2 Peter 3:2-4

3:2 I want you to recall ¹  both ²  the predictions ³  foretold by the holy prophets and the commandment of the Lord and Savior through your apostles. ⁴  3:3 Above all, understand this: ⁵  In the last days blatant scoffers ⁶  will come, being propelled by their own evil urges ⁷  3:4 and saying, ⁸  “Where is his promised return? ⁹  For ever since ¹⁰  our ancestors ¹¹  died, ¹²  all things have continued as they were ¹³  from the beginning of creation.”

[3:2]  ¹ tn Grk “to remember.” “I want you” is supplied to smooth out the English. The Greek infinitive is subordinate to the previous clause.

[3:2]  ² tn “Both” is not in Greek; it is supplied to show more clearly that there are two objects of the infinitive “to remember” – predictions and commandment.

[3:2]  ³ tn Grk “words.” In conjunction with πρόειπον (proeipon), however, the meaning of the construction is that the prophets uttered prophecies.

[3:2]  ⁴ sn Holy prophets…apostles. The first chapter demonstrated that the OT prophets were trustworthy guides (1:19-21) and that the NT apostles were also authoritative (1:16-18). Now, using the same catch phrase found in the Greek text of 1:20 (τοῦτο πρῶτον γινώσκοντες, touto prwton ginwskontes), Peter points to specific prophecies of the prophets as an argument against the false teachers.

[3:3]  ⁵ tn Grk “knowing this [to be] foremost.” Τοῦτο πρῶτον (touto prwton) constitute the object and complement of γινώσκοντες (ginwskonte"). The participle is loosely dependent on the infinitive in v. 2 (“[I want you] to recall”), perhaps in a telic sense (thus, “[I want you] to recall…[and especially] to understand this as foremost”). The following statement then would constitute the main predictions with which the author was presently concerned. An alternative is to take it imperativally: “Above all, know this.” In this instance, however, there is little semantic difference (since a telic participle and imperatival participle end up urging an action). Cf. also 2 Pet 1:20.

[3:3]  ⁶ tn The Greek reads “scoffers in their scoffing” for “blatant scoffers.” The use of the cognate dative is a Semitism designed to intensify the word it is related to. The idiom is foreign to English. As a Semitism, it is further incidental evidence of the authenticity of the letter (see the note on “Simeon” in 1:1 for other evidence).

[3:3]  ⁷ tn Grk “going according to their own evil urges.”

[3:4]  ⁸ tn The present participle λέγοντες (legontes, “saying”) most likely indicates result. Thus, their denial of the Lord’s return is the result of their lifestyle. The connection to the false teachers of chapter 2 is thus made clear.

[3:4]  ⁹ tn Grk “Where is the promise of his coming?” The genitive παρουσίας (parousia", “coming, advent, return”) is best taken as an attributed genitive (in which the head noun, promise, functions semantically as an adjective; see ExSyn 89-91).

[3:4]  ¹⁰ tn The prepositional phrase with the relative pronoun, ἀφ᾿ ἧς (af’ |h"), is used adverbially or conjunctively without antecedent (see BDAG 727 s.v. ὅς 1.k.).

[3:4]  ¹¹ tn Grk “fathers.” The reference could be either to the OT patriarchs or first generation Christians. This latter meaning, however, is unattested in any other early Christian literature.

[3:4]  ¹² tn The verb κοιμάω (koimaw) literally means “sleep,” but it is often used in the Bible as a euphemism for the death of a believer.

[3:4]  ¹³ tn Grk “thus,” “in the same manner.”