousness.

^a 12 Or as you will wait eagerly for the day of God to come

After reminding them of the coming destruction of the ungodly, Peter now calls on his readers to live in light of the future. His message is not only about fear of punishment but is also about the joy of the new heaven and new earth.

3:11 Since everything will be destroyed in this way, what kind of people ought you to be? You ought to live holy and godly lives

The use of rhetorical questions has always been popular with those who call on others to do what is right. Peter not only asks the obvious question - he answers it. The thinking is the same as that of the prophets, Paul and most other New Testament writers, and Jesus (see especially the parable of the wise and foolish virgins in Matthew 25:1-13). Since the world will be destroyed and the faithfulness of everyone will be clearly shown, Christians must live "holy" and "godly" lives. Both of these terms are plural in Greek, signifying the many holy behaviors and godly acts to which believers are called.

3:12 as you look forward to the day of God and speed its coming.

A focus on the eternal future that begins with the return of Jesus provides motivation for Christian living. What is most encouraging about this verse is that it moves beyond simply using fear of judgment as motivation. Peter calls on all his readers to anticipate eagerly the "day of God" and even to hasten its coming. The "day of God" is obviously the day of judgment, the Second Coming of Christ, the end of the present world. But what does it mean to "speed its coming?" The word for "speed" could be simply a synonym for "look forward to," but it probably means more here. Peter has just written about God's patient waiting which is motivated by his desire to give people the time to repent. It is likely therefore that holy living is understood here to hasten the coming of Jesus. Luke records Peter speaking in a similar way in Acts 3:19-20: "Repent, then, and turn to God so that your sins may be wiped out, that times of refreshing may come from the Lord, and that he may send the Christ . . . ."

That day will bring about the destruction of the heavens by fire, and the elements will melt in the heat.

Rehearsing what he has just written in verse 10, Peter writes that the day of God will be horrible and wonderful. It is unclear whether the phrase, "the heavens," refers to the sky or outer space or both. The "elements" are surely the stars, and they will "melt in the heat" (as in verse 10, see Isaiah 34:4).

3:13 But in keeping with his promise we are looking forward to a new heaven and a new earth, the home of righteousness.

God's promise is not only that this world and its wickedness will be destroyed. It is also that the new world will be "the home of righteousness." While lazy and discouraged Christians may need to be reminded of the coming punishment of the sinful, the greater motivation for Christians is God's promise of life with him. Peter borrows from Isaiah in order to express this future period. In Isaiah 65:17, God says, "Behold, I will create new heavens and a new earth." The picture is one in which sin has been conquered, and God's will is being done.

When many Christians think about eternal life, the thought is only of "heaven." Here Peter envisions not only a new heaven but also a new earth, presumably the dwelling place of God's people. Even though the picture of eternal life with God is necessarily fuzzy, it should be remembered that Christians look forward to the resurrection of the body and the redemption and renewal of the creation, which has been subjected to frustration (Rom 8:20).

III. FINAL EXHORTATIONS (3:14-18)

¹⁴ So then, dear friends, since you are looking forward to this, make every effort to be found spotless, blameless and at peace with him. ¹⁵ Bear in mind that our Lord's patience means salvation, just as our dear brother Paul also wrote you with the wisdom that God gave him. ¹⁶ He writes the same way in all his letters, speaking in them of these matters. His letters contain some things that are hard to understand, which ignorant and unstable people distort, as they do the other Scriptures, to their own destruction.

¹⁷ Therefore, dear friends, since you already know this, be on your guard so that you may not be carried away by the error of lawless men and fall from your secure position. ¹⁸ But grow in the grace and knowledge of our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ. To him be glory both now and forever! Amen.

Although it is arguable that the conclusion to the letter does not begin until verse 17, the repetitive nature of these verses may suggest that Peter is now summing up his practical advice. He also returns to the wording of the beginning of the letter, when he writes about the "knowledge of our Lord" (see 1:3) and their need to "make every effort" (see 1:5). Finally, he seems to mark the conclusion by the use of "so then, dear friends" in verse 14. The use of the similar "therefore, dear friends" in verse 17 serves to return to concluding remarks after the parenthetical statements about Paul.

3:14 So then, dear friends, since you are looking forward to this, make every effort to be found spotless, blameless and at peace with him.

After his third reference to these Christians as "loved ones" (NIV "dear friends"), Peter calls to their mind what he has just told them about the new heavens and earth. He reminds them that they will only enjoy this wonderful existence if they "make every effort," echoing his words in 1:5. There he called them to goodness, knowledge, self-control, and the like. Here he calls them to "be found spotless, blameless, and at peace with him." It is, of course, by the exercise of the former virtues that they will at the judgment be found innocent. There is apparently a legal metaphor at work here, that of a trial before a judge. There is also the background of the sacrificial system, in which only the animals "without spot or blemish" are accepted. (The careful reader remembers that the false teachers are "blots and blemishes," according to 2:13.) The terms "spotless" and "blameless" refer to being without sin. The desire to be "at peace" most likely refers to the relationship with God that comes from having sins forgiven in Christ and living in light of that forgiveness.

3:15 Bear in mind that our Lord's patience means salvation, just as our dear brother Paul also wrote you with the wisdom that God gave him.

Peter repeats again the important teaching that the so-called delay of the return of Jesus is due to God's patient desire for people to repent and therefore receive "salvation." Peter then alludes to the teaching of Paul, perhaps to remind these Christians that the false teachers stand not only against Peter but also against the apostle Paul. This probably implies that Paul was well known and respected among the Christians who received this letter. He was also loved by Peter and by others (perhaps these readers or other apostles), as indicated in the description "our dear ["loved," ajgaphtov", agapçtos] brother Paul." Peter may mean that Paul wrote specifically to these people ("Paul also wrote you"), in which case they would naturally think of Paul as dear or beloved.

Peter acknowledges the already common belief that Paul's "wisdom" came from God. This acceptance of Paul by Peter is one of the so-called proofs that Peter could not have written this letter. It is argued that Paul and Peter were on opposite sides in the early church, Peter representing a very Jewish approach and Paul a very non-Jewish approach. There certainly were some early troubles between these two over some matters (see Gal 2:11-14). However, there is every indication that these were quickly worked out and that Peter and Paul were of the same mind in all important areas. Not only does the book of Acts show Peter and Paul together at the Jerusalem council (Acts 15). They also were both helped by Silas (1 Pet 5:12; 1 Thess 1:1, etc.) and Mark (1 Pet 5:13; Col 4:10). The differences between Peter and Paul have been greatly overstated.

3:16 He writes the same way in all his letters, speaking in them of these matters.

Peter acknowledges what all readers of Paul's letters know. In virtually every letter Paul calls his readers to a holy life, basing his exhortation on the coming of Christ. A typical example is Romans 13:11-13: "And do this, understanding the present time. The hour has come for you to wake up from your slumber, because our salvation is nearer now than when we first believed. The night is nearly over; the day is almost here. So let us put aside the deeds of darkness and put on the armor of light. Let us behave decently . . . ."

His letters contain some things that are hard to understand, which ignorant and unstable people distort, as they do the other Scriptures, to their own destruction.

Having mentioned the letters of Paul, Peter now feels the need to deal with the fact that some are misusing Paul. That parts of Paul's letters are "hard to understand" would probably be agreed upon as quickly in the early church as in its modern counterpart. Not only did he write about specific situations which only the originally addressed church would fully comprehend, Paul also wrote things that were subject to misinterpretation. It is quite possible that the false teachers Peter opposed claimed Paul for their position. It could be that they misunderstood Paul's teachings on justification by faith and Christian freedom, using them to justify libertine behavior. Paul himself had to counter this misuse of his teaching (Rom 6:1-2, Gal 5:13). In the second century, Gnostic heretics regularly cited Paul's writings.

Peter accuses those who "distort" Paul's writings of being "ignorant" and "unstable." The terms probably refer to the false teachers and may also refer to those who follow them. There is no hint here that these people are excused on the basis of their ignorance and instability since they are willfully so (see 3:5). This too will contribute to their coming "destruction."

It is especially interesting that Peter writes of the distortion of Paul's letters along with "the other Scriptures." The implication is that the letters of Paul were already regarded as Scripture at the time Peter wrote. While many have dated 2 Peter into the second century on this basis, there is no compelling reason to do so. It is quite reasonable to think that the letters of the apostles were regarded as Scripture almost immediately. Paul claims to be inspired and authoritative in his letters, which may have been read during the assembly (see Col 4:16).

3:17 Therefore, dear friends, since you already know this, be on your guard so that you may not be carried away by the error of lawless men and fall from your secure position.

With the words, "Therefore, dear friends" (see 3:14), Peter returns to his concluding remarks after his aside about the letters of Paul. He has given them no new information in this letter but has rather "reminded them" (1:12; 3:1-2) of what they already knew from the prophets, apostles, and Jesus himself. They are to "be on guard," because the false teachers sound impressive (2:18-19) and because many will follow them (2:2). These men are "lawless," since their lack of moral constraint has led them into lust and greed (2:13-15).

Christians can be confident in their relationship with God ("secure position") by putting their complete confidence in Jesus and living in light of God's holiness. However, it is possible to "fall" from that high position by failing to strive for holiness. It is especially dangerous to be surrounded by people who are encouraging sinful living. Therefore Peter ends this letter as he began it, with an exhortation for spiritual growth (1:5-8; 3:18).

3:18 But grow in the grace and knowledge of our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ. To him be glory both now and forever! Amen.

The antidote to being "carried away" is to "grow in the grace and knowledge" of Christ. Peter described this process early in this letter by encouraging his readers to add to their faith goodness, knowledge, self-control, perseverance, godliness, brotherly kindness, and love (1:5-7). These are all gifts that can only come from the grace of God. However, only those who seek these gifts will receive them. The exhortation to "grow" means to "make every effort" (1:5).

One Christian virtue, knowledge, is singled out by Peter for special mention. Peter has already written several times of the importance of knowledge (1:2,3,8; 2:20). This is because the false teachers' fundamental error is a lack of knowledge. Their wrong thinking about the return of Christ has had disastrous consequences for their lives. Bad thinking leads to bad living. Correct thinking encourages right living.

Peter ends the letter with a doxology to Christ. Although many Jewish and Christian writings ended with doxologies, it is somewhat unusual to end a letter in this way (but see Philippians 4:20 and Romans 16:25-27). It is even more unusual to find a doxology to Jesus Christ rather than to God the Father (but see 2 Timothy 4:18 and Revelation 1:4-6). However, given Peter's very high view of Jesus (see comments on 1:1), it is not surprising.

"To him be glory" is a prayer that Jesus will be praised. The NIV translation "both now and forever" obscures the reference to "the day of the ages" in the original. Given the content of 2 Peter, the reference may be to the day that will begin with the Second Coming of Jesus.

Peter's final words provide a fitting prayer with which to end these comments on his letter: "Lord, may we continually grow in the grace and knowledge of our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ. To him be glory both now and forever! Amen."

-College Press New Testament Commentary: with the NIV

Introduction / Outline

Robertson: 2 Peter (Book Introduction)

THE SECOND EPISTLE OF PETER

ABOUT a.d. 66 OR 67

By Way of Introduction

Most Doubtful New Testament Book

Every book in the New Testament is challenged by some one, as indeed the historicity of Jesus Christ himself is and the very existence of God. But it is true that more modern scholars deny the genuineness of 2 Peter than that of any single book in the canon. This is done by men like F. H. Chase, J. B. Mayor, and R. D. Strachan, who are followers of Christ as Lord and Saviour. One has to admit that the case concerning 2 Peter has problems of peculiar difficulty that call for careful consideration and balanced judgment. One other word needs to be said, which is that an adverse decision against the authenticity of 2 Peter stands by itself and does not affect the genuineness of the other books. It is easy to take an extreme position for or against it without full knowledge of all the evidence.

Slow in General Acceptance

It was accepted in the canon by the council at Laodicea (372) and at Carthage (397). Jerome accepted it for the Vulgate, though it was absent from the Peshito Syriac Version. Eusebius placed it among the disputed books, while Origen was inclined to accept it. Clement of Alexandria accepted it and apparently wrote a commentary on it. It is probable that the so-called Apocalypse of Peter (early second century) used it and the Epistle of Jude either used it or 2 Peter used Jude. There are undoubted allusions also to phrases in 2 Peter in Aristides, Justin Martyr, Irenaeus, Ignatius, Clement of Rome. When one considers the brevity of the Epistle, the use of it is really as strong as one can expect. Athanasius and Augustine accepted it as genuine, as did Luther, while Calvin doubted and Erasmus rejected it. It may be said for it that it won its way under criticism and was not accepted blindly.

Claims Petrine Authorship

Not only so, but in fuller form than 1Pe_1:1, for the writer terms himself " Simon (Symeon in some MSS.) Peter," a fact that has been used against the genuineness. If no claim had been made, that would have been considered decisive against him. Simon (Symeon was the Jewish form as used by James in Act_15:14) is the real name (Joh_1:42) and Peter merely the Greek for Cephas, the nickname given by Christ. There is no reason why both could not properly be employed here. But the claim to Petrine authorship, if not genuine, leaves the Epistle pseudonymous. That was a custom among some Jewish writers and even Christian writers, as the spurious Petrine literature testifies (Gospel of Peter, Apocalypse of Peter, etc.), works of a heretical or curious nature. Whatever the motive for such a pious fraud, the fact remains that 2 Peter, if not genuine, has to take its place with this pseudonymous literature and can hardly be deemed worthy of a place in the New Testament. And yet there is no heresy in this Epistle, no startling new ideas that would lead one to use the name of Simon Peter. It is the rather full of edifying and orthodox teaching.

And Personal Experiences of Peter

The writer makes use of his own contact with Jesus, especially at the Transfiguration of Christ (Mar_9:2-8; Mat_17:1-8; Luk_9:28-36). This fact has been used against the genuineness of the Epistle on the plea that the writer is too anxious, anyhow, to show that he is Symeon Peter (2Pe_1:1). But Bigg rightly replies that, if he had only given his name with no personal contacts with Jesus, the name would be called " a forged addition." It is possible also that the experience on the Mount of Transfiguration may have been suggested by Peter’s use of exodos for his own death (2Pe_1:15), the very word used by Luke (Luk_9:31) as the topic of discussion between Jesus and Moses and Elijah. There is also in 2Pe_1:13 the use of " tent" ( skēnoma ) for the life in the body, like Peter’s use of " tents" ( skēnas ) to Jesus at that very time (Mar_9:5; Mat_17:4; Luk_9:33). In 2Pe_1:14 Peter also refers to the plain words of Jesus about his coming death (Joh_21:18.). In 2Pe_1:15 Peter speaks of his own plan for preserving the knowledge of Jesus when he is gone (possibly by Mark’s Gospel). All this is in perfect keeping with Peter’s own nature.

And yet the Epistle Differs in Style from First Peter

This is a fact, though one greatly exaggerated by some scholars. There are many points of similarity, for one thing, like the habit of repeating words ( epichorēgeō in 2Pe_1:10, 2Pe_1:19, bebaios in 2Pe_1:12, 2Pe_1:13, 2Pe_1:15, prophēteia in 2Pe_1:20; 2Pe_3:3, etc.). These repetitions occur all through the Epistle as in 1 Peter. " This is a matter of very high importance" (Bigg). Again in both Epistles there is a certain dignity of style with a tendency to iambic rhythm. There is more quotation of the Old Testament in 1 Peter, but frequent allusion to words and phrases in 2 Peter. There are more allusions to words and facts in the Gospels in 1 Peter than in 2 Peter, though some do occur in 2 Peter. Besides those already given, note 2Pe_1:8 (Luk_13:7.), 2Pe_2:1 (Mat_10:33), 2Pe_2:20 (Mat_12:45; Luk_11:26), 2Pe_3:4 (Mat_24:1.), and possibly 2Pe_1:3 to Christ’s calling the apostles. Both appear to know and use the O.T. Apocrypha. Both are fond of the plural of abstract substantives. Both make sparing use of Greek particles. Both use the article similarly, idiomatically, and sometimes not using it. There are some 361 words in 1 Peter not in 2 Peter, 231 in 2 Peter not in 1 Peter. There are 686 hapax legomena in N.T., 54 in 2 Peter instead of the average of 62, a large number when the brevity of the Epistle is considered. There are several ways of explaining these variations. One way is to say that they are written by different men, but difference of subject has to be borne in mind. All writers and artists have an early and a later manner. Another solution is that Peter employed different amanuenses. Silvanus was the one for 1 Peter (1Pe_5:12). Mark was Peter’s usual interpreter, but we do not know who was the amanuensis for 2 Peter, if indeed one was used. We know from Act_4:13 that Peter and John were considered unlettered men ( agrammatoi kai idiōtai ). 2 Peter and the Apocalypse illustrate this statement. 2 Peter may have more of Peter’s real style than 1 Peter.

He Accepts Paul’s Epistles as Scripture

This fact (2Pe_3:15.) has been used as conclusive proof by Baur and his school that Peter could not have written the Epistle after the stern rebuke from Paul at Antioch (Gal_2:11.). But this argument ignores one element in Peter’s impulsive nature and that is his coming back as he did with Jesus. Paul after that event in Antioch spoke kindly of Peter (1Co_9:5). Neither Peter nor Paul cherished a personal grudge where the Master’s work was involved. It is also objected that Peter would not have put Paul’s Epistles on the level with the O.T. and call them by implication " Scripture." But Paul claimed the help of the Holy Spirit in his writings and Peter knew the marks of the Holy Spirit’s power. Besides, in calling Paul’s Epistles Scripture he may not have meant to place them exactly on a par with the Old Testament.

The Resemblance to the Epistle of Jude

This is undoubted, particularly between Jude and the second chapter of 2 Peter. Kuhl argues that 2 Peter 2:1-3:2 is an interpolation, though the same style runs through out the Epistle. " The theory of interpolation is always a last and desperate expedient" (Bigg). In 2 Peter 2 we have the fallen angels, the flood, the cities of the plain with Lot, Balaam. In Jude we have Israel in the wilderness, the fallen angels, the cities of the plain (with no mention of Lot, Cain, Balaam, Korah). Jude mentions the dispute between Michael and Satan, quotes Enoch by name. There is rather more freshness in Jude than in 2 Peter, though 2 Peter is more intelligible. Evidently one had the other before him, besides other material. Which is the earlier? There is no way to decide this point clearly. Every point is looked at differently and argued differently by different writers. My own feeling is that Jude was before (just before) 2 Peter, though it is only a feeling and not a conviction.

Anachronisms

It used to be said that it was impossible for 2 Peter to have been written in the first century, because it had the atmosphere of the second. But one fact is strongly against that argument. In 2Pe_3:8 occurs the quotation of Psa_90:4 about the thousand years without any chiliastic turn at all, a thing sure to happen in the second century after chiliasm had come to have such a swing. Peter’s use of it suits the first century, not the second. As a matter of fact, the false teachers described in 2 Peter suit the first century precisely if one recalls Paul’s troubles with the Judaizers in Galatia and Corinth and with the Gnostics in Colossae and Ephesus. " Every feature in the description of the false teachers and mockers is to be found in the apostolic age" (Bigg).

The Readers

The author says that this is his second Epistle to them (2Pe_3:1), and that means that he is writing to the saints in the five Roman provinces in Asia Minor to whom the first Epistle was sent (1Pe_1:1). Spitta and Zahn deny this on the ground that the two Epistles do not discuss the same subjects, surely a flimsy objection. Zahn even holds that 2 Peter precedes 1 Peter and that the Epistle referred to in 2Pe_3:1 has been lost. He holds that 2 Peter was addressed to the church in Corinth. He considers the readers to be Jews while 1 Peter was addressed to Gentiles. But " there is nothing in 2 Peter to differentiate its first readers from those of 1 Peter" (Bigg).

The Purpose

Certainly Peter is here concerned chiefly with the heresies of that general region in Asia Minor that so disturbed Paul (Colossians, Ephesians, Pastoral Epistles) and John (Gospel, Epistles, Apocalypse). Paul early foresaw at Miletus these wolves that would ravish the sheep (Act_20:29.). In 1 Peter he is concerned chiefly with the fiery persecutions that are upon them, but here with the heretics that threaten to lead them astray.

Balance of Probability

There are difficulties in any decision about the authorship and character of 2 Peter. But, when all things are considered, I agree with Bigg that the Epistle is what it professes to be by Simon Peter. Else it is pseudonymous. The Epistle more closely resembles the other New Testament books than it does the large pseudepigraphic literature of the second and third centuries.

The Date

If we accept the Petrine authorship, it must come before his death, which was probably a.d. 67 or 68. Hence the Epistle cannot be beyond this date. There are those who argue for a.d. 64 as the date of Peter’s death, but on insufficient grounds in my opinion.

JFB: 2 Peter (Book Introduction)

AUTHENTICITY AND GENUINENESS.--If not a gross imposture, its own internal witness is unequivocal in its favor. It has Peter's name and apostleship in its heading: not only his surname, but his original name Simon, or Simeon, he thus, at the close of his life, reminding his readers who he originally was before his call. Again, in 2Pe 1:16-18, he mentions his presence at the Transfiguration, and Christ's prophecy of his death! and in 2Pe 3:15, his brotherhood with Paul. Again, in 2Pe 3:1, the author speaks of himself as author of the former Epistle: it is, moreover, addressed so as to include (but not to be restricted to) the same persons as the first, whom he presupposes to be acquainted with the writings of Paul, by that time recognized as "Scripture" (2Pe 3:15, "the long-suffering of God," compare Rom 2:4). This necessarily implies a late date, when Paul's Epistles (including Romans) already had become generally diffused and accepted as Scripture in the Church. The Church of the fourth century had, besides the testimony which we have of the doubts of the earlier Christians, other external evidence which we have not, and which, doubtless, under God's overruling providence, caused them to accept it. It is hard to understand how a book palpably false (as it would be if Peter be not the author) could have been accepted in the Canon as finally established in the Councils of Laodicea, A.D. 360 (if the fifty-ninth article be genuine), Hippo, and Carthage in the fourth century (393 and 397). The whole tone and spirit of the Epistle disprove its being an imposture. He writes as one not speaking of himself, but moved by the Holy Ghost (2Pe 1:21). An attempt at such a fraud in the first ages would have brought only shame and suffering, alike from Christians and heathen, on the perpetrator: there was then no temptation to pious frauds as in later times. That it must have been written in the earliest age is plain from the wide gulf in style which separates it and the other New Testament Scriptures from even the earliest and best of the post-apostolic period. DAILLE well says, "God has allowed a fosse to be drawn by human weakness around the sacred canon to protect it from all invasion."

Traces of acquaintance with it appear in the earliest Fathers. HERMAS [Similitudes, 6.4] (compare 2Pe 2:13), Greek, "luxury in the day . . . luxuriating with their own deceivings"; and [Shepherd, Vision 3.7], "They have left their true way" (compare 2Pe 2:15); and [Shepherd, Vision 4.3], "Thou hast escaped this world" (compare 2Pe 2:20). CLEMENT OF ROME, [Epistle to the Corinthians, 7.9; 10], as to Noah's preaching and Lot's deliverance, "the Lord making it known that He does not abandon those that trust in Him, but appoints those otherwise inclined to judgment" (compare 2Pe 2:5-7, 2Pe 2:9). IRENÆUS, A.D. 178 ("the day of the Lord is as a thousand years"), and JUSTIN MARTYR seem to allude to 2Pe 3:8. HIPPOLYTUS [On Antichrist], seems to refer to 2Pe 1:21, "The prophets spake not of their own private (individual) ability and will, but what was (revealed) to them alone by God." The difficulty is, neither TERTULLIAN, CYPRIAN, CLEMENT OF ALEXANDRIA, nor the oldest Syriac (Peschito) version (the later Syriac has it), nor the fragment known as Muratori's Canon, mentions it. The first writer who has expressly named it is ORIGEN, in the third century (Homily on Joshua; also Homily 4 on Leviticus, and Homily 13 on Numbers), who names it "Scripture," quoting 2Pe 1:4; 2Pe 2:16; however (in EUSEBIUS [Ecclesiastical History, 6.25]), he mentions that the Second Epistle was doubted by some. FIRMILIAN, bishop of Cappadocia, in Epistle to Cyrpian speaks of Peter's Epistles as warning us to avoid heretics (a monition which occurs in the Second, not the First Epistle). Now Cappadocia is one of the countries mentioned (compare 1Pe 1:1 with 2Pe 3:1) as addressed; and it is striking, that from Cappadocia we get the earliest decisive testimony. "Internally it claims to be written by Peter, and this claim is confirmed by the Christians of that very region in whose custody it ought to have been found" [TREGELLES].

The books disputed (Antilegomena), as distinguished from those universally recognized (Homologoumena), are Epistles Second Peter, James, Second and Third John, Jude, the Apocalypse, Epistle to Hebrews (compare EUSEBIUS [Ecclesiastical History, 3.3,25]). The Antilegomena stand in quite a different class from the Spurious; of these there was no dispute, they were universally rejected; for example, the Shepherd of Hermas, the Revelation of Peter, the Epistle of Barnabas. CYRIL OF JERUSALEM (A.D. 348) enumerates seven Catholic Epistles, including Second Peter; so also GREGORY NAZIANZEN (A.D. 389), and EPIPHANIUS (A.D. 367). The oldest Greek manuscripts extant (of the fourth century) contain the Antilegomena. JEROME [On Illustrious Men], conjectured, from a supposed difference of style between the two Epistles, that Peter, being unable to write Greek, employed a different translator of his Hebrew dictation in the Second Epistle, and not the same as translated the First into Greek. Mark is said to have been his translator in the case of the Gospel according to Mark; but this is all gratuitous conjecture. Much of the same views pervade both Epistles. In both alike he looks for the Lord's coming suddenly, and the end of the world (compare 2Pe 3:8-10 with 1Pe 4:5); the inspiration of the prophets (compare 1Pe 1:10-12 with 2Pe 1:19-21; 2Pe 3:2); the new birth by the divine word a motive to abstinence from worldly lusts (1Pe 1:22; 1Pe 2:2; compare 2Pe 1:4); also compare 1Pe 2:9 with 2Pe 1:3, both containing in the Greek the rare word "virtue" (1Pe 4:17 with 2Pe 2:3).

It is not strange that distinctive peculiarities of STYLE should mark each Epistle, the design of both not being the same. Thus the sufferings of Christ are more prominent in the First Epistle, the object there being to encourage thereby Christian sufferers; the glory of the exalted Lord is more prominent in the Second, the object being to communicate fuller "knowledge" of Him as the antidote to the false teaching against which Peter warns his readers. Hence His title of redemption, "Christ," is the one employed in the First Epistle; but in the Second Epistle, "the Lord." Hope is characteristic of the First Epistle; full knowledge, of the Second Epistle. In the First Epistle he puts his apostolic authority less prominently forward than in the Second, wherein his design is to warn against false teachers. The same difference is observable in Paul's Epistles. Contrast 1Th 1:1; 2Th 1:1; Phi 1:1, with Gal 1:1; 1Co 1:1. The reference to Paul's writings as already existing in numbers, and as then a recognized part of Scripture (2Pe 3:15-16), implies that this Epistle was written at a late date, just before Peter's death.

Striking verbal coincidences occur: compare 1Pe 1:19, end, with 2Pe 3:14, end; "His own," Greek, 2Pe 1:3, 2Pe 2:16; 2Pe 3:17 with 1Pe 3:1, 1Pe 3:5. The omission of the Greek article, 1Pe 2:13 with 2Pe 1:21; 2Pe 2:4-5, 2Pe 2:7. Moreover, two words occur, 2Pe 1:13, "tabernacle," that is, the body, and 2Pe 1:15, "decease," which at once remind us of the transfiguration narrative in the Gospel. Both Epistles refer to the deluge, and to Noah as the eighth that was saved. Though the First Epistle abounds in quotations of the Old Testament, whereas the Second contains none, yet references to the Old Testament occur often (2Pe 1:21; 2Pe 2:5-8, 2Pe 2:15; 2Pe 3:5-6, 2Pe 3:10, 2Pe 3:13). Compare Greek, "putting away," 1Pe 3:21, with 2Pe 1:14; Greek, "pass the time," 1Pe 1:17, with 2Pe 2:18; "walked in," 1Pe 4:3, with 2Pe 2:10; 2Pe 3:3; "called you," 1Pe 1:15; 1Pe 2:9; 1Pe 5:10, with 2Pe 1:3.

Moreover, more verbal coincidences with the speeches of Peter in Acts occur in this Second, than in the First Epistle. Compare Greek, "obtained," 2Pe 1:1 with Act 1:17; Greek, "godliness," 2Pe 1:6, with Act 3:12, the only passage where the term occurs, except in the Pastoral Epistles; and 2Pe 2:9 with Act 10:2, Act 10:7; "punished," 2Pe 2:9, with Act 4:21, the only places where the term occurs; the double genitive, 2Pe 3:2, with Act 5:32; "the day of the Lord," 2Pe 3:10, with Act 2:20, where only it occurs, except in 1Th 5:2.

The testimony of Jude, Jud 1:17-18, is strong for its genuineness and inspiration, by adopting its very words, and by referring to it as received by the churches to which he, Jude, wrote, "Remember the words which were spoken before of the apostles of our Lord Jesus Christ; how that they told you there should be mockers in the last time, who should walk after their own ungodly lusts." Jude, therefore, must have written after Second Peter, to which he plainly refers; not before, as ALFORD thinks. No less than eleven passages of Jude rest on similar statements of Second Peter. Jud 1:2, compare 2Pe 1:2; Jud 1:4, compare 2Pe 2:1; Jud 1:6, compare 2Pe 2:4; Jud 1:7, compare 2Pe 2:6; Jud 1:8, compare 2Pe 2:10; Jud 1:9, compare 2Pe 2:11; Jud 1:11, compare 2Pe 2:15; Jud 1:12, compare 2Pe 2:17; Jud 1:16, compare 2Pe 2:18; Jud 1:18, compare 2Pe 2:1; 2Pe 3:3. Just in the same way Micah, Mic 4:1-4, leans on the somewhat earlier prophecy of Isaiah, whose inspiration he thereby confirms. ALFORD reasons that because Jude, in many of the passages akin to Second Peter, is fuller than Second Peter, he must be prior. This by no means follows. It is at least as likely, if not more so, that the briefer is the earlier, rather than the fuller. The dignity and energy of the style is quite consonant to what we should expect from the prompt and ardent foreman of the apostles. The difference of style between First and Second Peter accords with the distinctness of the subjects and objects.

THE DATE, from what has been said, would be about A.D. 68 or 69, about a year after the first, and shortly before the destruction of Jerusalem, the typical precursor of the world's end, to which 2Pe 3:10-13 so solemnly calls attention, after Paul's ministry had closed (compare Greek aorist tense, "wrote," past time, 2Pe 3:15), just before Peter's own death. It was written to include the same persons, and perhaps in, or about the same place, as the first. Being without salutations of individuals, and entrusted to the care of no one church, or particular churches as the first is, but directed generally "to them that have obtained like precious faith with us" (2Pe 1:1), it took a longer time in being recognized as canonical. Had Rome been the place of its composition or publication, it could hardly have failed to have had an early acceptance--an incidental argument against the tradition of Peter's martyrdom at Rome. The remote scene of its composition in Babylon, or else in some of the contiguous regions beyond the borders of the Roman empire, and of its circulation in Cappadocia, Pontus, &c., will additionally account for its tardy but at last universal acceptance in the catholic Church. The former Epistle, through its more definite address, was earlier in its general acceptance.

OBJECT.--In 2Pe 3:17-18 the twofold design of the Epistle is set forth; namely, to guard his readers against "the error" of false teachers, and to exhort them to grow in experimental "knowledge of our Lord and Saviour" (2Pe 3:18). The ground on which this knowledge rests is stated, 2Pe 1:12-21, namely, the inspired testimony of apostles and prophets. The danger now, as of old, was about to arise from false teachers, who soon were to come among them, as Paul also (to whom reference is made, 2Pe 3:15-16) testified in the same region. The grand antidote is "the full knowledge of our Lord and Saviour," through which we know God the Father, partake of His nature, escape from the pollutions of the world, and have entrance into Christ's kingdom. The aspect of Christ presented is not so much that of the past suffering, as of the future reigning, Saviour, His present power, and future new kingdom. This aspect is taken as best fitted to counteract the theories of the false teachers who should "deny" His Lordship and His coming again, the two very points which, as an apostle and eye-witness, Peter attests (His "power" and His "coming"); also, to counteract their evil example in practice, blaspheming the way of truth, despising governments, slaves to covetousness and filthy lusts of the flesh, while boasting of Christian freedom, and, worst of all, apostates from the truth. The knowledge of Christ, as being the knowledge of "the way of righteousness," "the right way," is the antidote of their bad practice. Hence "the preacher" of righteousness, Noah, and "righteous Lot," are instanced as escaping the destruction which overtook the "unjust" or "unrighteous"; and Balaam is instanced as exemplifying the awful result of "unrighteousness" such as characterized the false teachers. Thus the Epistle forms one connected whole, the parts being closely bound together by mutual relation, and the end corresponding with the beginning; compare 2Pe 3:14, 2Pe 3:18 with 2Pe 1:2, in both "grace" and "peace" being connected with "the knowledge" of our Saviour; compare also 2Pe 3:17 with 2Pe 1:4, 2Pe 1:10, 2Pe 1:12; and 2Pe 3:18, "grow in grace and knowledge," with the fuller 2Pe 1:5-8; and 2Pe 2:21; and 2Pe 3:13, "righteousness," with 2Pe 1:1; and 2Pe 3:1 with 2Pe 1:13; and 2Pe 3:2 with 2Pe 1:19.

The germs of Carpocratian and Gnostic heresies already existed, but the actual manifestation of these heresies is spoken of as future (2Pe 2:1-2, &c.): another proof that this Epistle was written, as it professes, in the apostolic age, before the development of the Gnostic heresies in the end of the first and the beginning of the second centuries. The description is too general to identify the heresies with any particular one of the subsequent forms of heresy, but applies generally to them all.

Though altogether distinct in aim from the First Epistle, yet a connection may be traced. The neglect of the warnings to circumspection in the walk led to the evils foretold in the Second Epistle. Compare the warning against the abuse of Christian freedom, 1Pe 2:16 with 2Pe 2:19, "While they promise them liberty, they themselves are the servants of corruption"; also the caution against pride, 1Pe 5:5-6 with 2Pe 2:18, "they speak great swelling words of vanity."

JFB: 2 Peter (Outline)

• ADDRESS: EXHORTATION TO ALL GRACES, AS GOD HAS GIVEN US, IN THE KNOWLEDGE OF CHRIST, ALL THINGS PERTAINING TO LIFE: CONFIRMED BY THE TESTIMONY OF APOSTLES, AND ALSO PROPHETS, TO THE POWER AND COMING OF CHRIST. (2Pe. 1:1-21)
• FALSE TEACHERS TO ARISE: THEM BAD PRACTICES AND SURE DESTRUCTION, FROM WHICH THE GODLY SHALL BE DELIVERED, AS LOT WAS. (2Pe. 2:1-22)
• SURENESS OF CHRIST'S COMING, AND ITS ACCOMPANIMENTS, DECLARED IN OPPOSITION TO SCOFFERS ABOUT TO ARISE. GOD'S LONG SUFFERING A MOTIVE TO REPENTANCE, AS PAUL'S EPISTLES SET FORTH; CONCLUDING EXHORTATION TO GROWTH IN THE KNOWLEDGE OF CHRIST. (2Pe. 3:1-18)

TSK: 2 Peter 3 (Chapter Introduction)

Overview

2Pe 3:1, He assures them of the certainty of Christ’s coming to judgment, against those scorners who dispute against it; 2Pe 3:8, warning the godly, for the long patience of God, to hasten their repentance; 2Pe 3:10, He describes also the manner how the world shall be destroyed; 2Pe 3:11, exhorting them, from the expectation thereof, to all holiness of life; 2Pe 3:16, and again to think the patience of God to tend to their salvation, as Paul wrote to them in his epistles.

Poole: 2 Peter 3 (Chapter Introduction)

PETER CHAPTER 3

MHCC: 2 Peter (Book Introduction)

This epistle clearly is connected with the former epistle of Peter. The apostle having stated the blessings to which God has called Christians, exhorts those who had received these precious gifts, to endeavour to improve in graces and virtues. They are urged to this from the wickedness of false teachers. They are guarded against impostors and scoffers, by disproving their false assertions, 2Pe 3:1-7, and by showing why the great day of Christ's coming was delayed, with a description of its awful circumstances and consequences; and suitable exhortations to diligence and holiness are given.

MHCC: 2 Peter 3 (Chapter Introduction)

(2Pe 3:1-4) The design here is to remind of Christ's final coming to judgement.

(2Pe 3:5-10) He will appear unexpectedly, when the present frame of nature will be dissolved by fire.

(2Pe 3:11-18) From thence is inferred the need for holiness, and stedfastness in the faith.

Matthew Henry: 2 Peter (Book Introduction)

An Exposition, with Practical Observations, of The Second Epistle General of Peter

The penman of this epistle appears plainly to be the same who wrote the foregoing; and, whatever difference some learned men apprehend they discern in the style of this epistle from that of the former, this cannot be a sufficient argument to assert that it was written by Simon who succeeded the apostle James in the church at Jerusalem, inasmuch as he who wrote this epistle calls himself Simon Peter, and an apostle (2Pe 1:1), and says that he was one of the three apostles that were present at Christ's transfiguration (2Pe 1:18), and says expressly that he had written a former epistle to them, 2Pe 3:1. The design of this second epistle is the same with that of the former, as is evident from the first verse of the third chapter, whence observe that, in the things of God, we have need of precept upon precept, and line upon line, and all little enough to keep them in remembrance; and yet these are the things which should be most faithfully recorded and frequently remembered by us.

Matthew Henry: 2 Peter 3 (Chapter Introduction)

The apostle drawing towards the conclusion of his second epistle, begins this last chapter with repeating the account of his design and scope in writing a second time to them (2Pe 3:1-2). II. He proceeds to mention one thing that induced him to write this second epistle, namely, the coming of scoffers, whom he describes (2Pe 3:3-7). III. He instructs and establishes them in the coming of our Lord Jesus Christ to judgment (2Pe 3:8-10). IV. He sets forth the use and improvement which Christians ought to make of Christ's second coming, and that dissolution and renovation of things which will accompany that solemn coming of our Lord (2Pe 3:11-18).

Barclay: 2 Peter (Book Introduction)

INTRODUCTION TO THE SECOND LETTER OF PETER

The Neglected Book And Its Contents

Second Peter is one of the neglected books of the New Testament. Very few people will claim to have read it, still less to have studied it in detail. E. F. Scott says "it is far inferior in every respect to First Peter"; and goes on "it is the least valuable of the New Testament writings." It was only with the greatest difficulty that Second Peter gained entry into the New Testament, and for many years the Christian Church seemed to be unaware of its existence. But, before we approach its history, let us look at its contents.

The Lawless Men

Second Peter was written to combat the beliefs and activities of certain men who were a threat to the Church. It begins by insisting that the Christian is a man who has escaped from the corruption of the world (2Pe_1:4 ) and must always remember that he has been purged of his old sins (2Pe_1:9 ). There is laid upon him the duty of moral goodness, which culminates in the great Christian virtue of love (2Pe_1:5-8 ).

Let us set out the characteristics of the men whom Second Peter rebukes. They twist Scripture to make it suit their own purpose (2Pe_1:20 ; 2Pe_3:16 ). They bring the Christian faith into disrepute (2Pe_2:2 ). They are covetous of gain and exploiters of their fellow-men (2Pe_2:3 ; 2Pe_2:14-15 ). They are doomed and will share the fate of the sinning angels (2Pe_2:4 ), the men before the Flood (2Pe_2:5 ), the citizens of Sodom and Gomorrah (2Pe_2:6 ), and the false prophet Balaam (2Pe_2:15 ). They are bestial creatures, ruled by their brute instincts (2Pe_2:12 ), and dominated by their lusts (2Pe_2:10 ; 2Pe_2:18 ). Their eyes are full of adultery (2Pe_2:14 ). They are presumptuous, self-willed and arrogant (2Pe_2:10 , 2Pe_2:18 ). They spend even the daylight hours in unrestrained and luxurious revelry (2Pe_2:13 ). They speak of liberty but what they call liberty is unbridled licence and they themselves are the slaves of their own lusts (2Pe_2:19 ). Not only are they deluded, they also delude others and lead them astray (2Pe_2:14 ; 2Pe_2:18 ). They are worse than those who never knew the right, because they knew what goodness is and have relapsed into evil, like a dog returning to its vomit and a sow returning to the mud after it has been washed (2Pe_2:20-22 ).

It is clear that Peter is describing antinomians, men who used Godgrace as a justification for sinning. In all probability they were Gnostics, who said that only spirit was good and that matter was essentially evil and that, therefore, it did not matter what we did with the body and that we could glut its appetites and it made no difference. They lived the most immoral lives and encouraged others to do so; and they justified their actions by perverting grace and interpreting Scripture to suit themselves.

The Denial Of The Second Coming

Further, these evil men denied the Second Coming (2Pe_3:3-4 ). They argued that this was a stable world in which things remained unalterably the same, and that God was so dilatory that it was possible to assume that the Second Coming was never going to happen at all. The answer of Second Peter is that this is not a stable world; that it has, in fact, been destroyed by water in the Flood and that it will be destroyed by fire in the final conflagration (2Pe_3:5-7 ). What they regard as dilatoriness is in fact God withholding his hand in patience to give men still another chance to repent (2Pe_3:8-9 ). But the day of destruction is coming (2Pe_3:10 ). A new heaven and a new earth are on the way; therefore. goodness is an absolute necessity if a man is to be saved in the day of judgment (2Pe_3:11-14 ). With this Paul agrees, however difficult his letters may be to understand, and however false teachers deliberately misinterpret them (2Pe_3:15-16 ). The duty of the Christian is to stand fast, firmly founded in the faith, and to grow in grace and in the knowledge of Jesus Christ (2Pe_3:17-18 ).

The Doubts Of The Early Church

Such are the contents of the letter. For long it was regarded with doubt and with something very like misgiving. There is no trace of it until after A.D. 200. It is not included in the Muratorian Canon Of A.D. 170 which was the first official list of New Testament books. It did not exist in the Old Latin Version of the Scriptures; nor in the New Testament of the early Syrian Church.

The great scholars of Alexandria either did not know it or were doubtful about it. Clement of Alexandria, who wrote outlines of the books of Scripture, does not appear to have included Second Peter. Origen says that Peter left behind one epistle which is generally acknowledged; "perhaps also a second, for it is a disputed question." Didymus commented on it, but concluded his work by saying: "It must not be forgotten that this letter is spurious; it may be read in public; but it is not part of the canon of Scripture."

Eusebius, the great scholar of Caesarea, who made a careful investigation of the Christian literature of his day, comes to the conclusion: "Of Peter, one Epistle, which is called his former Epistle, is acknowledged by all; of this the ancient presbyters have made frequent use in their writings as indisputably genuine; but that which is circulated as his second Epistle we have received to be not canonical although, since it appeared to be useful to many, it has been diligently read with the other Scriptures."

It was not until well into the fourth century that Second Peter came to rest in the canon of the New Testament.

The Objections

It is the well-nigh universal judgment of scholars, both ancient and modern, that Peter is not the author of Second Peter. Even John Calvin regarded it as impossible that Peter could have spoken of Paul as Second Peter speaks of him (2Pe_3:15-16 ), although he was willing to believe that someone else wrote the letter at Peterrequest. What, then, are the arguments against Peterauthorship?

(i) There is the extreme slowness, and even reluctance, of the early church to accept it. If it had been truly Peter there can be little doubt that the Church would have welcomed and honoured it from the first. But the case was very different. For the first two centuries the letter is never quoted at all in any certain instance; it is regarded with doubt and suspicion for more than another century; and only late in the fourth century is it accepted.

(ii) The contents make it difficult to believe that it is Peter There is no mention of the Passion, the Resurrection and the Ascension of Jesus Christ; no mention of the Church as the true Israel; no mention of that faith which is undefeatable hope and trust combined; no mention of the Holy Spirit, of prayer, of baptism; and no passionate desire to call men to the supreme example of Jesus Christ. If one took away these great verities from First Peter there would be little or nothing left, and yet none of them occurs in Second Peter.

(iii) It is wholly different in character and style from First Peter. This was realized as early as Jerome who wrote: "Simon Peter wrote two Epistles which are called Catholic, of which the authenticity of the second is denied by many because of the difference of the style from the first." The Greek style of this letter is very difficult. Clogg calls it ambitious, artificial and often obscure, and remarks that it is the only book in the New Testament which is improved by translation. Bishop Chase writes: "The Epistle does produce the impression of being a somewhat artificial piece of rhetoric. It shows throughout signs of self-conscious effort. The author appears to be ambitious of writing in a style which is beyond his literary power." He concludes that it is hard to reconcile the literary character of this letter with the supposition that Peter wrote it. Moffatt says: "Second Peter is more periodic and ambitious than First Peter, but its linguistic and its stylistic efforts only reveal by their cumbrous obscurity a decided inferiority of conception, which marks it off from First Peter."

It might be claimed, as Jerome claimed, that, while Peter used Silvanus for First Peter, he used a different amanuensis for Second Peter and that this explains the change in style. But J. B. Mayor compares the two letters. He quotes some of the great passages of First Peter and then says: "I think that none who read these words can help feeling that, not even in Paul, not even in John, is there to be found a more beautiful or a more living description of the secret of primitive Christianity, of the force that overcame the world, than in the perfect quaternion of faith and hope and love and joy, which pervades this short epistle (i.e. First Peter). No one could make the same assertion with regard to Second Peter: thoughtful and interesting as it is, it lacks that intense sympathy, that flame of love, which marks First Peter.... No change of circumstances can account for the change of tone of which we are conscious in passing from one epistle to the other." It is the conclusion of that great and conservative scholar that no explanation, other than difference of authorship, can explain, not so much the difference in style as the difference in atmosphere between First and Second Peter. It is true that from the purely linguistic point of view there are 369 words which occur in First Peter which do not occur in Second Peter; and there are 230 words which occur in Second Peter and not in First Peter. But there is more than a difference in style. A writer can change his style and his vocabulary to suit his audience and his occasion. But the difference between the two letters in atmosphere and attitude is so wide that it is hardly possible that the same person should have written both.

(iv) Certain things within Second Peter point well-nigh irresistibly to a late date. So much time has passed that men have begun to abandon hope of the Second Coming altogether (2Pe_3:4 ). The apostles are spoken of as figures of the past (2Pe_3:2 ). The fathers, that is the founders of the Christian faith, are now figures of the almost dim and distant past; there have been generations between this letter and the first coming of the Christian faith (2Pe_3:4 ).

There are references which require the passing of the years to explain them. The reference to Peterapproaching death looks very like a reference to Jesusrophecy in Joh_21:18-19 , and the Fourth Gospel was not written until about A.D. 100. The statement that Peter is going to leave something which will continue his teaching after he has gone looks very like a reference to MarkGospel (Mar_1:12-14 ).

Above all there is the reference to the letters of Paul (2Pe_3:15-16 ). From this it is quite certain that Paulletters are known and used throughout all the Church; they are public property, and furthermore they are regarded as Scripture and on a level with "the other Scriptures" (2Pe_3:16 ). It was not until at least A.D. 90 that these letters were collected and published, and it would take many years for them to acquire the position of sacred Scripture. It is practically impossible that anyone should write like this until midway through the second century A.D.

All the evidence converges to prove that Second Peter is a late book. It is not until the third century that it is quoted. The great scholars of the early church did not regard it as Peteralthough they did not question its usefulness. The letter has references which require the passing of the years to explain them. The great interest of Second Peter lies in the very fact that it was the last book in the New Testament to be written and the last to gain entry into the New Testament.

In PeterName

How, then, did it become attached to the name of Peter? The answer is that it was deliberately attached. This may seem to us a strange proceeding but in the ancient world this was common practice. Platoletters were written not by Plato but by a disciple in the mastername. The Jews repeatedly used this method of writing. Between the Old and the New Testament, books were written under the names of Solomon, Isaiah, Moses, Baruch, Ezra, Enoch and many another. And in New Testament times there is a whole literature around the name of Peter--The Gospel of Peter, The Preaching of Peter, The Apocalypse of Peter.

One salient fact makes this method of writing even more intelligible. The heretics used it. They issued misleading and pernicious books under the names of the great apostles, claiming that they were the secret teaching of the great founders of the Church handed down by word of mouth to them. Faced with this, the Church retaliated in kind and issued books in which men set down for their own generation the things they were quite sure that the apostles would have said had they been facing this new situation. There is nothing either unusual or discreditable in a book being issued under the name of Peter although Peter did not write it. The writer in humility was putting the message which the Holy Spirit had given him into the mouth of Peter because he felt his own name was unworthy to appear upon the book.

We will not find Second Peter easy to read; but it is a book of first-rate importance because it was written to men who were undermining the Christian ethic and the Christian doctrine and who had to be stopped before the Christian faith was wrecked by their perversion of the truth.

FURTHER READING

2 Peter

C. Bigg, St. Peter and St. Jude (ICC; G)

C. E. B. Cranfield, 1 and 2 Peter and Jude (Tch; E)

J. B. Mayor, The Second Epistle of St. Peter and the Epistle of St. Jude (MmC; G)

J. Moffatt, The General Epistles: James, Peter and Jude (MC; E)

Abbreviations

ICC: International Critical Commentary

MC : Moffatt Commentary

MmC: Macmillan Commentary

NCB: New Century Bible

Tch: Torch Commentary

E: English Text

G: Greek Text

Barclay: 2 Peter 3 (Chapter Introduction)

The Principles Of Preaching (2Pe_3:1-2)

The Denial Of The Second Coming (2Pe_3:3-4)

Destruction By Flood (2Pe_3:5-6)

Destruction By Fire (2Pe_3:7)

The Mercy Of God's Delay (2Pe_3:8-9)

The Dreadful Day (2Pe_3:10)

The Moral Dynamic (2Pe_3:11-14)

Hastening The Day (2Pe_3:11-14 Continued)

Perverters Of Scripture (2Pe_3:15-16)

A Firm Foundation And A Continual Growth (2Pe_3:17-18)

Constable: 2 Peter (Book Introduction)

Introduction

Historical Background

This epistle claims that the Apostle Peter wrote it (1:1). It also claims to follow a former letter by Peter (3:1) that appears to be a reference to 1 Peter, though Peter may have been referring to a letter we no longer have. The author's reference to the fact that Jesus had predicted a certain kind of death for him (1:14) ties in with Jesus' statement to Peter recorded in John 21:18.

The earliest external testimony (outside Scripture) to Petrine authorship comes from the third century.¹ The writings of the church fathers contain fewer references to the Petrine authorship of 2 Peter than to the authorship of any other New Testament book. It is easy to see why critics who look for reasons to reject the authority of Scripture have targeted this book for attack. Ironically in this letter Peter warned his readers of heretics who departed from the teaching of the apostles and the Old Testament prophets, which is the very thing these modern critics do. Perhaps that is another reason some contemporary teachers question its authenticity. Not all who reject Petrine authorship are false teachers, however. The arguments of these modern critics have convinced some otherwise conservative scholars who retain belief in the epistle's inspiration.

Regardless of the external evidence, there is strong internal testimony to the fact that Peter wrote the book.² This includes stylistic similarities to 1 Peter, similar vocabulary compared with Peter's sermons in Acts, and the specific statements already mentioned (i.e., 1:1, 14; 3:1). In addition, the writer claimed to have witnessed Jesus' transfiguration (1:16-18) and to have received information about his own death from Jesus (1:13-14; cf. John 21:18).

Assuming Peter's reference to his former letter (3:1) is to 1 Peter, he seems to have sent this epistle to the same general audience. That audience was primarily Gentile but also Jewish Christians living in northern Asia Minor (cf. 1 Pet. 1:1). The background of the readers and the situation they faced, as Peter described these, fit such an audience well.³

Peter's reference to his imminent departure from this life (1:13-15) suggests that the time of composition may have been just before Peter suffered martyrdom.⁴ The writings of church fathers place Peter's death at A.D. 67-68 in Rome.⁵ Consequently a date of composition about that time seems most likely. Early church tradition also says Peter spent the last decade of his life in Rome.

"Second Peter is the swan song of Peter, just as 2 Timothy is the swan song of Paul. There are striking similarities between the two books. Both epistles put up a warning sign along the pilgrim pathway the church is traveling to identify the awful apostasy that was on the way at the time and which in our time has now arrived. What was then like a cloud the size of a man's hand today envelops the sky and produces a storm of hurricane proportions. Peter warns of heresy among teachers; Paul warns of heresy among the laity."⁶

The similarities between 2 Peter 2 and the Book of Jude, especially Jude 4-18, have raised several questions. Did Peter have access to Jude's epistle, or did Jude have a copy of 2 Peter? Which book came first? Did one man use the other's material, or did both draw from a common source? The commentators and writers of New Testament introductions deal with these questions thoroughly. See them for further explanations.⁷

Suffice it to say that the church through the ages has recognized the end product of both 2 Peter and Jude as epistles that God inspired. As far as which came first, we may never know for sure until we get to heaven. The consensus among scholars now is that Jude probably wrote before Peter (or his agent) composed 2 Peter.⁸ I tend to favor the priority of 2 Peter as do many conservative authorities.⁹

"Most scholars, in fact, date 2 Peter in the early part of the second century and consider it the last New Testament book to have been written. The author's claim to Petrine authorship, therefore, is part of the phenomenon of pseudonymity' in the ancient world, whereby the authority and tradition of a revered religious figure were attributed to a later work by an anonymous author."¹⁰

This quotation reflects the majority of scholarly opinion but not the conviction of many conservatives including myself.

"The purpose of 2 Peter is to call Christians to spiritual growth so that they can combat apostasy as they look forward to the Lord's return."¹¹

Message¹²

Peter wrote this epistle, as he did 1 Peter, to establish believers in their faith. He wrote both letters in obedience to Jesus' instructions to him to "strengthen your brothers" (Luke 22:32). Both epistles contain reminders of fundamental Christian teaching. Both evidently went to the same audience (2 Pet. 3:1). Both deal with how to handle various kinds of trials among other things, suffering in 1 Peter and false teachers in 2 Peter. Both also emphasize God's grace.

The differences between these two epistles are also significant.

The first epistle ends, "Stand firm in it [grace]" (5:12). Its theme is the sufficiency of God's grace. We need to stand fast in grace as Christians.

The second epistle ends, "Grow in grace" (3:18). Its theme is the responsibility of grace. We also need to keep growing in grace. This letter builds on the first. We do not only need to stand fast in grace, but we also need to keep growing in it.

We could state the message of the book therefore as follows: fulfill your responsibilities as recipients of the true grace of God. The message of 1 Peter was, "Stand firm in the true grace of God."

Let me identify the major revelations of this letter.

First, as recipients of God's grace we have resources that create responsibilities. Peter emphasized two of our resources.

Our first resource is the power of God (1:3). God's power grants us everything we need for godly living. Godly living becomes possible when we come to know God by saving faith. We grow in our knowledge of God as we get to know Him better through study of the Scriptures. We also do so as we respond to our increasing knowledge of Him properly by abiding in Him.

One area of life that God's power transforms is our spiritual vitality, energy. God wants us to be vital Christians (John 10:10; cf. James). The opposite condition is to have no spiritual energy. God's power enables us to demonstrate His own "glory" by giving us spiritual vitality (1:3). Peter saw the glory of God manifested through Jesus Christ on the Mount of Transfiguration (1:17). God wants to manifest His glory through every Christian (3:18). People can see God's glory in our spiritual vitality. The clearest illustration of spiritual vitality is Jesus Christ during His earthly ministry.

Another area of life that God's power transforms is our conduct, more specifically. By conduct I mean how we conduct ourselves in thought, word, and deed--what we do, and what we do not do. God wants us to be godly Christians as well as glorious Christians. He wants us to be virtuous as well as vital. The opposite condition is ungodly and unclean. The false teachers reflected the opposite condition, and Peter described their conduct quite fully in chapter 2. God's power enables us to demonstrate His own "excellence" by making us godly (1:3). Peter heard the excellence of God testified to on the Mount of Transfiguration when he heard God say of Jesus Christ, "This is my beloved Son in whom I am well pleased." (Cf. 1:17-18). God wants to manifest His excellence through every Christian (cf. 1 Pet. 2:9). People can see God's excellence in our godly conduct.

The second resource Peter emphasized that every Christian has is the promises of God (1:4). God's promises grant us everything we need to realize our potential and to maintain our purity in godly living. These promises are "magnificent" because they are essentially great and wonderful. They are "precious" to us because they are gifts of our loving heavenly Father and because they are the keys to our realizing our potential and maintaining our purity.

One area of life that God's promises transforms is our character. God wants us to partake of His nature. We receive His nature (i.e., the Holy Spirit) initially when we believe His promise that Christ died for our sins. However, He wants us to partake of that nature fully in this life. When we do so, we realize our potential as the children of God. We do so by continuing to believe God's promises to us. As we began the Christian life by faith, we should continue to walk by faith (cf. James). Because the false teachers rejected the promises of God they failed to realize their potential as human beings. They did not become partakers of the divine nature.

Another area of life that God's promises transforms is, more specifically, our morality. Again we receive future deliverance from the penalty of sin by believing that Christ died for our sins. Nevertheless we also receive present deliverance from the power of sin by believing other of God's promises to us. For example, God promises us that sin will no longer have enslaving power over us (Rom. 6:14; cf. 1 Pet. 4:11; 5:11). He also promises us that He will give us a way of escape in temptation (1 Cor. 10:13). He also promises us that He will give us the desire and the ability to obey Him (Phil. 1:6). One of the promises that Peter emphasized especially in this epistle was the promise that Jesus Christ would return (3:4, 9, 13). He discussed this promise in 3:4-16. When Christ returns He will perfect us. God has given us many more promises. Relying on these is key to maintaining our purity as Christians. Because the false teachers rejected the promises of God, they failed to maintain moral purity. They did not escape the corruption that is in the world through lust.

These then are the resources that create our responsibility: God's power within us, and God's promises in His Word. You can succeed in life and in ministry because you have these resources.

Next let us notice what Peter appealed to his readers to do in view of their resources. He called them to give diligence to two things.

First, we should diligently appropriate our resources (1:5-8). We do this be responding responsibly. We must respond by fulfilling our responsibility as well as by trusting God to fulfill His. We must exercise effort and self-discipline to develop qualities God wants to perfect within us (1:5-8). No one can become a strong Christian without self-discipline.

Second, we should diligently avoid our perils. We do this by remembering God's promises (1:9, 12-13; 3:1-2). Our tendency is to forget God's power and our responsibilities (1:9; 3:5). Our tendency is also to forget God's promises (3:4). Peter's concern was mainly that his readers not forget the promise of the Lord's return (3:9, 13). This promise should affect us by encouraging us to live pure lives (3:14). Because the false teachers chose to forget it, they failed to fulfill the responsibilities of God's grace. Scripture memorization and review are valuable activities because they help us remember God's promises.

These are the major revelations in the book. As recipients of God's grace we have resources that create responsibilities, namely God's power and promises. We also need to give diligence to our responsibilities of responding to God's power and remembering God's promises.

I would also like to point out some applications of this epistle's message to our lives.

First, God's resources do not free us from responsibility to cultivate godliness diligently. They increase that responsibility. The Christian life is a combination of trusting and toiling. We must balance these things. When we neglect either responsibility, we get into trouble (1:5). We are partners with God.

Our sanctification is a process in which we labor together with God.

We are responsible to trust and to obey, to exercise faith in God and to work. We frustrate the Holy Spirit's work of sanctifying us if we do not trust or if we do not obey. The Christian life is a lot like water skiing. We have to lean back and let God pull us out of the stuff that holds us down. However we also have to hold on to the rope, to keep following His leading. When we do both things He enables us to overcome. We can even fly over what formerly held us in its clutches.

Second, we should cultivate habits that will help us remember our resources: God's power and promises. One of the most important reasons we should read our Bibles regularly is that they remind us of things we need to remember. The same is true of memorizing Scripture, attending church services, and having fellowship with other Christians. Peter said it is better not to know Scripture than to forget it (2:21).

Third, God intended the promise of the Lord's return and the events that will follow to be important motivations for us. This is our hope. If we neglect the prophetic portions of Scripture, our motivation for godly living will sag (3:14).

Constable: 2 Peter (Outline)

Outline

I. Introduction 1:1-2

II. The condition of the Christian 1:3-11

A. The believer's resources 1:3-4

B. The believer's needs 1:5-9

C. The believer's adequacy 1:10-11

III. The authority for the Christian 1:12-21

A. The need for a reminder 1:12-15

B. The trustworthiness of the apostles' witness 1:16-18

C. The divine origin of Scripture 1:19-21

IV. The danger to the Christian 2:1-22

A. The characteristics of false teachers 2:1-3

B. The consequences of false teaching 2:4-10a

C. The conduct of false teachers 2:10b-19

D. The condemnation of false teachers 2:20-22

V. The prospect for the Christian 3:1-16

A. The purpose of this epistle 3:1-2

B. Scoffing in the last days 3:3-6

C. End-time events 3:7-10

D. Living in view of the future 3:11-16

VI. Conclusion 3:17-18

Constable: 2 Peter

2 Peter

Bibliography

Alford, Henry. Alford's Greek Testament. 4 vols. New ed. London: Rivingtons, 1884.

Bailey, Mark L., and Thomas L. Constable. The New Testament Explorer. Nashville: Word Publishing Co., 1999.

Barbieri, Louis A. First and Second Peter. Everyman's Bible Commentary series. Chicago Moody Press, 1978.

Barnes, Albert. Barnes' Notes on the New Testament. Reprint ed. Grand Rapids: Kregel Publications, 1964.

Barclay, William. The Letters of James and Peter. Daily Study Bible series. 2nd ed. Edinburgh: Saint Andrew Press, 1960.

Bauckham, Richard J. Jude, 2 Peter. Word Biblical Commentary series. Waco: Word Books, 1983.

Baxter, J. Sidlow. Explore the Book. 6 vols. London: Marshall, Morgan & Scott, 1965.

Bennett, W. H. "The General Epistles, James, Peter, John, and Jude." In The Century Bible: A Modern Commentary. London: Blackwood, Le Bass & Co., n.d.

Bigg, Charles. A Critical and Exegetical Commentary on the Epistles of St. Peter and St. Jude. International Critical Commentary series. 2nd ed. and reprint ed. Edinburgh: T. and T. Clark, 1961.

Blum, Edwin A. "2 Peter." In Hebrews-Revelation. Vol. 12 of The Expositor's Bible Commentary. 12 vols. Edited by Grank E. Gaebelein. Grand Rapids: Zondervan Publishing House, 1981.

Caffin, B. C. "The Second Epistle General of Peter." in The Pulpit Commentary. Reprint ed. Grand Rapids: Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Co., 1950.

Calvin, John. "The Epistles of Paul the Apostle to the Hebrews and the First and Second Epistles of St. Peter." In Calvin's Commentaries. Translated by William B. Johnston. Grand Rapids: Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Co., 1963.

Cedar, Paul A. James, 1, 2 Peter, Jude. The Communicator's Commentary series. Waco: Word Books, 1984.

Chang, Andrew D. "Second Peter 2:1 and the Extent of the Atonement." Bibliotheca Sacra 142:565 (January-March 1985):52-63.

Constable, Thomas L. "Analysis of Bible Books--New Testament." Paper submitted for course 686 Analysis of Bible Books--New Testament. Dallas Theological Seminary, January 1968.

_____. "What Prayer Will and Will Not Change." In Essays in Honor of J. Dwight Pentecost, pp. 99-113. Chicago: Moody Press, 1986.

Culver, Robert D. Daniel and the Latter Days. Westwood, N.J.: Fleming H. Revell Co., 1954.

Darby, John Nelson. Synopsis of the Books of the Bible. 5 vols. Revised ed. New York: Loizeaux Brothers Publishers, 1942.

Desjardins, Michel. "The Portrayal of the Dissidents in 2 Peter and Jude: Does It Tell Us More About the Godly' Than the Ungodly'?" Journal for the Study of the New Testament 30 (June 1987):89-102.

Dictionary of the Apostolic Church. Edited by James Hastings. 1915 ed. Edinburgh: T. and T. Clark. S.v. "Peter, Epistles of," by S. J. Case.

Dictionary of the Bible. Edited by James Hastings. 1910 ed. Edinburgh: T. and T. Clark. S.v. "Peter, Second Epistle of," by F. H. Chase.

Dillow, Joseph C. The Reign of the Servant Kings. Miami Springs, Fla.: Schoettle Publishing Co., 1992.

Dunham, Duane A. "An Exegetical Study of 2 Peter 2:18-22." Bibliotheca Sacra 140:557 (January-March 1983):40-54.

Fanning, Buist M. "A Theology of Peter and Jude." In A Biblical Theology of the New Testament, pp. 437-71. Edited by Roy B. Zuck. Chicago: Moody Press, 1994.

Fischel, H. A. "The Uses of sorites (Climax, Gradatio) in the Tannaitic Period." Hebrew Union College Annual44 (1973):119-51.

Fornberg, T. An Early Church in a Pluralistic Society: A Study of 2 Peter. Coniectanea biblica. New Testament series. Lund, Sweden: C. W. K. Gleerup, 1977.

Gaebelein, Arno C. The Annotated Bible. 4 vols. Reprint ed. Chicago: Moody Press, and New York: Loizeaux Brothers, Inc., 1970.

Gangel, Kenneth O. "2 Peter." In The Bible Knowledge Commentary: New Testament, pp. 859-79. Edited by John F. Walvoord and Roy B. Zuck. Wheaton: Scripture Press Publications, Victor Books, 1983.

A Greek-English Lexicon of the New Testament. By C. G. Wilke. Revised by C. L. Wilibald Grimm. Translated, revised and enlarged by Joseph Henry Thayer, 1889.

Green, Michael. The Second Epistle General of Peter and the General Epistle of Jude. Tyndale New Testament Commentaries series. Grand Rapids: Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Co., 1975.

Guthrie, Donald. New Testament Introduction. 3 vol. 2nd ed. London: Tyndale Press, 1966.

Hiebert, D. Edmond. Second Peter and Jude: An Expositional Commentary. Greenville, S.C.: Unusual Publications, 1989.

_____. "Directives for Living in Dangerous Days." Bibliotheca Sacra 141:564 (October-December 1984):330-40.

_____. "The Necessary Growth in the Christian Life: An Exposition of 2 Peter 1:5-11." Bibliotheca Sacra 141:561 (January-March 1984):43-54.

_____. "A Portrayal of False Teachers: An Exposition of 2 Peter 2:1-3." Bibliotheca Sacra 141:563 (July-September 1984):255-65.

_____. "The Prophetic Foundation for the Christian Life: An Exposition of 2 Peter 1:19-21." Bibliotheca Sacra 141:562 (April-June 1984):158-68.

Hodge, Charles Systematic Theology. 3 vols. New York: Charles Scribner's Sons, 1887.

Hodges, Zane C. "Exposition of Second Peter." The KERUGMA Message 1:1 (May-June 1991):3-4; 1:2 (July-August 1991):3-4; 1:3 (November-December 1991):2-3; 2:1 (Spring 1992):2-3; 2:2 (Winter 1992):2-4, 6; 3:1 (Spring 1993):2-3; 3:1 (January-March 1994):1, 3-4.

Howe, Frederic R. "The Christian Life in Peter's Theology." Bibliotheca Sacra 157:627 (July-September 2000):304-14.

International Standard Bible Encyclopedia. Edited by James Orr. 1957 ed. Grand Rapids: Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Co. S.v. "Peter, The Second Epistle of," by William G. Moorehead.

Ironside, H. A. Expository Notes on the Epistles of Peter. New York: Loizeaux Brothers, 1947.

Jamieson, Robert; A. R. Fausset; and David Brown; eds. Commentary Practical and Explanatory on the Whole Bible. Revised ed. Grand Rapids: Zondervan Publishing House, 1961.

Kelly, J. N. D. A Commentary on the Epistles of Peter and Jude. Thornapple Commentaries series. Reprint ed. Grand Rapids: Baker Book House, 1981.

Kennard, Douglas W. "Petrine Redemption: Its Meaning and Extent." Journal of the Evangelical Theological Society 30:4 (December 1987):399-405.

Kruger, Michael J. "The Authenticity of 2 Peter." Journal of the Evangelical Theological Society 42:4 (December 1999):645-71.

Lange, John Peter, ed. Commentary on the Holy Scripture. 12 vols. Reprint ed. Grand Rapids: Zondervan Publishing House, 1960. Vol. 12: James--Revelation, by J. P. Lange, J. J. Van Oosterzee, G. T. C. Fronmuller, and Karl Braune. Enlarged and edited by E. R. Craven. Translated by J. Isidor Mombert and Evelina Moore.

Lenski, Richard C. H. The Interpretation of the Epistles of St. Peter, St. John and St. Jude. Reprint ed. Minneapolis: Augsburg Publishing House, 1961.

Lillie, John. Lectures on the First and Second Epistles of Peter. Reprint ed. Minneapolis: Klock & Klock Christian Publishers, 1978.

Long, Gary D. Definite Atonement. Philadelphia: Presbyterian and Reformed Publishing Co., 1977.

McGee, J. Vernon. Thru the Bible with J. Vernon McGee. 5 vols. Pasadena, Calif.: Thru the Bible Radio, 1983.

McNab, Andrew. "The General Epistles of Peter." in The New Bible Commentary. Edited by F. Davidson. Grand Rapids: Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Co., 1953.

McNeile, A. H. An Introduction to the Study of the New Testament. 2nd ed. Revised by C. S. C. Williams. Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1965.

Merrill, Eugene H. "A Theology of the Pentateuch." In A Biblical Theology of the Old Testament, pp. 7-87. Edited by Roy B. Zuck. Chicago: Moody Press, 1991.

Moo, Douglas J. 2 Peter and Jude. The NIV Application Commentary series. Grand Rapids: Zondervan Publishing House, 1996.

Morgan, G. Campbell. Living Messages of the Books of the Bible. 2 vols. New York: Fleming H. Revell Co., 1912.

Moulton, James Hope, and George Milligan. The Vocabulary of the Greek Testament Illustrated from the Papyri and Other Non-Literary Sources. London: Hodder and Stoughton, 1952.

Nieboer, J. Practical Exposition of 2 Peter Verse by Verse. Erie, Pa.: Our Daily Walk Publishers, 1952.

Overstreet, R. Larry. "A Study of 2 Peter 3:10-13." Bibliotheca Sacra 137:548 (October-December 1980):354-71.

Paine, Stephen W. "The Second Epistle of Peter." In The Wycliffe Bible Commentary, pp. 1453-62. Edited by Charles F. Pfeiffer and Everett F. Harrison. Chicago: Moody Press, 1962.

Pentecost, J. Dwight. "The Apostles' Use of Jesus' Predictions of Judgment on Jerusalem in A.D. 70." In Integrity of Heart, Skillfulness of Hands, pp. 134-43. Edited by Charles H. Dyer and Roy B. Zuck. Grand Rapids: Baker Book House, 1994.

Peters, George N. H. The Theocratic Kingdom of Our Lord Jesus Christ. 3 vols. New York: Frank & Wagnalls, 1884.

Plummer, Alfred. "The Second Epistle General of Peter." In Ellicott's Commentary on the Whole Bible. Reprint ed. Grand Rapids: Zondervan Publishing House, n.d.

Rakestraw, Robert V. "Becoming Like God: An Evangelical Doctrine of Theosis." Journal of the Evangelical Theological Society 40:2 (June 1997):257-69.

Richard, Ramesh P. "Soteriological Inclusivism and Dispensationalism." Bibliotheca Sacra 151:601 (January-March 1994):85-108.

Robertson, Archibald Thomas. Word Pictures in the New Testament. 6 vols. Nashville: Broadman Press, 1931.

Ryrie, Charles C. "Apostasy in the Church." Bibliotheca Sacra 121:481 (January-March 1984):44-53.

_____. Dispensationalism. Chicago: Moody Press, 1995.

_____. Dispensationalism Today. Chicago: Moody Press, 1965.

Scott, Walter. Exposition of the Revelation of Jesus Christ. London: Pickering & Inglis, n.d.

Senior, Donald. "The Letters of Jude and Second Peter." The Bible Today 25:4 (July 1987):209-14.

Shedd, William G. T. Dogmatic Theology. 2 vols. Edinburgh: T. & T. Clark, 1889.

Sidebottom, E. M. James, Jude, 2 Peter. 1967. New Century Bible Commentary Series. Grand Rapids: Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Co., and London: Marshall, Morgan & Scott Publishers, Ltd., 1982.

Stanton, Gerald B. Kept from the Hour. Fourth ed. Miami Springs, Fla.: Schoettle Publishing Co., 1991.

Strachan, R. H. "The Second Epistle General of Peter." In The Expositor's Greek Testament, 5 (1910):81-148. Edited by W. Robertson Nicoll. 5 vols. London: Hodder and Stoughton, 1900-10.

Thiessen, Henry Clarence. Introduction to the New Testament. Grand Rapids: Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Co., 1962.

Thomas, W. H. Griffith. The Apostle Peter: Outline Studies in His Life, Character, and Writings. Grand Rapids: Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Co., 1946.

Wheaton, David H. "2 Peter." In The New Bible Commentary, Revised. Third edition. Edited by Donald Guthrie and J. A. Motyer. Downers Grove, Ill.: InterVarsity Press, 1970.

Wiersbe, Warren W. The Bible Exposition Commentary. 2 vols. Wheaton: Scripture Press Publications, Victor Books, 1989.

Williams, Nathaniel Marshman. "Commentary on the Epistles of Peter." In An American Commentary on the New Testament. Reprint ed. Philadelphia: American Baptist Publication Society, n.d.

Witmer, John A. "The Truth about Error." Bibliotheca Sacra 124:495 (July-September 1967):248-53.

Wolston, W. T. P. Simon Peter: His Life and Letters. 2nd ed. London: James Nisbet and Co., 1896.

Copyright 2003 by Thomas L. Constable

Haydock: 2 Peter (Book Introduction)

THE

SECOND EPISTLE OF ST. PETER,

THE APOSTLE.

INTRODUCTION.

This epistle, though not at first received [by some Churches] as canonical, was acknowledged as such [by all Churches] about the end of the fourth age [century]. See Eusebuis, lib. iii. History of the Church, chap. iii.; St. Jerome, de Vir. Illust. Tillem. art. 33. The design, as it appears, Chap. i. 13. and Chap. iii. 1. was to give them admonitions and instructions against teachers of false doctrine, particularly against the Simonites. It seems to have been written a little before his martyrdom, about the year 66. (Witham) --- In this epistle St. Peter says, (Chap. iii.) "Behold this is the second epistle I write unto you:" and before, (Chap. i. 14.) "Being assured that the putting off of this my tabernacle is at hand." This shews that it was written a very short time before his martyrdom, which was about thirty-five years after our Lord's ascension. In this epistle he admonishes the faithful to be mindful of the great gifts they received from God, and to join all other virtues with their faith. He warns them against false teachers, by describing their practices and foretelling their punishments. He describes the dissolution of this world by fire, and the day of judgment. (Challoner) --- This epistle may be considered as the spiritual testament or last will of the apostle, as it contains his last admonitions to the faithful. He first calls their attention to the care they should have of their sanctification and perfection, next to the perils that concern the Church one the part of heretics, those that menaced her in her infant state, and those that will assail her in the latter days, which includes an invincible proof of her perpetuity; for is is the same infallible and indefectible Church that is to encounter the latter as the former trials, but always with promised success. Hence the great St. John Chrysostom says: the same day that shall see the Church of God ended, shall see the end of the world; and to these continued struggles shall succeed perfect peace, to be enjoyed through a blissful eternity. If some are still found to object, that the present epistle was not written by St. Peter, on account of the marked difference of the style, St. Jerome removes this objection thus: St. Peter employed different interpreters, sometimes Glaucias, and sometimes St. Mark; hence the difference of the style, from the diversity of his scribes. St. Mark was with him when he penned the first, but was not with him when he dictated the present. The present epistle contains, as we said above, an account of the last dreadful trials that are to assail the faithful before the end of time; but all that faith teaches us on that subject is: first, That the world will have an end; secondly, that it will end by fire; and thirdly, that the world will not be destroyed, but changed and perfected. Hence all that is said with regard to the duration of the world; on the nature and quality of the fire that is to burn and purify the world; if it be to precede or follow the last judgment, all is problematical, all is doubtful. Hence the Christian knows a good deal, who knows how to entertain proper doubts.

====================

Gill: 2 Peter (Book Introduction)

INTRODUCTION TO 2 PETER

Though there was, among the ancients, a doubt concerning the authority of this epistle, which is first mentioned by Origen ^a, and afterwards by Eusebius ^b and Jerom ^c, yet it prevailed not among the churches, nor hindered the diligent reading and use of it, together with other Scriptures; it appearing to be useful and profitable, as Eusebius declares; and in process of time this doubt was entirely removed, and it was universally received by fathers and councils into the canon of the Scriptures, where it is justly retained, it having plain signatures of its divine original. Nor is there anything in it unworthy of so great an apostle, whose name it bears; but the whole of it is agreeable to the analogy of faith, to the rest of the sacred writings, particularly to the epistle of Jude, between which, and the second chapter of this, there is a great likeness. The only reason of the doubt of the genuineness of this epistle, and whether it was written by the Apostle Peter, is the difference of its style from the former; but the Holy Ghost, the dictator of the sacred writings, is not limited to a man's natural style, but could vary it as he pleased: besides, a man's style is not the same at different times, and when writing on different subjects; add to which, that this objection can only regard the second chapter, for the first and third agree with the former epistle. And some have thought that the second chapter is an extract out of some ancient Hebrew book, describing the characters of the old false prophets; which book Peter and Jude having before them, took the characters of the old prophets, and, under divine direction, applied them to the false teachers of the present age; and if so it is not to be wondered at that the style of the epistle should differ from the former, and even from itself in this part. But that it was written by the Apostle Peter, not only the inscription shows, which, if false, would indeed discredit the genuineness of the book, but the account that is given of the writer of it, as one that was with Christ at his transfiguration, 2Pe 1:16. Now there were only the three following disciples there, Peter, John, and, James. The last of these had been dead some time when this epistle was written, and it was never ascribed by any to the Apostle John, and therefore it remains that Peter must be the writer of it. As for Simeon, bishop of Jerusalem, that succeeded James, whom Grotius would suggest as the author of it, the character does not agree with him; he was not with Christ on the holy mount, nor heard the voice from heaven, asserting the sonship of Christ, and the divine complacency in him: moreover, this epistle is called a "second epistle", 2Pe 3:1 and supposes a first, and manifestly refers to the former epistle of Peter's, about which there never was any doubt, as the authors before mentioned observe. It was written by the apostle in his old age, when upon the decline of life, just as he was about to put off his tabernacle, 2Pe 1:13 a little before his martyrdom, in the year 68, though Dr. Lightfoot places it in 66; and it is sent to the same persons as his first, namely, to the believing Jews scattered throughout several parts of Asia, he being the minister of the circumcision; see 1Pe 1:1 compared with 2Pe 3:1. The scope and design of it are, to put them upon a concern for a larger increase of grace and spiritual knowledge; to confirm and establish them in the present truth of the Gospel; to warn them against false teachers, which he largely describes; and he puts them in mind of the dissolution of all things, and of what will precede and follow it; from whence he draws several useful hints and inferences.

Gill: 2 Peter 3 (Chapter Introduction)

INTRODUCTION TO 2 PETER 3

In this chapter the apostle makes mention of the end and design of his writing this second epistle; foretells that there would be scoffers at the coming of Christ in the last days; describes the coming of Christ and the burning of the world; and closes with the use saints should make of these things. The end of his writing both this and the former epistle was to put the persons he writes unto in mind of the doctrines and ordinances of the Gospel, delivered by the prophets and apostles, 2Pe 3:1; and then, agreeably to what the prophets had said, he predicts that there would be scoffers in the last day; who are described by their sinful course of life, and by their words, what they would say concerning the coming of Christ, and their reasoning about it, 2Pe 3:3; which arose from their ignorance of the creation of the heavens and the earth, and of the situation of them; and is refuted by showing that things have not remained as they were from the creation; that the earth standing in and out of the water, as it was capable of being overflowed with a flood, so it perished by one; and that the present heavens and earth are reserved and prepared for a general burning at the day of judgment, in which wicked men will be destroyed, 2Pe 3:5; but let these men scoff as they will, the length of time since the promise of Christ's coming was made should be no objection with the saints to the performance of it; since the longest term of time is nothing with God, however considerable it may be with men, 2Pe 3:8; besides, the reason of the coming of Christ being deferred, is not owing to any dilatoriness in the performance of the promise, but to the longsuffering of God towards his elect, being unwilling that anyone of them should be lost, but that all should be brought to repentance, 2Pe 3:9; but as for the coming of Christ, that is certain, and will be sudden; at which time will be the general conflagration, which is described in a very awful manner, 2Pe 3:10; and the use to be made of such a tremendous dispensation by the saints is to live a holy and godly conversation, 2Pe 3:11; to be eagerly looking for the coming of Christ, 2Pe 3:12, and to expect, according to his promise, new heavens and a new earth, in which will dwell righteous persons, 2Pe 3:13; and to be diligent to be found in peace at that day, 2Pe 3:14; and to account the longsuffering of God salvation; and the whole of this account, and the use of it, is strengthened by the testimony of the Apostle Paul, of whom, and of his epistles, a character is given, 2Pe 3:15; and the epistle is concluded with some cautions and exhortations to the saints, to beware lest they should be carried away with the errors of wicked men, and so fall from any degree of steadfastness in the faith; and to be concerned for a growth in grace, and in the knowledge of Christ Jesus, to whom glory is to be ascribed for ever and ever, 2Pe 3:17.

College: 2 Peter (Book Introduction)

INTRODUCTION

ABOUT THIS COMMENTARY

This commentary is written for serious students of the Bible, including Bible class teachers, preachers, college students, and other motivated readers. However, it is written on a popular rather than a scholarly level, so that readers need not be familiar with Greek or scholarly methods or jargon.

The goal is to help the modern reader to hear the message of 2 Peter as its first readers heard it. Our assumption is that we must know what it meant before we can know what it means . Peter wrote for a particular group of Christians facing a particular set of problems. The letter was therefore not written to us (although we believe that it was written for us). To be faithful to Peter's intent, we must attempt to place ourselves in the shoes of the earliest readers.

This is a difficult task for a couple of reasons. First, this "book" of the New Testament is a letter. This means we are reading someone else's mail. The problem is that both Peter and his readers knew the situation, so that Peter only makes allusions to what was going on. For example, we would like to know much more about the false teachers. However, Peter had no need to discuss in detail what both he and his readers already know. We are left to read between the lines in order to reconstruct the situation. Second, we are dealing with literature written in an ancient language to an ancient culture. They had a very different worldview, lived very different lifestyles, and practiced very different customs from those with which we are familiar.

Our task is therefore difficult, but it is not hopeless. We will never grasp the details of this letter exactly as the first readers did, but we can have confidence that we are understanding the larger picture. Greek scholars, historians, specialists in ancient Jewish and Christian literature, and others have spent countless hours studying this and other ancient documents. We are fortunate to stand on their shoulders.

Finally, we must mention the nature of this letter. Many dislike it because it is largely negative. After all, it is Peter's scathing denunciation of false teachers. Everyone prefers the message of grace to the message of judgment. However, it is sometimes necessary to expose error, even if the task is not enjoyable. This letter ought to remind Christians of the importance of guarding the essential doctrines of the Christian faith. As Peter makes painfully clear, bad doctrine leads to bad living, which leads to sure judgment. Christians must never shrink from the unpleasant task of fighting heresy.

The reader will quickly discover that I am greatly indebted to the fine commentaries of Douglas J. Moo and especially Richard Bauckham. Moo offers excellent comments from an evangelical perspective. Bauckham's detailed discussion of linguistic, historical, and literary matters is without equal. The reader is referred to his commentary in numerous footnotes simply because his discussion is the most thorough available.

AUTHORSHIP AND DATE

Second Peter claims to have been written by Simon Peter, the apostle of Jesus (1:1) and eyewitness to his transfiguration (1:16-18). Since he writes of his approaching death (1:14-15), Peter must have written this letter by the mid-60s of the first century A.D. (The tradition that Peter was martyred in Rome under the emperor Nero is probably reliable.)

A large number of modern scholars, however, are convinced that Peter could not have written this letter. In fact, this New Testament writing more than all others is believed to be pseudonymous (written under a false name). A number of reasons are given for this belief.

First, there is the language and style of the original Greek. Second Peter is written in elaborate Greek, often using rare and poetic terminology. Many believe that a Galilean Jew could not have written in this style. More significantly, 2 Peter is very much unlike 1 Peter. Most argue that the writer who wrote 1 Peter could not have written this letter. In response it must be admitted that this is an argument of some weight. However, conservative scholars are not convinced. First, no one can really know what Peter could and could not have written at different times in life and to different audiences. The style argument always involves considerable subjectivity. Second, many conservative commentators admit that the style of 2 Peter disallows thinking that Peter wrote it himself. They suggest that an amanuensis probably wrote the letter for Peter, as Silvanus may have done in 1 Peter (5:12). A trusted "secretary" may well have written Peter's thoughts in a different style from that of Peter.

A second argument against Petrine authorship is that even some of the early Christians had their doubts about this letter. The evidence is quite complex and difficult to analyze, but a few facts are fairly clear. Origen (3rd century) notes that 2 Peter was a disputed letter, although he believes that Peter wrote it. Eusebius (4th century) rejects its authenticity, although he suggests that the majority accepted it. Jerome (end of 4th century) writes that many rejected it because it was so unlike 1 Peter; yet he contends that Peter probably used two different amanuenses (secretaries). In response, it must again be granted that this is a substantive claim. More than any other New Testament book, 2 Peter was late in being universally accepted. However, evangelical scholars underscore the fact that it was accepted; and it was accepted at a time when a number of works falsely attributed to Peter were being rejected. The evidence from the early church is not unanimous, but it is clearly for the authenticity of 2 Peter.

A third argument for the pseudonymity of 2 Peter concerns the time references regarding the false teachers. At times the writer speaks of false teachers who will come, but at other times he makes it clear that they are already present. The argument is that the actual writer attempts to write as if Peter is predicting the future. In reality he betrays the fact that he is actually living during the times of the false teachers. In response, conservatives note that there are many possible reasons for the changing tenses. The possibility that the pseudonymous writer forgot to continue his fiction is not the most likely. Perhaps the false teachers had not arrived yet but were known because they were already present in other locations. The full discussion is found in the comments on 2:1.

Fourth, many think that the inference in 3:16 that Paul's letters are "Scripture" betrays a late date. Paul's letters, it is argued, were not considered Scripture until at least the late first century. Those who accept Petrine authorship must admit that Peter's words are somewhat surprising. However, it cannot be ruled out that the written words of one regarded as an inspired apostle would be called Scripture. Scholars are often too sure that they know what early Christians could and could not think.

Fifth, many who deny that Peter wrote this letter do so on the basis that it is a "testament," a final address of a leader before his death to the group which reveres him (see comments on 1:11). Most often, a testament was written well after the death of the hero whose name is attached to it, and it addressed the needs of the later generation. Many believe therefore that someone wrote this testament in Peter's name in order to lend his authority to the crisis provoked by the false teachers. Conservatives have responded that there are certainly some elements of the testament genre in 2 Peter, but that these elements do not make 2 Peter a testament like others. Furthermore, testaments need not be pseudonymous. Peter certainly could have written this way at the end of his life.

Sixth, many scholars reject 2 Peter on the basis of the false teaching it opposes. Many think that the heresy is Gnosticism, which developed in the second century. However, while there are minor similarities to that heresy, there is nothing in 2 Peter that would identify the false teachers as second-century Gnostics. The sort of false teaching in 2 Peter is already seen in Paul's letters.

Finally, some also argue that the apostle Peter would not have borrowed from the letter of Jude (see section on "Relation to Jude"). However, this argument is really quite weak. It is not clear why Peter would not have borrowed useful material from another source. Neither is it certain that Peter borrowed from Jude. Jude may have borrowed from Peter, or both may have borrowed from another source, whether oral or written.

In the final analysis, most conservative scholars argue that the apostle Peter wrote 2 Peter. They know that this can never be proven and that the decision is in part based on faith and tradition. Nonconservative scholars make significant arguments against Petrine authorship, but they wrongly claim that they have proven that Peter did not write this letter. We find their arguments weighty but not conclusive. In this commentary we will assume that Peter wrote 2 Peter.

OCCASION

Peter wrote to a specific church (or group of churches) facing specific problems, namely the coming of false teachers. Second Peter may have been written to the same churches as 1 Peter (churches in Asia Minor, according to 1:1), since 2 Peter mentions an earlier letter to this group (3:1). However, the fact that he may have written letters to other churches means that we cannot be sure.

Peter wrote this letter primarily because false teachers were 1) denying the Second Coming of Jesus, and 2) living without moral restraint and encouraging others to do so. Peter writes that they denied the teachings of prophets and apostles and that they arrogantly slandered spiritual beings. They denied the Second Coming, arguing that the world was simply continuing on its course as it had since the creation.

Their belief that there would be no Second Coming (and therefore no final judgment) led these false teachers into ungodly lifestyles. They willfully satisfied their sinful desires, including greed, sexual immorality, and gluttony. They encouraged others to follow their sinful examples, especially recent converts who were just escaping these very sins.

Readers of 2 Peter would like to know more about these teachers of error. There is much that we do not know, because of the nature of a letter. (Both author and recipients knew the situation, so there was no need to rehearse the details.) It would be helpful to know more precisely the identity of the false teachers, their background, their practices, and their teaching. This lack of information has led scholars to speculate regarding the identity of the troublemakers. Many have theorized that they were Gnostics, a group of second-century heretics who argued that knowledge was the key to salvation. They believed in a strict dualism between the spiritual and the physical worlds. Therefore they did not believe that Christ was actually human. They also tended to discount the importance of sins involving the body, such as sexual sin. The body, they claimed, belonged to the evil physical world that was created by an inferior god.

There is no evidence in 2 Peter that the false teachers were Gnostics since there is not a trace of the developed Gnostic systems of the second century. Furthermore, all of the teachings which Peter attacked are also found in Paul's letters. For example, in 1 Corinthians Paul writes against some who deny the resurrection (15:12-34) and others who argue for the right to engage in sexual sin (5:1-2; 6:12-20). The most that can be said is that 2 Peter's antagonists may have been the predecessors of what would later be called Gnostics.

A better and more cautious approach is to call these false teachers simply libertines. Their libertine approach seems to have sprung from their (false) understanding of grace and their denial of the judgment at the Second Coming of Jesus.

Another reason Peter wrote 2 Peter is that he was nearing the end of his life. This may have been his last opportunity to offer his teachings concerning sin, judgment, and false teachers. This was especially important because he was an eyewitness to the life, death, and resurrection of Jesus. As an apostle, it was his responsibility to testify to the truth about Jesus and to destroy the efforts of the false teachers.

RELATION TO JUDE

Portions of 2 Peter and Jude are remarkably similar. This applies not only to their contents but also to their order. They use the same examples of destruction for sinfulness: evil angels cast into hell and the judgment against Sodom and Gomorrah. They use similar metaphors, such as clouds or mists driven by a storm. They speak in the same way of the false teachers, including their slander of celestial beings and their following the way of Balaam. They speak of their opponents as "scoffers" and their readers as "friends."

Most scholars think that the resemblance between the two letters is simply too close to be coincidental. It is remotely possible that both may be relying on an oral body of teaching against false teachers. However, it is likely that there is a literary dependence between the two letters. It could be that Peter has used Jude, Jude has used Peter, or that both have used another written source. Very few argue for a third (unknown) source used by both, since this only compounds the problem. Most think that Peter used Jude, and they may be correct. It does seem more plausible that Peter adapted and expanded Jude than that Jude used only a portion of 2 Peter and added very little to it.

However, the fact is that all theories about the literary relationship are conjectural. Fortunately, we need not know the direction of influence in order to interpret the letter. It is obvious that both writers are facing similar problems. Their churches were facing so-called Christian teachers who not only taught false doctrine but lived ungodly lives.

-College Press New Testament Commentary: with the NIV

BIBLIOGRAPHY

2 PETER

Bauckham, Richard. Jude, 2 Peter. Word Biblical Commentary. Waco, TX: Word, 1983.

Green, Michael. The Second General Epistle of Peter and the General Epistle of Jude. Tyndale New Testament Commentary. Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1968.

Hillyer, Norman. 1 and 2 Peter, Jude. New International Biblical Commentary. Peabody, MA: Hendrickson, 1992.

Kelly, J.N.D. A Commentary on the Epistles of Peter and of Jude . Harper's New Testament Commentary. San Francisco: Harper & Row, 1969.

Mayor, Joseph B. The Epistle of St. Jude and the Second Epistle of St. Peter: Greek Text with Introduction, Notes, and Comments. Grand Rapids: Baker, 1979 (orig. 1907).

Moo, Douglas J. 2 Peter and Jude. The NIV Application Commentary. Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 1996.

Neyrey, Jerome H. 2 Peter, Jude: A New Translation with Introduction and Commentary. Anchor Bible. New York: Doubleday, 1993.

-College Press New Testament Commentary: with the NIV

College: 2 Peter (Outline)

OUTLINE

I. INTRODUCTION - 1:1-15

A. Salutation and Greeting - 1:1-2

B. Preface: Exhortation to Godly Living - 1:3-11

C. Occasion: The Approaching Death of Peter - 1:12-15

II. BODY OF LETTER - 1:16-3:13

A. Reasons for Believing in Christ's Return - 1:16-21

1. Peter's Eyewitness Testimony - 1:16-18

2. The Sure Prophetic Word - 1:19-21

B. Warning against False Teachers - 2:1-22

1. The Coming of False Teachers - 2:1-3

2. The Condemnation of False Teachers - 2:4-10a

3. The Sins of the False Teachers - 2:10b-16

4. The Future Suffering of the False Teachers - 2:17-22

C. The Necessity of Believing in Christ's Return - 3:1-13

1. The Content of the False Teaching - 3:1-7

2. The Sure Return of Christ - 3:8-10

3. Christian Living in Light of Christ's Return - 3:11-13

III. FINAL EXHORTATIONS - 3:14-18

-College Press New Testament Commentary: with the NIV