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
3:1 Peter's first letter was most likely 1 Peter. He implied that he wrote this letter soon after the earlier one. This second epistle, he said, went to the same audience in northern Asia Minor (cf. 1 Pet. 1:1), primarily Gentile Christians. His purpose in writing the second letter was to refresh his readers' memories (cf. 1:13). "Sincere"means unflawed by evil. He gave his readers credit for not having embraced the teaching of the heretics yet.
"An effective antidote to false doctrine is to recall and dwell on the teaching already perceived."131
"The English sincere' is from the Latin words sine cera, without wax.' Some pottery salesmen would use wax to cover cracks and weak places in pottery. Such a cover-up could be detected only by holding the jug up to the sun to see if any weaknesses were visible. Such a vase was sun-judged' (the lit. meaning of the Gr. eilikrines). God wants His people to have sun-judged minds, not those in which their sin spots have been covered over."132
3:2 Again Peter put the teaching of the apostles, which these men received from Jesus Christ, on a level of authority equal with the writings of the Old Testament prophets (cf. 1:12-21; 3:16; Acts 1:16; Rom. 9:29; Heb. 4:7).
"The commandment' is used here in the same way as in 2:21 . . .: it emphasizes the ethical aspect of the Christian message because it is on this, along with the eschatological expectation, that the author wishes to insist, in opposition to the false teachers."133
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
Next Peter outlined what will surely happen so his readers would understand what will take place.
3:7 God has given orders that the present heavens and earth (vv. 5-6) will experience another judgment yet future. Then God will with His word destroy them by fire rather than by water (cf. vv. 10, 12). This will evidently take place after the great white throne judgment and before the creation of the new heavens and new earth (cf. Rev. 20:11-15; 21:1).140The world is presently "reserved"for fire in the sense that this is its inevitable destiny (cf. Deut. 32:22; Isa. 34:4 LXX; 66:15-16; Zeph. 1:18; Mal. 3:19).
3:8 Again Peter reminded his readers to remember what they had learned previously (v. 1) and not to forget, as the scoffers did (v. 5). As far as God's faithfulness to His promises, it does not matter if He gave His promise yesterday or a thousand years ago. He will still remain faithful and will fulfill every promise (cf. Ps. 90:4). The passage of a thousand years should not lead us to conclude that God will not fulfill what He has promised. The passing of time does not cause God to forget His promises.141
This verse does not mean that God operates in a timeless state. Time is simply the way He and we measure the relationship of events to one another. The idea of a timeless existence is Platonic, not biblical. God's relationship to time is different from ours since He is eternal, but this does not mean that eternity will be timeless. Eternity is endless time.
"Peter did not say that to God one day isa thousand years, and a thousand years areone day.' The point is not that time has no meaning for God but rather that His use of time is such that we cannot confine Him to our time schedules. His use of time is extensive, so that He may use a thousand years to do what we might feel should be done in a day, as well as intensive, doing in a day what we might feel could only be done in a thousand years."142
This statement does not negate the hope of the imminent return of the Lord either. Peter, as the other New Testament writers, spoke as though his readers would be alive at His return (1:19; 3:14). This was an indisputable hope of the early Christians.143
3:9 The fact that the fulfillment of God's promise to judge (v. 7) lingers does not mean that God has forgotten His promise, was lying, or cannot fulfill it. It means that He is waiting to fulfill it so that people will have time to repent. Unbelievers left on the earth will be able to repent after the Rapture, but it is better for them if they do so before that event.
If God wants everyone to be saved, will not all be saved?144The answer is no because this desire of God's is not as strong as some other of His desires. For example, we know God desires that everyone have enough freedom to believe or disbelieve the gospel more strongly than He desires that everyone be saved. Otherwise everyone would end up believing. However that will not happen (Matt. 25:46). Somehow it will result in God's greater glory for some to perish than for all to experience salvation. Nevertheless, God sincerely "desires"(Gr. boulomenosin contrast to the stronger thelontes, "determines") that every person come to salvation.145
"No dispensationalist minimizes the importance of God's saving purpose in the world. But whether it is God's total purpose or even His principal purpose is open to question. The dispensationalist sees a broader purpose in God's program for the world than salvation, and that purpose is His own glory [Eph. 1:6, 12, 14]. For the dispensationalist the glory of God is the governing principle and overall purpose, and the soteriological program is one of the principal means employed in bringing to pass the greatest demonstration of His own glory. Salvation is part and parcel of God's program, but it cannot be equated with the entire purpose itself."146
"Soteriology . . . is obviously a major theme of biblical theology, though it clearly is not thecentral motif. This is evident in that salvation implies deliverance fromsomething tosomething and is thus a functional rather than a teleological concept. In other words, salvation leads to a purpose that has been frustrated or interrupted and is not a purpose in itself."147
"The final cause of all God's purposes is his own glory. . . . (Rev. iv. 11) . . . (Num. xiv. 21) . . . (Is.xlviii. 11) . . . (Ezek. xx. 9) . . . (1 Cor. i. 26-31; Eph. ii. 8-10)."148
"The final end of both election and reprobation is the Divine glory, in the manifestation of certain attributes. . . . Neither salvation nor damnation are ultimate ends, but means to an ultimate end: namely, the manifested glory of the triune God. . . . 2 Cor. 3:7, 9."149
3:10 The phrase "day of the Lord"refers to a specific time yet future, as elsewhere in Scripture. This "day"will begin when Antichrist makes a covenant with Israel, and it will conclude with the burning up of the present heavens and earth (Dan. 9:27; 1 Pet. 3:12; et al.).150"Its works"probably refers to all that has been done on earth that has only temporal value (e.g., buildings, etc.). This day will come as a thief in that its beginning will take those unbelievers living on the earth then (after the Rapture) by surprise (Matt. 24:37-39, 43-44; Luke 12:39-40; 1 Thess. 5:2; Rev. 3:3; 16:15). The term "heavens"probably refers to the earth's atmosphere and the "second heaven"in which the stars and the planets hang, not God's abode (the "third heaven"). The "elements"(Gr. stoicheia) apparently refer to the material building blocks of physical things (i.e., the atoms, molecules, and larger masses that are foundational to larger things).151
When in the "day of the Lord"will this conflagration take place? Some believe it will happen at the beginning of the millennial kingdom.152It seems more likely however that this holocaust will take place at the end of the Millennium and will result in the destruction of the universe as we know it (Rev. 21:1; cf. Matt. 5:18; 24:35; Mark 13:31; Luke 16:17; 21:33).153
"Peter clearly opposes those Christians who insisted that Christ had to return within a certain short period of time after his resurrection. But he by no means opposes the idea of imminence itself."154
Peter drew application for his readers and focused their attention on how they should live presently in view of the future.
3:11 Peter believed that an understanding of the future should motivate the believer to live a holy life now. His question is rhetorical. Holy conduct refers to behavior that is separate from sin and set apart to please God. Godly means like God (1:3, 6-7; cf. 2:7, 10, 12-15, 18-20; 3:3; 1 Pet. 1:15-16).
3:12 The Greek participle translated "hastening"or "speeding"(speudontes) sometimes means "desiring earnestly"(RSV margin).155If Peter meant that here, the sense would be that believers not only look for the day of God but desire earnestly to see it (cf. vv. 8-10; Matt. 24:42; 25:13).156The AV has "hastening unto"implying that Peter meant believers are rapidly approaching the day of God. Yet "unto"needs supplying; it is not in the text. Most of the translators and commentators, however, took speudontesin its usual sense of hastening. They assumed that Peter was thinking that believers can hasten the day of God by their prayers (cf. Matt. 6:10) and their preaching (cf. Matt. 24:14; Acts 3:19-20).157Believers affect God's timetable by our witnessing and our praying as we bring people to Christ (cf. Josh. 10:12-14; 1 Kings 20:1-6; et al.).158
"Clearly this idea of hastening the End is the corollary of the explanation (v 9) that God defers the Parousia because he desires Christians to repent. Their repentance and holy living may therefore, from the human standpoint, hasten its coming. This does not detract from God's sovereignty in determining the time of the End . . ., but means only that his sovereign determination graciously takes human affairs into account."159
The "day of God"may be a reference to the time yet future in which God will be all in all (1 Cor. 15:28).160This will follow the creation of the new heavens and new earth (Rev. 21:1). On the other hand this phrase may be another way of describing the day of the Lord.161The antecedent of "on account of which"(NASB) is the day of God. God will burn up the present heavens and earth because of that day.
3:13 We look forward to the new heavens and earth, not the destruction of the present heavens and earth. The reason is that the new heavens and earth will be where righteousness dwells. Unrighteousness characterizes the present world (cf. Jer. 23:5-7; 33:16; Dan. 9:24; Rev. 21:1, 8, 27). "His promise"of new heavens and earth is in Isaiah 65:17; 66:22; et al.
"Christians need to remember the ultimate, bottom-line,' purpose of biblical eschatology: to make us better Christians here and now."162
"The purpose of prophetic truth is not speculation but motivation . . ."163
3:14 "These things"probably refers to all of what Peter just finished saying in verses 10-13 rather than to the new world in which righteousness dwells (v. 13; cf. the "these things"in v. 11). Peter again urged his readers to "diligent"action (cf. 1:5, 10). He wanted us to be at peace with God, and the implication was that he expected his readers to be alive when the Lord comes.164"Spotless"means without defect or defilement (as in a spotless sacrifice, cf. 2:13; 1 Pet. 1:19), and "blameless"means without justifiable cause for reproach. The false teachers were stains and blemishes (2:13), but believers need to be spotless and blameless.
3:15 We should view the Lord's tarrying as a manifestation of His longsuffering that leads people to repentance and salvation rather than as a sign that He is never coming (v. 9).
"While God is waiting, He is both giving time for the unbeliever to be saved, and for the believer to be working out his salvation (cf. Phil. 2:12, 13) in terms of progress in sanctification."165
Peter regarded Paul as a "dear brother"who was one with him in his allegiance to God and His Word. Perhaps Peter had Romans 2:4 in mind when he said Paul wrote the same thing he had just said.
3:16 "These things"probably refers generally to future events (cf. vv. 11, 14) and the importance of Christians living godly lives in view of them.
It is somewhat comforting to learn that even the Apostle Peter found some of what Paul wrote hard to understand! Peter also wrote some things in his two epistles that tax our understanding. The "untaught"(Gr. amatheis) are those who had not received teaching concerning all that God had revealed. The "unstable"(Gr. asteriktoi) are those who were not always consistent in their allegiance to God or the world, namely, double-minded, fence-straddling compromisers. These types of people misunderstood and in some cases deliberately misrepresented the meaning of Paul's writings. However this only added to their own guilt before God.
"The verb distort' (streblousin), occuring only here in the New Testament, means to twist or wrench,' specifically, to stretch on the rack, to torture.'166They take Paul's statements and twist and torture them, like victims on the rack, to force them to say what they want them to say."167
Note that Peter regarded Paul's writings as of equal authority with the Old Testament Scriptures. This statement reiterates what he said previously about the apostles' teaching being equal with the prophets' writings (1:12-21; 3:2).
"That an Apostle should speak of the writings of a brother-Apostle in the same termsas the books of the Old Testament--viz., as Scripture--need not surprise us, especially when we remember the large claims made by St. Paul for his own words (1 Thess. ii. 13; 2 Thess. ii. 15; Eph. iii. 3-5. Comp. Acts xv. 28; Rev. xxii. 18, 19)."168
"In attempting to destroy the Bible men destroy themselves."169
