¹ tc Several significant witnesses read Sivmwn (Simwn, “Simon”) for Sumewvn (Sumewn, “Simeon”; including Ì72 B Y 81 1241 2464 vg). However, this appears to be a motivated reading as it is the more common spelling. Sumewvn occurs only here and in Acts 15:14 as a spelling for the apostle’s name. The reading Sumewvn enjoys ample and widespread support among the manuscripts, strongly suggesting its authenticity. Further, this Hebraic spelling is a subtle argument for the authenticity of this letter, since a forger would almost surely follow the normal spelling of the name (1 Peter begins only with “Peter” giving no help either way).
²tn Grk “Simeon Peter.” The word “from” is not in the Greek text, but has been supplied to indicate the sender of the letter.
³tn Though dou'lo" (doulos) is normally translated “servant,” the word does not bear the connotation of a free man serving another. BAGD notes that “‘servant’ for ‘slave’ is largely confined to Biblical transl. and early American times…in normal usage at the present time the two words are carefully distinguished” (BAGD 205 s.v. dou'lo"). At the same time, perhaps “servant” is apt in that the dou'lo" of Jesus Christ took on that role voluntarily, unlike a slave. The most accurate translation is “bondservant” (sometimes found in the ASV for dou'lo"), in that it often indicates one who sells himself into slavery to another. But as this is archaic, few today understand its force. The notion of “slave of Jesus Christ” is that one is subject to Jesus Christ completely, body and soul, to do his will.
⁴tc Some manuscripts (Í Y et pauci) read kurivou (kuriou, “Lord”) for qeou' (qeou, “God”) in v. 1, perhaps due to confusion of letters (since both words were nomina sacra).
⁵sn The terms God and Savior both refer to the same person, Jesus Christ. This is one of the clearest statements in the NT concerning the deity of Christ. The construction in Greek is known as the Granville Sharp rule, named after the English philanthropist-linguist who first clearly articulated the rule in 1798. Sharp pointed out that in the construction article-noun-kaiv-noun (where kaiv [kai] = “and”), when two nouns are singular, personal, and common (i.e., not proper names), they always had the same referent. Illustrations such as “the friend and brother,” “the God and Father,” etc. abound in the NT to prove Sharp’s point. In fact, the construction occurs elsewhere in 2 Peter, strongly suggesting that Peter’s idiom was the same as the rest of the NT authors’ (cf., e.g., 1:11 [“the Lord and Savior”], 2:20 [“the Lord and Savior”]). The only issue is whether terms such as “God” and “Savior” could be considered common nouns as opposed to proper names. Sharp and others who followed (such as T. F. Middleton in his masterful The Doctrine of the Greek Article [1808]) demonstrated that a proper name in Greek was one that could not be pluralized. Since both “God” (qeos) and “savior” (swthr) were occasionally found in the plural, they did not constitute proper names, and hence, do fit Sharp’s rule. Although there have been 200 years of attempts to dislodge Sharp’s rule, all attempts have been futile. Sharp’s rule stands vindicated after all the dust has settled. (For more information on the application of Sharp’s rule to 2 Pet 1:1, see Wallace, Exegetical Syntax, 272, 276-77, 290.)
⁶tn The verb lagcavnw (lancanw) means “obtain by lot,” “receive.” A literal translation would put it in the active, but some of the richness of the term would thereby be lost. It is used in collocation with klh'ro" (klhros, “lot”) frequently enough in the LXX to suggest the connotation of reception of a gift, or in the least reception of something that one does not deserve. Hanse’s statement (TDNT 4.1) that “Even where there is no casting of lots, the attainment is not by one’s own effort or as a result of one’s own exertions, but is like ripe fruit falling into one’s lap” is apt for this passage. Peter’s opening line is a reminder that our position in Christ is not due to merit, but grace.
⁷tn Grk “equal in value/honor.”
sn A faith just as precious. The author’s point is that the Gentile audience has been blessed with a salvation that is in no way inferior to that of the Jews.
⁸tn Grk “May grace and peace be multiplied to you.”
⁹tn The words “as you grow” are not in the Greek text, but seem to be implied.
¹⁰tn The word ejpivgnwsi" (epignwsis) could simply mean knowledge, but Mayor (171-74) has suggested that it is often a fuller knowledge, especially in reference to things pertaining to spiritual truth. Bauckham argues that it refers to the knowledge of God that is borne of conversion, but this is probably saying too much and is asking questions of the author that are foreign to his way of thinking. The term is used in 1:2, 3, 8; 2:20 (the verb form occurs twice, both in 2:21). In every instance it evidently involves being in the inner circle of those who connect to God, though it does not necessarily imply such a direct and relational knowledge of God for each individual within that circle. An analogy would be Judas Iscariot: even though he was a disciple of the Lord, he was not converted.
¹¹tn A comma properly belongs at the end of v. 2 instead of a period, since v. 3 is a continuation of the same sentence. With the optative in v. 2, Peter has departed from Paul’s normal greeting (in which no verb is used), rendering the greeting a full-blown sentence. Nevertheless, this translation divides the verses up along thematic lines in spite of breaking up the sentence structure. For more explanation, see note on “power” in v. 3.
¹²tn The verse in Greek starts out with wJ" (Jws) followed by a genitive absolute construction, dependent on the main verb in v. 2. Together, they form a subordinate causal clause. A more literal rendering would be “because his divine power…” The idea is that the basis or authority for Peter’s prayer in v. 2 (that grace and peace would abound to the readers) was that God’s power was manifested in their midst. The author’s sentence structure is cumbersome even in Greek; hence, we have broken this up into two sentences.
¹³tc The Greek reads taV pavnta (ta panta)—“all the things,” or, if the article is lacking, “all things.” The article is absent in Ì72 B C P 0209 1739 Byz, but is found in Í Y 33^vid 81 1505 et pauci. Most likely it dropped out due to homoioteleuton, though a decision is difficult. (The expression taV pavnta occurs 35 times in the NT, though nowhere else in the Petrine corpus.)
¹⁴tn The word “necessary” is not in the Greek, but is implied by the preposition prov" (pros).
¹⁵tn See the note on “rich knowledge” in v. 2.
¹⁶sn Called. The term kalevw (kalew), used here in its participial form, in soteriological contexts when God is the subject, always carries the nuance of effectual calling. That is, the one who is called is not just invited to be saved—he is also and always saved (cf. Rom 8:30). Calling takes place at the moment of conversion, while election takes place in eternity past (cf. Eph 1:4).
¹⁷tn The datives ijdiva/ dovxh/ kaiV ajreth'/ (idia doxh kai areth) could be taken either instrumentally (“by [means of] his own glory and excellence”) or advantage (“for [the benefit of] his own glory and excellence”). Both the connection with divine power and the textual variant found in several early and important witnesses (diaV dovxh" kaiV ajreth'" in Ì72 B 0209^vid) argues for an instrumental meaning. The instrumental notion is also affirmed by the meaning of ajreth'/ (“excellence”) in contexts that speak of God’s attributes (BAGD 106 s.v. 3 in fact defines it as “manifestation of divine power” in this verse).
¹⁸tn Verse 4 is in Greek a continuation of v. 3, “through which things.”
sn The phrase these things refers to God’s glory and excellence.
¹⁹tn Grk “through them.” The implication is that through inheriting and acting on these promises the believers will increasingly become partakers of the divine nature.
²⁰sn Although Peter has borrowed the expression partakers of the divine nature from paganism, his meaning is clearly Christian. He does not mean apotheosis (man becoming a god) in the pagan sense, but rather that believers have an organic connection with God. Because of such a connection, God can truly be called our Father. Conceptually, this bears the same meaning as Paul’s “in Christ” formula. Peter’s statement, though startling at first, is hardly different from Paul’s prayer for the Ephesians that they “may be filled up to all the fullness of God” (3:19).
²¹tn The aorist participle ajpofugovnte" (apofugonte") is often taken as attendant circumstance to the preceding verb gevnhsqe (genhsqe). As such, the sense is “that you might become partakers…and might escape…” However, it does not follow the contours of the vast majority of attendant circumstance participles (in which the participle precedes the main verb, among other things). Further, attendant circumstance participles are frequently confused with result participles (which do follow the verb). Many who take this as attendant circumstance are probably viewing it semantically as result (“that you might become partakers…and [thereby] escape…”). But this is next to impossible since the participle is aorist: result participles are categorically present tense.
²²tn Grk “the corruption in the world (in/because of) lust.”
²³tn The Greek text begins with “and,” a typical Semitism.
sn The reason given is all the provisions God has made for the believer, mentioned in vv. 3-4.
²⁴tn The participle is either means (“by making every effort”) or attendant circumstance (“make every effort”). Although it fits the normal contours of attendant circumstance participles, the semantics are different. Normally, attendant circumstance is used of an action that is a necessary prelude to the action of the main verb. But “making every effort” is what energizes the main verb here. Hence it is best taken as means. However, for the sake of smoothness we have translated it as a command with the main verb translated as an infinitive. This is in accord with English idiom.
²⁵tn Or “moral excellence,” “virtue”; this is the same word used in v. 3 (“the one who has called us by his own glory and excellence”).
²⁶tn Perhaps “steadfastness,” though that is somewhat archaic. A contemporary colloquial rendering would be “stick-to-it-iveness.”
²⁷sn The final virtue or character quality in this list is “love” (ajgavph, agaph). The word was not used exclusively of Christian or unselfish love in the NT (e.g., the cognate, ajgapavw [agapaw], is used in John 3:19 of the love of darkness!), but in a list such as this in which ajgavph is obviously the crescendo, unselfish love is evidently in view. Bauckham notes that as the crowning virtue, ajgavph encompasses all the previous virtues.
²⁸tn Each item in Greek begins with “and.” The conjunction is omitted for the sake of good English style, with no change in meaning.
sn Add to your faith excellence…love. The list of virtues found in vv. 5-7 stands in tension to the promises given in vv. 2-4. What appears to be a synergism of effort or even a contradiction (God supplies the basis, the promises, the grace, the power, etc., while believers must also provide the faith, excellence, etc.) in reality encapsulates the mystery of sanctification. Each believer is responsible before God for his conduct and spiritual growth, yet that growth could not take place without God’s prior work and constant enabling. We must not neglect our responsibility, yet the enabling and the credit is God’s. Paul says the same thing: “Continue working out your salvation with humility and dependence, for the one bringing forth in you both the desire and the effort…is God” (Phil 2:12-13).
²⁹tn The participles are evidently conditional, as most translations render them.
³⁰tn The participle uJpavrconta (Juparconta) is stronger than the verb eijmiv (eimi), usually implying a permanent state. Hence, the addition of “really” is implied.
³¹sn Continually increasing. There are evidently degrees of ownership of these qualities, implying degrees of productivity in one’s intimacy with Christ. An idiomatic rendering of the first part of v. 8 would be “For if you can claim ownership of these virtues in progressively increasing amounts…”
³²tn Grk “cause [you] not to become.”
³³tn Grk “unto,” “toward”; although it is possible to translate the preposition eij" (eis) as simply “in.”
³⁴tn Grk “the [rich] knowledge of our Lord Jesus Christ.” Verse 8 in Greek does not make a full stop (period), for v. 9 begins with a subordinate relative pronoun. Contemporary English convention requires a full stop in translation, however.
³⁵tn Grk “for.” The connection, though causal, is also adversative.
³⁶tn Grk “to the one for whom these things are not present.”
³⁷tn The words “that is to say, he is” are not in Greek. The word order is unusual. We might expect the author to have said “he is nearsighted and blind” (as the NIV has so construed it), but this is not the word order in Greek. Perhaps Peter begins with a strong statement followed by a clarification, i.e., that being nearsighted in regard to these virtues is as good as being blind.
³⁸tn Grk “brothers,” but the Greek word may be used for “brothers and sisters” or “fellow Christians” as here (cf. BAGD 16 s.v. ajdelfov" 1., where considerable nonbiblical evidence for the plural ajdelfoiv [adelfoi] meaning “brothers and sisters” is cited).
³⁹tn Grk “make your calling and election sure.”
sn Make sure of your calling and election. Peter is not saying that virtue and holiness produce salvation, but that virtue and holiness are the evidence of salvation.
⁴⁰tn Grk “these things.”
⁴¹tn In Greek ouj mhv (ou mh) followed by the subjunctive is normally the strongest way to negate an action. Coupled with povte (pote, “ever”), the statement is even more emphatic. The author is offering sage advice on how to grow in grace.
⁴²tn The words “into sin” are not in Greek, but the Greek word ptaivw (ptaiw) is used in soteriological contexts for more than a mere hesitation or stumbling. BAGD 727 s.v. 1 suggests that it means “to make a mistake, go astray, sin.” Alternatively, the idea of ptaivw here could be that of “suffer misfortune” (so K.L. Schmidt, TDNT 6.884), as a result of sinning.
⁴³tn Grk “always.”
⁴⁴tn Or “tent.” Peter uses this as a metaphor for his physical body.
sn Peter’s use of the term tabernacle for the human body is reminiscent both of John’s statements about Jesus (“he tabernacled among us” in John 1:14; “the temple of his body” in John 2:21) and Paul’s statements about believers (e.g., “you are God’s building” in 1 Cor 3:9; “you are God’s temple” in 1 Cor 3:16; “your body is the temple of the Holy Spirit” in 1 Cor 6:19; “holy temple” in Eph 2:21). It is precisely because the Shekinah glory has been transferred from the OT temple to the person of Jesus Christ and, because he inhabits believers, to them, that Peter can speak this way. His life on earth, his physical existence, is a walking tabernacle, a manifestation of the glory of God.
⁴⁵tn Grk “since I know that the removal of my tabernacle is [coming] soon.”
⁴⁶tn Grk “just as.”
⁴⁷sn When Peter says our Lord Jesus Christ revealed this to me, he is no doubt referring to the prophecy that is partially recorded in John 21:18-19.
⁴⁸sn There are various interpretations of v. 15. For example, Peter could be saying simply, “I will make every effort that you remember these things.” But the collocation of spoudavzw (spoudazw) with mnhvnh (mnhnh) suggests a more specific image. Bauckham is right when he notes that these two words together suggest a desire to write some sort of letter or testament. Most commentators recognize the difficulty in seeing the future verb spoudavsw (spoudasw) as referring to 2 Peter itself (the present or aorist would have been expected, i.e., “I have made every effort, “ or “I am making every effort”). Some have suggested that Mark’s Gospel is in view. The difficulty with this is threefold: (1) Mark is probably to be dated before 2 Peter, (2) early patristic testimony seems to imply that Peter was the unwitting source behind Mark’s Gospel; and (3) “these things” would seem to refer, in the least, to the prophecy about Peter’s death (absent in Mark). A more plausible suggestion might be that Peter was thinking of the ending of John’s Gospel. This is possible because (1) John 21:18-19 is the only other place in the NT that refers to Peter’s death; indeed, it fleshes out the cryptic statement in v. 14 a bit more; (2) both 2 Peter and John were apparently written to Gentiles in and around Asia Minor; (3) both books were probably written after Paul’s death and perhaps even to Paul’s churches (cf. 2 Pet 3:1-2, 15-16); and (4) John 21 gives the appearance of being added to the end of a finished work. There is thus some possibility that this final chapter was added at Peter’s request, in part to encourage Gentile Christians to face impending persecution, knowing that the martyrdom of even (Paul and) Peter was within the purview of God’s sovereignty. That 2 Pet 1:15 alludes to John 21 is of course by no means certain, but remains at least the most plausible of the suggestions put forth thus far.
⁴⁹tn Grk “for we did not make known to you the power and coming of our Lord Jesus Christ by following cleverly concocted fables.”
⁵⁰tn Grk “but, instead.”
⁵¹tn Grk “became.”
⁵²tn Grk “that one’s.” That is, “eyewitnesses of the grandeur of that one.” The remote demonstrative pronoun is used perhaps to indicate esteem for Jesus. Along these lines it is interesting to note that “the Pythagoreans called their master after his death simply ejkei'no"” as a term of reverence and endearment” (BAGD 239 s.v. ejkei'no" 1. c.).
⁵³sn The term grandeur was used most frequently of God’s majesty. In the first century, it was occasionally used of the divine majesty of the emperor. 2 Pet 1:1 and 1:11 already include hints of a polemic against emperor-worship (in that “God and Savior” and “Lord and Savior” were used of the emperor).
⁵⁴tn Grk “such a.” The pronoun toia'sde (toiasde) most likely refers to what follows, connoting something of the uniqueness of the proclamation.
⁵⁵tn The verb eujdovkhsa (eudokhsa) in collocation with eij" o{n (ei" Jon) could either mean “in whom I am well-pleased, delighted” (in which case the preposition functions like ejn [en]), or “on whom I have set my favor.”
sn This is my beloved Son, in whom I am delighted alludes to the Transfiguration. However, Peter’s version is markedly different from the synoptic accounts (in particular his introductory phrase, “when that voice was conveyed to him,” an unusual expression [perhaps used to avoid naming God directly as the one who spoke from heaven]). The most natural explanation for such differences is that he was unaware of the exact wording of the gospels. This is, of course, easier to explain if 2 Peter is authentic than if it is a late document, written in the second century.
⁵⁶tn The “we” in v. 18 is evidently exclusive, that is, it refers to Peter and the other apostles.
⁵⁷tn 2 Pet 1:17-18 comprise one sentence in Greek, with the main verb “heard” in v. 18. All else is temporally subordinate to that statement. Hence, more literally these verses read as follows: “For when he received honor and glory from God the Father, when that voice was conveyed to him the Majestic Glory: ‘This is my beloved Son, in whom I am delighted,’ we ourselves heard this voice when it was conveyed from heaven, when we were with him on the holy mountain.”
⁵⁸tn Grk “and.” The use of kaiv (kai) is of course quite elastic. Only the context can determine if it is adversative, continuative, transitional, etc.
⁵⁹sn We in v. 19 is apparently an inclusive “we” (Peter and his audience). Such shifts in the first person plural are quite common in epistolary literature (cf., e.g., 2 Cor 10-13, passim).
⁶⁰tn The comparative adjective bebaiovteron (bebaioteron) is the complement to the object toVn profhtikoVn lovgon (ton profhtikon logon). As such, the construction almost surely has the force “The prophetic word is (more certain/altogether certain)—and this is something that we all have.” Many scholars prefer to read the construction as saying “we have the prophetic word made more sure,” but such a nuance is unparalleled in object-complement constructions (when the construction has this force, poievw (poiew) is present [as in 2 Pet 1:10]). The meaning, as we have construed it, is that the Bible (in this case, the Old Testament) that these believers had in their hands was a thoroughly reliable guide. Whether it was more certain than was even Peter’s experience on the Mount of Transfiguration depends on whether the adjective should be taken as a true comparative (“more certain”) or as an elative (“very certain, altogether certain”). Some would categorically object to any experience functioning as a confirmation of the scriptures and hence would tend to give the adjective a comparative force. Yet the author labors to show that his gospel is trustworthy precisely because he was an eyewitness of this great event. Further, to say that the Old Testament scriptures (the most likely meaning of “the prophetic word”) were more trustworthy an authority than an apostle’s own experience of Christ is both to misconstrue how prophecy took place in the OT (did not the prophets have visions or other experiences?) and to deny the final revelation of God in Christ (cf. Heb 1:2). In sum, since syntactically the meaning that “we have confirmed the prophetic word by our experience” is improbable, and since contextually the meaning that “we have something that is a more reliable authority than experience, namely, the Bible” is unlikely, we are left with the meaning “we have a very reliable authority, the Old Testament, as a witness to Christ’s return.” No comparison is thus explicitly made. This fits both the context and normal syntax quite well. The introductory kaiv (kai) suggests that Peter is adding to his argument. He makes the statement that Christ will return, and backs it up with two points: (1) Peter himself (as well as the other apostles) was an eyewitness to the Transfiguration, which is a precursor to the Parousia; and (2) the Gentile believers, who were not on the Mount of Transfiguration, nevertheless have the Old Testament, a wholly reliable authority that also promises the return of Christ.
⁶¹tn Grk “paying attention” (the adverbial participle is either conditional [“if you pay attention”] or instrumental [“by paying attention”]; though there is difference in translation, there is virtually no difference in application). On a lexical level, “pay attention to” (prosevcw [prosecw]) does not, in a context such as this, mean merely observe or notice, but follow, give heed to, obey.
⁶²tn “To this” is a relative pronoun in Greek. The second half of v. 19 is thus a relative clause. Literally it reads, “to which you do well if you pay attention.”
⁶³tn Grk “as”; wJ" (Jws) clauses after imperatives or implied commands (as here) make a comparison of what should be true (imperative) to what is true (indicative). This is the case even when the verb of the wJ" clause is only implied. Cf. Matt 6:10 (“may your will be done on earth as [it is] in heaven”); 10:16 (“be wise as serpents [are], and be as gentle as doves [are]”); 22:39 (“love your neighbor as [you already do] love yourself”).
⁶⁴sn The reference to the morning star constitutes a double entendre. First, the term was normally used to refer to Venus. But the author of course has a metaphorical meaning in mind, as is obvious from the place where the morning star is to rise— “in your hearts.” Most commentators see an allusion to Num 24:17 (“a star shall rise out of Jacob”) in Peter’s words. Early Christian exegesis saw in that passage a prophecy about Christ’s coming. Hence, in this verse Peter tells his audience to heed the OT scriptures which predict the return of Christ, then alludes to one of the passages that does this very thing, all the while running the theme of light on a parallel track. In addition, it may be significant that Peter’s choice of terms here is not the same as is found in the LXX. He has used a Hellenistic word that was sometimes used of emperors and deities, perhaps as a further polemic against the paganism of his day.
⁶⁵sn The phrase in your hearts is sometimes considered an inappropriate image for the parousia, since the coming of Christ will be visible to all. But Peter’s point has to do with full comprehension of the revelation of Christ, something only believers will experience. Further, his use of light imagery is doing double-duty, suggesting two things at once (i.e., internal guidance to truth or illumination, and OT prophecy about Christ’s return) and hence can not be expected to be consistent with every point he wishes to make.
⁶⁶tn Grk “knowing this [to be] foremost.” Tou'to prw'ton (touto prwton) constitute the object and complement of ginwvskonte" (ginwskonte"). The participle is dependent on the main verb in v. 19 (“you do well [if you pay attention]”), probably in a conditional usage. An alternative is to take it imperativally: “Above all, know this.” In this rendering, prw'ton is functioning adverbially. Only here and 2 Pet 3:3 do we find tou'to prw'ton in the NT, making a decision more difficult.
⁶⁷tn The o{ti (oti) clause is appositional (“know this, that”). English usage can use the colon with the same force.
⁶⁸tn Verse 20 is variously interpreted. There are three key terms here that help decide both the interpretation and the translation. As well, the relation to v. 21 informs the meaning of this verse. (1) The term “comes about” (givnetai [ginetai]) is often translated “is a matter” as in “is a matter of one’s own interpretation.” But the progressive force for this verb is far more common. (2) The adjective ijdiva" (idias) has been understood to mean (a) one’s own (i.e., the reader’s own), (b) its own (i.e., the particular prophecy’s own), or (c) the prophet’s own. Catholic scholarship has tended to see the reference to the reader (in the sense that no individual reader can understand scripture, but needs the interpretations handed down by the Church), while older Protestant scholarship has tended to see the reference to the individual passage being prophesied (and hence the Reformation doctrine of analogia fidei [analogy of faith], or scripture interpreting scripture). But neither of these views satisfactorily addresses the relationship of v. 20 to v. 21, nor do they do full justice to the meaning of givnetai. (3) The meaning of ejpivlusi" (epilusi") is difficult to determine, since it is a biblical hapax legomenon. Though it is sometimes used in the sense of interpretation in extra-biblical Greek, this is by no means a necessary sense. The basic idea of the word is unfolding, which can either indicate an explanation or a creation. It sometimes has the force of solution or even spell, both of which meanings could easily accommodate a prophetic utterance of some sort. Further, even the meaning explanation or interpretation easily fits a prophetic utterance, for prophets often, if not usually, explained visions and dreams. There is no instance of this word referring to the interpretation of scripture, however, suggesting that if interpretation is the meaning, it is the prophet’s interpretation of his own vision. (4) The gavr (gar) at the beginning of v. 21 gives the basis for the truth of the proposition in v. 20. The connection that makes the most satisfactory sense is that prophets did not invent their own prophecies (v. 20), for their impulse for prophesying came from God (v. 21).
sn No prophecy of scripture ever comes about by the prophet’s own imagination. 2 Pet 1:20-21, then, form an inclusio with v. 16: the Christian’s faith and hope is not based on cleverly concocted fables, but is based on the sure Word of God—one which the prophets, prompted by the Spirit of God, spoke. Peter’s point is the same as is found elsewhere in the NT, i.e., that human prophets did not originate the message, but they did convey it, using their own personalities in the process.
¹sn There will be false teachers among you. Peter uses the same verb, givnomai (ginomai), in 2 Pet 2:1 as he had used in 1:20 to describe the process of inspiration. He may well be contrasting, by way of a catch-word, the two kinds of prophets.
²tn Grk “who”; verse 1 is one sentence in Greek, the second half constituting a relative clause.
³sn By the use of the future tense (will infiltrate), Peter is boldly prophesying the role that false teachers will have before these Gentile believers. It was necessary for him to establish both his own credentials and to anchor his audience’s faith in the written Word before he could get to this point, for these false teachers will question both.
⁴tn Grk “will bring in,” often with the connotation of secretiveness; “your midst” is implied.
⁵tn Or “destructive opinions,” “destructive viewpoints.” The genitive ajpwleiva" (apwleia") could be taken either attributively (“destructive”) or as a genitive of destination (“leading to destruction”). Although our preference is to see it as a genitive of destination, especially because of the elaboration given at the end of the verse (“bringing swift destruction on themselves”), translating it attributively is less cumbersome in English. Either way, the net result is the same.
⁶tn Grk “even.” The kaiv (kai) is ascensive, suggesting that the worst heresy is mentioned in the words that follow.
⁷tn Grk “bringing.” The present participle ejpavgonte" (epagonte") indicates the result of the preceding clause.
⁸tn “Debauched lifestyles” is literally “licentiousnesses,” “sensualities,” “debaucheries.”
⁹tn Grk “because of whom,” introducing a subordinate clause to the first part of the verse.
¹⁰tn Or “blasphemed,” “reviled,” “treated with contempt.”
¹¹tn Grk “to whom,” introducing a subordinate relative clause.
¹²tn Grk “the ancient judgment.”
¹³tn Grk “is not idle.”
¹⁴tn Greek has “and their.” As introducing a synonymous parallel, it is superfluous in English.
¹⁵tn The participle aJmarthsavntwn (Jamarthsantwn) could either be attributive (“who sinned”) or adverbial (“when they sinned”). The relation to the judgment of the false teachers in v. 3 suggests that the objects of God’s judgment are not in question, but the time-frame for the execution of justice is. If the participle is taken temporally, the point of comparison is not as acute. The objection that the illustrations following (the flood, Sodom and Gomorrah) are viewed temporally does not mitigate this translation, for in both instances only the time of executing judgment is in view. Further, in both instances the OT notes that God withheld punishment for a long time.
¹⁶tn Grk “casting them into Tartarus,” or “holding them captive in Tartarus.” This verb, tartarovw (tartarow), occurs only here in the NT, but its meaning is clearly established in both Hellenistic and Jewish literature. “Tartarus was thought of by the Greeks as a subterranean place lower than Hades where divine punishment was meted out, was so regarded in Jewish apocalyptic as well…” (BAGD 805 s.v.). Grammatically, it is translated as an indicative because it is an attendant circumstance participle.
¹⁷tn Grk “handed them over.”
¹⁸tn The reading seirai'" (seirai", “chains”) is found in Ì72 P Y 33 1739 Byz vg et alii, while siroi'" (sirois [or seiroi'", seirois], “pits”) is found in Í A B C 81 et pauci. The evidence is thus fairly evenly divided. Internally, the reading adopted here (seirai'") is a rarer term, perhaps prompting some scribes to replace it with the more common word. However, this more common term is not a synonym and hence does not follow the normal pattern of scribes. As well, the use of the genitive zovfou (zofou) in “chains of darkness” is a bit awkward (a rare genitive of place), perhaps prompting some scribes to change the imagery to “pits of darkness” (in which case zovfou is an attributive genitive). A further point that complicates the issue is the relationship of 2 Peter to Jude. Jude’s parallel (v. 6) has desmoi'" (desmois, “chains”). Apart from the issue of whether 2 Peter used Jude or Jude used 2 Peter, this parallel suggests one of two possibilities: either (1) since these two books obviously have a literary relationship, seirai'" is original, or (2) early scribes, recognizing that these two books shared their material, changed seiroi'" to seirai'" to conform the wording, at least conceptually, to Jude 6. On balance, seirai'" looks to be original because scribes were not prone to harmonize extensively between books other than the gospels (although 2 Peter and Jude do display some of this harmonizing). Apparently some early scribes, not recognizing the term seirai'", changed it to one with which they were familiar (seiroi'").
¹⁹tn The genitive zovfou (zofou) is taken as a genitive of place. See previous note for discussion.
²⁰tn “Along with seven others” is implied in the cryptic, “the eighth, Noah.” A more literal translation thus would be, “he did protect Noah [as] the eighth…”
²¹tn Grk “he.” The referent (God) has been repeated here for clarity, although somewhat redundant with the beginning of v. 4.
²²tn Grk “a world of the ungodly.”
²³tc Several important witnesses omit katastrofh'/ (katastrofh; such as Ì72 B C* 1241 1739 1881), but this is best explained as an accidental omission due to homoioarcton (the word following is katevkrinen [katekrinen]).
tn Or “ruin,” “destruction,” or “extinction.” The first part of this verse more literally reads, “And [if] he condemned to annihilation the cities of Sodom and Gomorrah, by turning them to ashes.”
²⁴tn The perfect participle teqeikwv" (teqeikw") suggests an antecedent act. More idiomatically, the idea seems to be, “because he had already appointed them to serve as an example.”
²⁵tn “To serve as” is not in Greek but is implied in the object-complement construction.
²⁶tn Grk “an example of the things coming to the ungodly,” or perhaps “an example to the ungodly of coming [ages].”
²⁷tn Or “unprincipled.”
²⁸tn This verse more literally reads, “And [if] he rescued righteous Lot, who was deeply distressed by the lifestyle of the lawless in [their] debauchery.”
²⁹tn Grk “that righteous man tormented his righteous soul.”
³⁰tn Grk “by lawless deeds, in seeing and hearing [them].”
³¹tn The Greek is one long conditional sentence, from v. 4 to v. 10a. 2 Pet 2:4-8 constitute the protasis; vv. 9 and 10a, the apodosis. In order to show this connection more clearly, a resumptive summary protasis—“if so,” or “if God did these things”—is needed in English translation.
³²tn Grk “from trial,” or possibly “from temptation” (though this second meaning for peirasmov" (peirasmo") does not fit the context in which Noah and Lot are seen as in the midst of trials, not temptation).
³³tn The adverbial participle kolazomevnou" (kolazomenou") can refer either to contemporaneous time or subsequent time. At stake is the meaning of the following prepositional phrase (at the day of judgment or until the day of judgment). If the participle is contemporaneous, the idea is “to keep the ungodly in a state of punishment until the day of judgment.” If subsequent, the meaning is “to keep the ungodly to be punished at the day of judgment.” Many commentators/translations opt for the first view, assuming that the present participle cannot be used of subsequent time. However, the present participle is the normal one used for result, and is often used of purpose (cf., e.g., for present participles suggesting result, Mark 9:7; Luke 4:15; John 5:18; Eph 2:15; 2 Pet 2:1, mentioned above; for present participles indicating purpose, note Luke 10:25; John 12:33; Acts 3:26; 2 Pet 2:10 [as even most translations render it!]). Further, the context supports this: 2:1-10 forms something of an inclusio, in which the final end of the false teachers is mentioned specifically in v. 1, then as a general principle in v. 9. The point of v. 3—that the punishment of the false teachers is certain, even though the sentence has not yet been carried out, is underscored by a participle of purpose in v. 9.
³⁴tn Grk “those who go after the flesh in [its] lust.”
³⁵tn There is no “and” in Greek; it is supplied for the sake of English convention.
³⁶tn We are taking blasfhmou'nte" (blasfhmounte") as an adverbial participle of purpose, as most translations do. However, it is also possible to see this temporally (thus, “they do not tremble when they blaspheme”).
³⁷tn Dovxa" (doxas) almost certainly refers to angelic beings rather than mere human authorities, though it is difficult to tell whether good or bad angels are in view. Verse 11 seems to suggest that wicked angels is what the author intends.
³⁸tn Grk “whereas.”
³⁹tn Grk “who are greater in strength and power.” What is being compared, however, could either be the false teachers or “the glorious ones,” in which case “angels” would refer to good angels and “the glorious ones” to evil angels.
⁴⁰tn Or “insulting.” The word comes from the same root as the term found in v. 10 (“insult”), v. 12 (“insulting”), and v. 2 (“will be slandered”). The author is fond of building his case by the repetition of a word in a slightly different context so that the readers make the necessary connection. English usage cannot always convey this connection because a given word in one language cannot always be translated the same way in another.
⁴¹tc Some witnesses omit paraV kurivw/ (para kuriw; so A Y 33 vg et alii), while others have the genitive paraV kurivou (para kuriou; so Ì72 1241 et pauci). The majority of witnesses (including Í B C P 1739 et plu) read the dative paraV kurivw/. The genitive expression suggests that angels would not pronounce a judgment on “the glorious ones” from the Lord, while the dative indicates that angels would not pronounce a judgment on “the glorious ones” in the presence of the Lord. The parallel in Jude 9 speaks of a reviling judgment against the devil in which the prepositional phrase is entirely absent. At the same time, Michael does say, “The Lord rebuke you.” (Hence, he is offering something of a judgment from the Lord.) The best options, externally, are the omission or the dative, but a decision is difficult. Internally, the omission may possibly be a motivated reading in that it finds a parallel in Jude 9 (where no prepositional phrase is used). All things considered, the dative is to be preferred, though with much reservation.
⁴²tn 2 Pet 2:12 through 16 constitute one cumbersome sentence in Greek. It is difficult to tell whether a hard break belongs in the middle of v. 13, as we have it, or whether the compounding of participles is meant in a loosely descriptive sort of way, without strong grammatical connection. Either way, the sentence rambles in a way that often betrays a great “vehemence of spirit” (Robertson, Grammar, 435). The author is obviously agitated at these false teachers who are to come.
⁴³tn The false teachers could conceivably be men or women, but in v. 14 they are said to have eyes “full of an adulteress.” This can only refer to men. Hence, both here and in v. 17 the false teachers are described as “men.”
⁴⁴tn Grk “born for capture and destruction.”
⁴⁵tn Grk “with [reference to] whom.”
⁴⁶tn There is no conjunction joining this last clause of v. 12 to the preceding (i.e., no “and consequently”). The argument builds asyndetically (a powerful rhetorical device in Greek), but cannot be naturally expressed in English as such.
⁴⁷tn This cryptic expression has been variously interpreted. (1) It could involve a simple cognate dative in which case the idea is “they will be utterly destroyed.” But the presence of aujtw'n (autwn; their, of them) is problematic for this view. Other, more plausible views are: (2) the false teachers will be destroyed at the same time as the irrational beasts, or (3) in the same manner as these creatures (i.e., by being caught); or (4) the false teachers will be destroyed together with the evil angels whom they insult. Because of the difficulties of the text, it was thought best to leave it ambiguous, as the Greek has it.
⁴⁸tn There is a play on words in Greek, but this is difficult to express adequately in English. The verb ajdikevw (adikew) as a passive means “to suffer harm,” or “to suffer an injustice.” The noun ajdikiva (adikia) means “unrighteousness.” Since the Greek verb has a wider field of meaning than the English, to translate it as suffer an injustice is unwarranted, for it implicitly attributes evil to God. As Bauckham notes, “in English it is impossible to translate ajdikouvmenoi as a morally neutral term and ajdikiva" with a morally pejorative term, while retaining the play on words” (Jude, 2 Peter, 265).
⁴⁹tn Grk “considering carousing in the daytime a pleasure.”
⁵⁰tn Or “carousing,” “reveling.” The participle ejntrufw'nte" (entrufwnte") is a cognate to the noun trufhv (trufh, “carousing”) used earlier in the verse.
⁵¹tn Grk “having eyes.” See note on “men” at the beginning of v. 12.
⁵²tn Grk “full of an adulteress.”
⁵³tn Grk “and unceasing from sin.” Some translate this “insatiable for sin,” but such a translation is based on a textual variant with inadequate support.
⁵⁴tn Grk “enticing.” See note on “men” at the beginning of v. 12.
⁵⁵tn “People” is literally “souls.” The term yuchv (yuch) can refer to one’s soul, one’s life, or oneself.
⁵⁶tn Grk “having hearts trained in greediness, children of cursing.” The participles continue the general description of the false teachers, without strong grammatical connection. The genitive katavra" (kataras, “of cursing”) is taken attributively here.
⁵⁷tn “Wages of unrighteousness” in Greek is the same expression found in v. 13, “wages for harmful ways.” The repetition makes the link between the false teachers and Balaam more concrete.
⁵⁸tn Grk “but he had a rebuke.”
⁵⁹tn Grk “a voice of a (man/person).”
⁶⁰tn Although some translations have simply “these” or “these people,” since in v. 14 they are described as having eyes “full of an adulteress,” men are in view.
⁶¹tn Grk “utter darkness of darkness.” Verse 4 speaks of wicked angels presently in “chains of utter darkness,” while the final fate of the false teachers is a darker place still.
⁶²tn Grk “high-sounding words of futility.”
⁶³tn Grk “they entice.”
⁶⁴tn Grk “with the lusts of the flesh, with debauchery.”
⁶⁵tn Grk “those.”
⁶⁶tn Or “those who are barely escaping.”
⁶⁷tn Or “deceit.”
⁶⁸tn Verse 19 is a subordinate clause in Greek. The masculine nominative participle “promising” (ejpaggellovmenoi, epangellomenoi) refers back to the subject of vv. 17-18. At the same time, it functions subordinately to the following participle, uJpavrconte" (Juparconte", “while being”).
⁶⁹tn Grk “them.”
⁷⁰tn Grk “slaves of.”
⁷¹tn Or “corruption,” “depravity.” Verse 19 constitutes a subordinate clause to v. 18 in Greek. The main verbal components of these two verses are: “uttering…they entice…promising…being (enslaved).” The main verb is (they) entice. The three participles are adverbial and seem to indicate an instrumental relation (by uttering), a concessive relation (although promising), and a temporal relation (while being [enslaved]). For the sake of English usage, in the translation of the text this is broken down into two sentences.
⁷²tn Grk “for by what someone is overcome, to this he is enslaved.”
⁷³tn Grk “defilements”; “contaminations”; “pollutions.”
⁷⁴sn Through the rich knowledge of our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ. The implication is not that these people necessarily knew the Lord (in the sense of being saved), but that they were in the circle of those who had embraced Christ as Lord and Savior.
⁷⁵tn Grk “(and/but) they.”
⁷⁶tn Grk “they again, after becoming entangled in them, are overcome by them.”
⁷⁷tn Grk “the [statement] of the true proverb has happened to them.” The idiom in Greek cannot be translated easily in English.
⁷⁸tn The quotation is a loose rendering of Prov 26:11. This proverb involves a participle that is translated like a finite verb (“returns”). In the LXX this line constitutes a subordinate and dependent clause. But since the line has been lifted from its original context, we have translated it as an independent statement.
⁷⁹tn Or “after being washed.” The middle verb may be direct (“wash oneself” or permissive (“allow oneself to be washed”).
⁸⁰tn The source of this quotation is uncertain. Heraclitus has often been mentioned as a possible source, but this is doubtful. Other options on the translation of the second line include: a sow, having (once) bathed herself (in mud), (returns) to wallowing in the mire, or a sow washes herself by wallowing in the mire (BAGD 145 s.v. bovrboro"). The advantage of this last translation is that no verbs need to be supplied for it to make sense. The disadvantage is that in this context it does not make any contribution to the argument. Since we do not know the source of the quotation, there is some guesswork involved in the reconstruction. Most commentators prefer a translation similar to the one in the text above.
¹tn Grk “I am already writing this [as] a second letter.” The object-complement construction is more smoothly rendered in English a bit differently. Further, although the present tense gravfw (grafw) is used here, English convention employs an epistolary past tense. (The Greek epistolary aorist might have been expected here, but it also occurs in situations unlike its English counterparts.)
²tn The relative pronoun is plural, indicating that the following statement is true about both letters.
³tn Or “I have stirred up, aroused.” The translation treats the present tense verb as a conative present.
⁴tn Grk “to remember.” “I want you” is added to smooth out the English. The Greek infinitive is subordinate to the previous clause.
⁵tn “Both” is not in Greek; it is added to show more clearly that there are two objects of the infinitive “to remember”—predictions and commandment.
⁶tn Grk “words.” In conjunction with proveipon (proeipon), however, the meaning of the construction is that the prophets uttered prophecies.
⁷sn 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 (tou'to prw'ton ginwvskonte", touto prwton ginwskontes), Peter points to specific prophecies of the prophets as an argument against the false teachers.
⁸tn Grk “knowing this [to be] foremost.” Tou'to prw'ton (touto prwton) constitute the object and complement of ginwvvskonte" (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.
⁹tn 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.
¹⁰tn Grk “going according to their own evil urges.”
¹¹tn The present participle levgonte" (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.
¹²tn Grk “Where is the promise of his coming?” The genitive parousiva" (parousia") is best taken as an attributed genitive (in which the head noun, promise, functions semantically as an adjective; see Wallace, Exegetical Syntax, 89-91).
¹³tn The prepositional phrase with the relative pronoun, ajf= h|" (af’ |h"), is used adverbially or conjunctively without antecedent (see BAGD 585 s.v. o{" I.11.).
¹⁴tn 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.
¹⁵sn “Sleep” is often a biblical euphemism for death, as here.
¹⁶tn Grk “thus,” “in the same manner.”
¹⁷tn 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].”
¹⁸tn 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.
¹⁹tn The antecedent is ambiguous. It could refer to the heavens, the heavens and earth, or the water and the word. If the reference is to the heavens, the author is reflecting on the Genesis account about “the floodgates of the heavens” being opened (Gen 7:11). If the reference is to the heavens and earth, he is also thinking about the cosmic upheaval that helped to produce the flood (Gen 6:11). If the reference is to the water and the word, he is indicating both the means (water) and the cause (word of God). This last interpretation is the most likely since the final nouns of v. 5 are “water” and “word of God,” making them the nearest antecedents.
²⁰tn Grk “the ungodly people.”
²¹tn The same verb, lanqavnw (lanqanw, “escape”) used in v. 5 is found here (there, translated “suppress”).
²²tn Or perhaps, “the Lord is not delaying [the fulfillment of] his promise,” or perhaps “the Lord of the promise is not delaying.” The verb can mean “to delay,” “to be slow,” or “to be hesitant.”
²³tn Grk “not wishing.” The participle most likely has a causal force, explaining why the Lord is patient.
²⁴sn He does not wish for any to perish. This verse has been a battleground between Arminians and Calvinists. The former argue that God wants all people to be saved, but either through inability or restriction of his own sovereignty does not interfere with peoples’ wills. Some of the latter argue that the “any” here means “any of you” and that all the elect will repent before the return of Christ, because this is God’s will. Both of these positions have problems. The “any” in this context means “any of you.” (This can be seen by the dependent participle which gives the reason why the Lord is patient “toward you.”) There are hints throughout this letter that the readership may be mixed, including both true believers and others who are “sitting on the fence” as it were. But to make the equation of this readership with the elect is unlikely. This would seem to require, in its historical context, that all of these readers would be saved. But not all who attend church know the Lord or will know the Lord. Simon the Magician, whom Peter had confronted in Acts 8, is a case in point. Thus, the literary context seems to be against the Arminian view, while the historical context seems to be against (one representation of) the Calvinist view. The answer to this conundrum is found in the term “wish” (a participle in Greek from the verb boulomai). It often represents a mere wish, or one’s desiderative will, rather than one’s resolve. Unless God’s will is viewed on the two planes of his desiderative and decretive will (what he desires and what he decrees), hopeless confusion will result. The scriptures amply illustrate both that God sometimes decrees things that he does not desire and desires things that he does not decree. It is not that his will can be thwarted, nor that he has limited his sovereignty. But the mystery of God’s dealings with humanity is best seen if this tension is preserved. Otherwise, either God will be perceived as good but impotent or as a sovereign taskmaster. Here the idea that God does not wish for any to perish speaks only of God's desiderative will, without comment on his decretive will.
²⁵tn Grk “reach to repentance.” Repentance thus seems to be a quantifiable state, or turning point. The verb cwrevw (cwrew, “reach”) typically involves the connotation of “obtain the full measure of” something. It is thus most appropriate as referring to the repentance that accompanies conversion.
²⁶tn Grk “in which.”
²⁷tn Or “pass away.”
²⁸tn Or “hissing sound,” “whirring sound,” “rushing sound,” or “loud noise.” The word occurs only here in the NT. It was often used of the crackle of a fire, as would appear appropriate in this context.
²⁹tn Grk “elements.” Most commentators are agreed that “celestial bodies” is meant, in light of this well-worn usage of stoicei'a (stoiceia) in the second century and the probable allusion to Isa 34:4 (text of Vaticanus). See Bauckham, Jude, 2 Peter, 315-16 for discussion.
³⁰tn Grk “be dissolved.”
³¹tn Grk “being burned up.”
³²tn Grk “the works in it.”
³³tc One of the most difficult textual problems in the NT is found in v. 10. The reading euJreqhvsetai (Jeureqhsetai), which enjoys by far the earliest and best support (Í B K P 1241 1739^text et alii) is nevertheless so difficult a reading that many scholars regard it as nonsensical. As Bauckham has pointed out, solutions to the problem are of three sorts: (1) conjectural emendation (which normally speaks more of the ingenuity of the scholar who makes the proposal than of the truth of the conjecture, e.g., a[rga [arga] for e[rga [erga] with the meaning, “the earth and the things in it will be found useless”); (2) adoption of one of several variant readings (all of which, however, are easier than this one and simply cannot explain how this reading arose, e.g., the reading of Ì72 which adds luomevna [luomena] to the verb—a reading suggested no doubt by the threefold occurrence of this verb in the surrounding verses: “the earth and its works will be found dissolved”; or the simplest variant, the reading of the Sahidic manuscripts, oujc [ouc] preceding eJureqhvsetai— “will not be found”); or (3) interpretive gymnastics which regards the text as settled but has to do some manipulation to its normal meaning. Bauckham puts forth an excellent case that the third option is to be preferred and that the meaning of the term is virtually the equivalent of “will be disclosed,” “will be manifested.” Thus, the force of the clause is that “the earth and the works [done by men] in it will be stripped bare [before God].” We might add that the unusualness of the expression is certainly in keeping with Peter’s style throughout this little book. Hence, what looks to be suspect because of its abnormalities, upon closer inspection is actually in keeping with the author’s stylistic idiosyncrasies. The meaning of the text then, is that all but the earth and men’s works will be destroyed. Everything will be removed so that humanity will stand naked before God.
³⁴tn Grk “all these things thus being dissolved.”
³⁵tn Or “thus.”
³⁶tc The Greek has no pronoun. Most manuscripts add a pronoun to the infinitive—either uJma'" (Jumas, “you,” found in A C P Y 33 1739, as well as the correctors of Ì72 and Í [second corrector], et plu), hJma'" (Jhmas, “we,” read by Í* 2464 et alii), or eJautouv" (Jeautous, “[you your]selves/[we our]selves,” read by 1243). But the shorter reading has the support of Ì72* Ì74^vid B et pauci. Though slim, the evidence is the earliest. Further, the addition of some pronoun, especially the second person pronoun, is a clarifying variant. It would be difficult to explain the pronoun’s absence in some witnesses if the pronoun were original.
tn Or “you.”
³⁷tn Grk “in holy conduct and godliness.”
³⁸tn Or possibly, “striving for,” but the meaning “hasten” for spoudavzw (spoudazw) is normative in Jewish apocalyptic literature (in which the coming of the Messiah/the end is anticipated). Such a hastening is not an arm-twisting of the divine volition, but a response by believers that has been decreed by God.
³⁹sn The coming of the day of God. Peter elsewhere describes the coming or parousia as the coming of Christ (cf. 2 Pet 1:16; 3:4). The almost casual exchange between “God” and “Christ” in this little book, and elsewhere in the NT, argues strongly for the deity of Christ (see esp. 1:1).
⁴⁰tn Grk “on account of which” (a subordinate relative clause in Greek).
⁴¹tn Grk “being burned up, will dissolve.”
⁴²tn See note in v. 10 on “heavenly bodies.”
⁴³tn Grk “being burned up” (see v. 10).
⁴⁴tn Or possibly, “let us wait for.” The form in Greek (prosdovkwmen, prosdokwmen) could be either indicative or subjunctive. The present participle in v. 14, however, is best taken causally (“since you are waiting for”), suggesting that the indicative is to be read here.
⁴⁵tn The relative pronoun is plural, indicating that the sphere in which righteousness dwells is both the new heavens and the new earth.
⁴⁶tn Grk “dwells.” The verb katoikevw (katoikew) is an intensive cognate of oijkevw (oikew), often with the connotation of “taking up residence,” “settling down,” being at home,” etc. Cf., e.g., Matt 2:23; Acts 17:26; 22:12; Eph 3:17; Col 1:19; 2:9. Hence, the addition of the adverb “truly” is implicit in the connotation of the verb in a context such as this.
⁴⁷tn Grk “dear friends, waiting for.” See note in v. 13 on “waiting for.”
⁴⁸sn The Greek verb used in the phrase strive to be found is the same as is found in v. 10, translated “laid bare.” In typical Petrine fashion, a conceptual link is made by the same linkage of terms. The point of these two verses thus becomes clear: when the heavens disappear and the earth and its inhabitants are stripped bare before the throne of God, they should strive to make sure that their lives are pure and that they have nothing to hide.
⁴⁹tn “When you come into” is not in Greek. However, the dative pronoun aujtw'/ (autw) does not indicate agency (“by him”), but presence or sphere. The idea is “strive to found {before him/in his presence}.”
⁵⁰tn The language here is cryptic. It probably means “regard the patience of our Lord as an opportunity for salvation.” In the least, Peter is urging his audience to take a different view of the delay of the parousia than that of the false teachers.
⁵¹sn Critics generally assume that 2 Peter is not authentic, partially because in vv. 15-16 Paul is said to have written scripture. It is assumed that a recognition of Paul’s writings as scripture could not have happened until early in the second century. However, in the same breath that Paul is canonized, Peter also calls him “brother.” This is unparalleled in the second century apocryphal works, as well as early patristic writings. The apostles are universally elevated above the author and readers; here, Peter simply says “he’s one of us.”
⁵²sn Paul wrote to you. That Paul had written to these people indicates that they are most likely Gentiles. Further, that Peter is now writing to them suggests that Paul had already died, for Peter was the apostle to the circumcised. Peter apparently decided to write his two letters to Paul’s churches shortly after Paul’s death, both to connect with them personally and theologically (Paul’s gospel is Peter’s gospel) and to warn them of the wolves in sheep’s clothing that would come in to destroy the flock. Thus, part of Peter’s purpose seems to be to anchor his readership on the written documents of the Christian community (both the Old Testament and Paul’s letters) as a safeguard against heretics.
⁵³tn Grk “as also in all his letters speaking in them of these things.”
⁵⁴tn Grk “in which are some things hard to understand.”
⁵⁵tn Grk “which.” The antecedent is the “things hard to understand,” not the entirety of Paul’s letters. A significant principle is seen here: the primary prooftexts used for faith and practice ought to be the clear passages that are undisputed in their meaning. Heresy today is still largely built on obscure texts.
⁵⁶tn Or “distort,” “wrench,” “torture” (all are apt descriptions of what heretics do to scripture).
⁵⁷sn This one incidental line, the rest of the scriptures, links Paul’s writings with scripture. This is thus one of the earliest affirmations of any part of the NT as scripture. Peter’s words were prophetic and were intended as a preemptive strike against the heretics to come.
⁵⁸tn Grk “knowing beforehand.”
⁵⁹tn Or “lawless ones.”
sn These unprincipled men. The same word is used in 2:7, suggesting further that the heretics in view in chapter 3 are the false teachers of chapter 2.
⁶⁰tn Grk “fall from your firmness.”
⁶¹tn The term “knowledge” (gnw'si", gnwsis) used here is not the same as is found in 2 Pet 1:2, 3, 8; 2:20. This term is found in 1:5 and 1:6.
⁶²tn Or “until.”
⁶³tc The vast bulk of manuscripts add ajmhvn (amhn, “Amen”) at the end of this letter, as they do the rest of the NT letters. The omission in B 1241 1739* et alii appears to be original, although the fact that even the best and earliest Alexandrian witnesses add the particle renders such a judgment less than iron-clad.
tn Grk “day of eternity.”