Translation
& Sermon by Nate Wilson for Christ The Redeemer Church Manhattan
KS, 10 Mar. 2024
Omit the greyed-out text
to keep delivery time under 45 minutes.
Translation: Loved ones, this is already a second letter I am writing to y’all, in [both of] which I am rousing your sincere thinking by means of a reminder, so y’all may be reminded of the words previously-spoken by the holy prophets, as well as of the commandment from the Lord and Savior through your apostles. Know this first, that during the last days, mockers will come with scoffing, conducting themselves according to their own lusts and saying, “Where is the promise of His coming? For, ever since the fathers were laid to rest, all things continue to remain thus from the beginning of creation.” For they are unaware of them willfully, namely that, by the word of God, the heavens have come into being of old, and the earth has stood together out of water and through water (through which [waters] the world back then perished by being flooded in water), but the present heavens and earth are safeguarded by His word, being kept for the day of judgment and destruction of the ungodly men by fire.
This passage introduces us to three groups of persons who are speaking words,
First is the prophets and apostles (which amounts to the Bible),
second is the words of the mockers (who are also called ungodly),
and finally we have the Word of God.
Let us consider each in turn, what their messages are, and what the consequences are of heeding their messages. We begin in chapter 3 with the words of the prophets and apostles, as one of those apostles, Peter, explains why he is writing books that would become part of the New Testament.
Peter said much the same thing back in chapter 1, starting at v.12: “Therefore I will not neglect to remind y'all always concerning these things... I consider it right to rouse y'all with a reminder... so I will be diligent in order for y'all to be in possession of these things so that you can make the remembrance for yourselves at any time after the departure of myself. For it was not after following sophisticated stories that we made known to y'all the power of our Master Jesus Christ and His coming; rather it was after we had been eye-witnesses of that Man's incomparable-greatness... So we have the more-confirmed prophetic word – to which you do well when you are paying attention... knowing, first-of-all, that... it was not by the will of a man that prophecy was brought forth back then, but rather, it was while being led by the Holy Spirit that holy men of God made utterance.” (2 Peter 1:12-21, NAW)
This is also in the parallel passsage in Jude 1:17 “But as for y'all, beloved, keep remembering the words which have been spoken before by the apostles of our Lord Jesus Christ” (NAW)
The whole reason Peter wrote his two epistles was to remind Christians to think about and act upon what the Bible says.
The Bible, of course, is composed of the words of the prophets in the Old Testament and the words of the Apostles in the New Testament, or as Peter puts it in v.2, the “command from the Lord and Savior [which came] by means of the apostles.” The prophets and apostles were just the mouthpeices of the Holy Spirit, so the Bible is actually the word of God!
Throughout the Bible, we see the phrase “the LORD spoke by the mouth of His prophets.”
Luke 1:70 “As He spoke by the mouth of His holy prophets, Who have been since the world began,” (NKJV, cf. 2 Kings 17:13)
Acts 3:21 "... God has spoken by the mouth of all His holy prophets since the world began.” (NKJV)
This means that we mustn’t neglect the study of the Old Testament (like some sects do), neither should we neglect the New Testament (as some Judaising sects do). Both are God’s word for us, so we need to read both.
What is “the commandment of the Lord and Savior”? This is the same as “the holy commandment which was delivered to you” back in chapter 2 v.21.
In 1 John 3:23, the command to believe unto eternal life and the command to love God and one another is blended together: “And this is His command, that we should believe on the name of His Son Jesus Christ and that we should be loving one another, just as He commanded us.” (NAW, cf. 2 John 1:6)
And what attitude should we have toward God’s word? Peter says in v. 2 that it should be a “sincere” one.
The Greek word for “sincere” is found in this form only one other place in the Greek Bible, and that is Philippians 1:10, “I pray... that you may approve the things that are excellent, that you may be sincere and without offense till the day of Christ.” (NKJV)
1 and 2 Corinthians are the only other books in the Bible where any other form of this Greek word is used:
1 Corinthians 5:8 “In this way let us keep the feast – not with... leaven of malice and wickedness, but rather with... sincerity and truth.” (NAW);
2 Cor. 1:12 “... we conducted ourselves in the world in simplicity and godly sincerity, not with fleshly wisdom but by the grace of God...”
2 Cor. 2:17 “ we are not... peddling the word of God; but as of sincerity, but as from God, we speak in the sight of God in Christ.” (NKJV)
These allow us to define “sincerity” by its opposites. To be “sincere,” our minds should be “without offense,” without “malice and wickedness,” without “fleshly wisdom,” and without dishonestly seeking profit, but rather oriented around “Christ,” around “truth,” around “the grace of God” and the word of God, conscious that we are accountable to God.
Peter brought that up in his first epistle as well: 1 Peter 1:13 “Therefore, after girding up the loins of y'all's mind, being sober, perfectly start hoping upon the grace which is being brought to y'all in the revelation of Jesus Christ.” (NAW)
So the first source of words is the Holy Bible, and we are exhorted to read it and remember it. The next source of words is in...
Brothers and sisters, we are already in the “last days.”
Acts 2:17 says that the Pentecost experience of the outpouring of the Holy Spirit was something which happened during the “last days,”
and Hebrews 1:2 that it was in the “last days” that God “spoke through His Son” (Jesus).
So, since we are in the last days, we should be prepared to resist the “scoffing” words of “mockers.”
And how will you know who not to listen to? First, they will be “conducting themselves according to their own lusts”
We see this in the parallel passage in Jude 17-19 “But as for y'all, beloved, keep remembering the words which have been spoken before by the apostles of our Lord Jesus Christ, that told y'all that up to the end time there will be mockers conducting themselves according to their own ungodly desires. These guys are the ones who are cliquish, sensual, not having the Spirit.” (NAW)
1 Timothy 4:1 adds “Now the Spirit expressly says that in latter times some will depart from the faith, giving heed to deceiving spirits and doctrines of demons, speaking lies in hypocrisy, having their own conscience seared with a hot iron.”
and 2 Timothy 4:3 “For the time will come when they will not endure sound doctrine, but according to their own desires, because they have itching ears, they will heap up for themselves [false] teachers.” (NKJV)
We also saw this in the last chapter of 2 Peter: These are “the guys who go after what is fleshly in lust after uncleanness and who despise authority. ” (2 Peter 2:10, NAW)
Second, we will know who not to listen to, not only because they are “conducting themselves according to their own lusts,” but also, in v. 4, because they are denying the return of Christ.
The two characteristics go hand-in-hand: Those who don’t believe that there will be a Judgment Day aren’t going to live their life in accountability to God’s instructions; they will just do their own thing, believing they will get away with it.
They say that “ever since the patriarchs (in Genesis) were laid to rest (in their graves), all things have continued as they have been1.”
Philosophically, this is a form of uniformitarianism, the belief that the way things are is the way things have always been, so that the past and the future is looked upon as merely an extension of what is going on in the present (and that leads to prioritizing the present moment above all else).
One of the unfortunate consequences of the Renaissance was a movement away from belief in the Bible (and the miraculous events in the history it records), towards naturalism, eventually popularizing the belief that there is no God, that there were no miracles, and that everything in the past can be explained in terms of current scientific observations by sight, touch, sound, taste, and smell.
But, if the world came into existence (and the earth was flooded) by God’s supernatural interventions in the natural world, then science cannot perceive such interventions (except by their geological, anthropological, and biological consequences). Meanwhile, scientists who don’t want to believe in God are so committed to defining science as that which is not miraculous, that they are not even willing to consider the abundant evidence that God miraculously created the world around 4,000 B.C. (like the Bible says), and then flooded it in the 24th century B.C. They grasp at straws trying to re-interpret geology and anthropology and biology in such a way that they won’t have to acknowledge God. It stands to reason, then, that these scoffers also won’t acknowledge that Jesus is coming back from heaven in the flesh to judge the world.
John Calvin commented on this in the 16th Century A.D.: “It was a dangerous scoff when they insinuated a doubt as to the last resurrection; for when that is taken away, there is no gospel any longer, the power of Christ is brought to nothing, the whole of religion is gone. Then Satan aims directly at the throat of the Church, when he destroys faith in the coming of Christ. For why did Christ die and rise again, except that He may some time gather to himself the redeemed from death, and give them eternal life? All religion is wholly subverted, except faith in the resurrection remains firm and immovable. Hence, on this point Satan assails us most fiercely.” ~J. Calvin
It is important to note, however, that “the ‘scoffers’ here are not necessarily atheists.... They are willing to recognize a god, but not the God of [Biblical] revelation.” ~A. R. Fausset
At any rate, when a scoffer runs out of logical things to say, they will often resort to scoffing in hopes of putting you on the defensive and shutting down communication.
Peter said in his first epistle, chapter 4, v.12, that we should not let this take us by surprise.
And Proverbs reminds us, “Surely He [the LORD] scorns the scornful, But gives grace to the humble...” and “A scoffer seeks wisdom and does not find it, But knowledge is easy to him who understands.” (Prov. 3:34 and 14:6, NKJV)
Jesus told us in Matthew 24:44-45 “...y'all must keep becoming prepared men, because the Son of Man is coming in which hour you are not suspecting.” (NAW)
So we’ve considered the voice of the Apostles and Prophets in the Bible, and we’ve considered the voice of the scoffers and mockers2. Let’s now turn to consider the voice of God Himself!
In verses 5-7, Peter highlights three awesome events which have occurred or will occur by the word of God. The first is creation:
Although it is not given in the exact words of the Genesis creation account, verse 5 clearly coincides with Genesis 1:1 & 9 “In the beginning3 God created4 the heavens and the earth… Then God said, ‘Let the waters under the heavens be gathered together into one place, and let the dry land appear’; and it was so.” (NKJV)
Peter’s wording in v.5 is more like the poetic descriptions of creation in:
the book of Job5 and in
Psalm 24:1-2 “The earth and that which fills her belong to Yahweh – the world and her inhabitants. Because it was He who founded her upon the sea6…” (NAW)
and Colossians 1:16-17 “For by Him all things were created that are in heaven and that are on earth... All things were created through Him and for Him. And He is before all things, and in Him all things consist.” (NKJV)
It was “not by a fortuitous concurrence of atoms.” ~Alford
The phrase “by the word of God” is the main point of verses 5-7.
It is placed in an emphatic position in the Greek sentence, and the perfect and imperfect tenses of the verbs describing the “construction” of the “earth” and the “coming-into-being” of the “heavens” describe a momentous event in the past, namely God’s speaking them into existence and order, and their continuing existence and order today.
The rest of Scripture is also adamant on this point:
The “scoffers” however, are just as adamant in denying this.
They say that since it must be taken on faith, then it is anti-science to believe in creation,
so they say that the only scientific way to think about origins is that billions and billions of years ago there was basically nothing, and then it exploded into everything that now is (an explanation just as unprovable by science as creation is, and far less logical, because infinity and eternality are impossible in a naturalistic system, but are necessary for any theory of origins to have integrity)!
But this naturalistic theory of origins is what scoffers will cling to because they refuse to acknowledge God, because if they acknowledge God, then they have to acknowledge that they are accountable to God. So they “deliberately overlook” God, keeping themselves “willingly ignorant” – “dumb on purpose9,” and so Romans 1:28 is fulfilled, “And even as they did not like to retain God in their knowledge, God gave them over to a debased mind...”
v.6 describes the second awesome event where God intervened miraculously in earth history, and that is the worldwide flood:
Peter already mentioned this earlier in chapter 2, verse 5, “He did not spare the ancient10 world, but rather protected the eight [under the name of] Noah the preacher of righteousness, after bringing-on the flood upon the world of those who were ungodly.” (NAW)
The same “water” that the earth “stood” “in” and “through” at creation is what “flooded” the earth in Noah’s time, where the “springs” under the earth combined with the water vapors in the skies to drown all humans and land animals (outside of Noah’s ark).
Genesis 7:11-21 “In the six hundredth year of Noah's life, in the second month, the seventeenth day of the month, on that day all the fountains of the great deep were broken up, and the windows of heaven were opened. And the rain was on the earth forty days and forty nights… 20 The waters prevailed fifteen cubits upward, and the mountains were covered. And all flesh died that moved on the earth: birds and cattle and beasts and every creeping thing that creeps on the earth, and every man.” (NKJV)
Verse 6 doesn’t directly attribute the flood to the power of God’s word, but it does attribute it to the waters which were created by God. And in Genesis, it is clear that God is the one who instigated the flood very purposefully to punish wickedness: “And the Lord God, having seen that the wicked actions of men were multiplied upon the earth... said, ‘I will blot out man (whom I have made) from the face of the earth, even man with cattle, and reptiles with flying creatures of the sky...’ And the Lord God said to Noe, ‘...behold, I destroy... the earth. Make therefore for thyself an ark... And behold I bring a flood of water upon the earth, to destroy all flesh in which is the breath of life under heaven...” (Gen. 6, Brenton)
But scoffers don’t believe that. In fact, not only do they deny that it was an act of God’s judgment, many even deny that there was a worldwide flood at all! (And incidentally, since they don’t believe God’s word is true, many are vainly fretting themselves over a future world flood – that’s never going to happen because God promised it wouldn’t11!)
Despite the obvious geological evidence that everything in the world was once under water, they continue to maintain that the writers of Genesis were just writing about a local flood using exaggerated language.
For instance, there’s an article by The Skeptical Inquirer: The Magazine For Science And Reason, from March 2018, by a Dr. Lorence Collins, a retired professor of geology from California State University Northridge, entitled “Twenty-One Reasons Noah’s Worldwide Flood Never Happened12” In it he accurately states that his position is the “modern scientific view,” then he scoffs at those who believe in a worldwide flood, saying (and I quote) that we are “less imbued with scientific thinking.” I only have time to give one of his reasons, but notice his uniformitarian presupposition: “Wave action at high tide from a powerful category 5 hurricane with sustained winds of more than 156 mph can move an offshore barrier sandbar as much as 50 to 100 feet inland toward the continent, but such a major storm never moves sand for distances of thousands of miles across the United States, as creationists claim for the Tapeats, Coconino, and other sandstone deposits in the Grand Canyon... Therefore, producing such deposits by such winds and waves in Noah’s Flood has no scientific support.” In his view, it’s only science if it has happened under his observation, and since he has never seen a worldwide flood, he is not even willing to consider a worldwide flood as the cause for what he observes in geology.
Other geologists who have opened their mind to the possibility that what God’s word says is true about a worldwide flood have found that geology suddenly makes way more sense. For instance, Timothy Clarey, who earned his doctorate in geology from Western Michigan University wrote: “[S]ecular geologists merely label any sandstone that has large cross-beds as aeolian [desert], like they did with the Coconino Sandstone in Grand Canyon. And yet the Coconino contains minerals like carbonate ooids and flakes of mica minerals that cannot form in an aeolian [desert] environment. The ooids and minerals are best explained by a marine [flood] deposit... Blanket sands are best explained as massive Flood deposits as the waters advanced and/or retreated.13”
Now, just like the ungodly of Noah’s time (who refused to listen to Noah’s preaching), those who don’t believe in that historic act of judgment will be taken by surprise when the next judgment of God comes upon the earth: destruction by fire!
“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.” ~Matthew Henry
If you trace the first Greek verb for “preserved/reserved/stored up” through the rest of Scripture, you see that God is “treasuring up” punishment for the wicked at the same time that he is “treasuring up” salvation for the righteous!
Romans 2:5 says, “...in accordance with your hardness and your impenitent heart you are treasuring up for yourself wrath in the day of wrath and revelation of the righteous judgment of God.” (NKJV)
But Proverbs 2:7 says, “...[H]e treasures up salvation for them that walk uprightly: [H]e will protect their way.” (Brenton)
Now, some Bibles read that this has been done “by His word,” and others read “by the same word.”
It’s the difference of only one letter in Greek, and the manuscripts are kinda split between the two readings,
but, whether you go with “His word” or the “same word,” we’re still talking about the “word of God” mentioned earlier in v.5, by which the heavens and earth were created. God’s word also upholds and sustains all things until their just conclusion.
That’s what Hebrews 1:3 says in synonymous words: The “Son” of God who “created the universe ...carries (φέρων) all things by the word (ῥήματι) of His power.”
But He is not preserving the world to continue as it always has been. No, He is preserving it for a specific purpose, says Peter in v.7, for a one-of-a-kind ending, in a day of judgment, in which the “present heavens and earth” will be burned up, and all those “scoffers” and “ungodly men,” who ignored Him – and ignored the words He gave them through all the prophets and apostles, will be punished.
Many people see the present world as a titanic struggle between good and evil where evil has the upper hand and is preventing good from happening, but the outlook the Bible presents is entirely different. Peter here describes an almighty God with a definite plan, taking His time at setting up the heavens and earth for the greatest and most perfect acts of justice and mercy ever!14
We will read more about the end of the world later in ch. 3, but the previous prophets already warned of this:
Psalm 50:3-4 “Our God will come in and He will not keep quiet! Fire will consume things in front of His face, and all around Him it will be extremely volatile. He will call to the heavens above as well as to the earth, in order to judge His people.” (NAW)
Isaiah 66:15-16 “Behold, Yahweh will come with fire, and like the whirlwind His chariots will be, to return in the fury of His anger, and His rebuke will be with flames of fire. For with fire and with His sword, Yahweh will judge all flesh, and those punished by Yahweh will be many.” (NAW, cf. Isa 51:6)
the Apostles have also added their voices to warn of this coming event:
2 Thessalonians 1:6-10 “[I]t is a righteous thing with God to repay with tribulation those who trouble you, and to give you who are troubled rest with us when the Lord Jesus is revealed from heaven with His mighty angels, in flaming fire taking vengeance on those who do not know God, and on those who do not obey the gospel of our Lord Jesus Christ. These shall be punished with everlasting destruction from the presence of the Lord and from the glory of His power, when He comes, in that Day...” (NKJV)
Jude 1:14-15 “...Behold the Lord cometh with myriads of His holy ones to execute justice against all men and to prosecute all the ungodly ..." (NAW, cf. Heb. 12:29, 1 Cor. 3:13)
But remember, that fire is only for the destruction of the ungodly, it is not for you who believe God’s word and live with accountability to Him.
We have looked at three sources of words:
The words of the Prophets and Apostles in the Bible,
the words of the scoffers who deny that they are accountable to God,
and the almighty Word of God which created the heavens and the earth, which brought judgment in the worldwide flood, and which is preserving the world toward a fiery end in judgment.
Of these three, we see that two of them corroborate: the Bible and God’s spoken dictates.
The other one is horribly out-of-step, out-of-touch with reality, and destined for destruction.
Which words are you going to spend your life listening to?
“And as men are, by nature, for the most part, fond of novelty and thus inclined to be fastidious, it is useful for us to bear in mind what Peter says, so that we may not only willingly suffer ourselves to be admonished by others, but that every one may also exercise himself in calling to mind continually the truth, so that our minds may become resplendent with the pure and clear knowledge of it… That God may then continually shine upon us, we must devote ourselves to that study: let our faith at the same time acquiesce in witnesses so certain and credible. For when we have the prophets and apostles agreeing with us, nay, as the ministers of our faith, and God as the author, and angels as approvers, there is no reason that the ungodly, all united, should move us from our position!” ~J. Calvin
“What God has spoken by the prophets of the Old Testament, and Christ has commanded by the apostles of the New, cannot but demand and deserve to be frequently remembered; and those who meditate on these things will feel the quickening virtues thereof. It is by these things the pure minds of Christians are to be stirred up, that they may be active and lively in the work of holiness, and zealous and unwearied in the way to heaven.” ~M. Henry
GNTA |
NAWB |
KJVC |
MurdockD (Peshitta) |
RheimsE (Vulgate) |
1̈ Ταύτην ἤδηF, ἀγαπητοίG, δευτέρανH ὑμῖν γράφω ἐπιστολήν, ἐν αἷςI διεγείρωJ ὑμῶνK ἐν ὑπομνήσει τὴν εἰλικρινῆL διάνοιανM, |
1 Loved ones, this is already a second letter I am writing to y’all, in [both of] which I am rousing your sincere thinking by means of a reminder, |
1 This second epistle, beloved, I now write unto you; in both which I stir up your pure mind[s] by way of remembrance: |
1 This second epistle, [my] beloved, I now write to you; in both of which I stir up your honest mind by admonition: |
1
|
2̈ μνησθῆναιN τῶν προειρημένωνO ῥημάτων ὑπὸ τῶν ἁγίωνP προφητῶν καὶ τῆς τῶν ἀποστόλων Qὑμῶν ἐντολῆςR τοῦ Κυρίου καὶ σωτῆροςS· |
2 so y’all may be reminded of the words previously-spoken by the holy prophets, as well as of the commandment from the Lord and Savior through your apostles. |
2
That ye may be mindful
of the words which were spoken before by the holy prophets,
and of the commandment
of |
2
that ye may be mindful of the words which were formerly spoken by
the holy prophets,
and of the injunction
of [our]
Lord and Redeemer by [the
hand of] |
2
That you may be mindful of tho |
3̈ τοῦτο πρῶτονT γινώσκοντεςU ὅτι ἐλεύσονται ἐπ᾿ ἐσχάτωνV τῶν ἡμερῶν W[εν εμπαιγμονη] ἐμπαῖκταιX, κατὰ τὰς ἰδίας ἐπιθυμίας αὐτῶν πορευόμενοι |
3 Know this first, that during the last days, mockers will come with scoffing, conducting themselves according to their own lusts |
3 Knowing this first, that there shall come in the last days scoffers, walking after their own lusts, |
3
knowing this previously,
that there will come in the last days scoffers, |
3 Knowing this first: That in the last days there shall come deceitful scoffers, walking after their own lusts, |
4̈ καὶ λέγοντες· ποῦ ἐστὶν ἡ ἐπαγγελία τῆς παρουσίας αὐτοῦ; ἀφ᾿ ἧςY γὰρ οἱ πατέρες ἐκοιμήθησανZ, πάντα οὕτω διαμένειAA ἀπ᾿ ἀρχῆς κτίσεως. |
4 and saying, “Where is the promise of His coming? For, ever since the fathers were laid to rest, all things continue to remain thus from the beginning of creation.” |
4 And saying, Where is the promise of his coming? for since the fathers fell asleep, all things continue as they were from the beginning of the creation. |
4 and saying, Where is the promise of his coming? for, since our fathers fell asleep, every thingX remaineth just as from the beginning of the creation. |
4 Saying: Where is his promise [or] his coming? For since the time that the fathers slept, all things continue as [they were] from the beginning of the creation. |
5̈ λανθάνειAB γὰρ αὐτοὺς τοῦτοAC θέλονταςAD ὅτι οὐρανοὶ ἦσαν ἔκπαλαιAE καὶ γῆ ἐξ ὕδατοςAF καὶ δι᾿AG ὕδατος συνεστῶσαAH τῳ῀ τοῦ Θεοῦ λόγῳ, |
5 For they are unaware of them willfully, namely that, by the word of God, the heavens have come into being of old, and the earth has stood together out of water and through water |
5
For this
they willingly
are ignorant
of, that by the word of God the heavens were of old, and the earth
standing
out of the water and |
5 For this they willingly forget, that the heavens were of old; and the earth rose up from the water[s], and by means of water, by the word of God. |
5 For this they are wilfully ignorant of: That the heavens were before, and the earth out of water and through water, consisting by the word of God: |
6 (through which [waters] the world back then perished by being flooded in water), |
6 Whereby the world that then was, being overflowed with water, perished: |
6
And, by
means of |
6 Whereby the world that then was, being overflowed with water, perished. |
|
7̈ οἱ δὲ νῦν οὐρανοὶ καὶ ἡ γῆ τῳ῀ AKαὐτοῦ λόγῳ τεθησαυρισμένοιAL εἰσὶ πυρίAM τηρούμενοι εἰς ἡμέραν κρίσεως καὶ ἀπωλείας τῶν ἀσεβῶν ἀνθρώπων. |
7 but the present heavens and earth having been safeguarded by His word, are being kept for the day of judgment and destruction of the ungodly men by fire. |
7
But the heavens and the earth, [which
are] now, by
the same
word are kept in
store, reserved
unto
fire |
7
And the heavens [that]
now [are],
and the earth, are by his
word stored up,
being
reserved for
[the]
fire |
7
But the heavens and the earth [which
are] now, by
the same
word are kept in
store, reserved
unto
fire |
1Matthew
Henry offered a slightly-different take: “[T]hose 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…”
(so also Fausset). D.F. Zeller also gave a tip of the hat to this,
“It may also be that there were some who misunderstood the promise
of Mt. 24:332-34...”
Gordon Clark framed my interpretation in
the words, no doubt, of fellow philosophy professors: “The
positivitistic laws of history are uniform, and irruptions ab
extra have been shown to be
impossible, if not yet by David Hume, at least by Aristotle and
Epicureans.”
2Scoffers also delight in mocking the Bible. Take, for instance the Presbyterian Church’s Auburn Affirmation of 1924: “There is no assertion in the Scriptures that their writers were kept ‘from error.’ … The doctrine of inerrancy, intended to enhance the authority of the Scriptures, in fact impairs their supreme authority for faith and life…”
3The LXX is ἀρχῇ, used in 2 Peter 3:4, but a synonymous word ekpalai is employed in 2 Pet 3:5.
4The LXX reads ἐποίησεν, but it is the verb of being that is used to recap the event in Gen. 1:2, that Peter picks up on.
5Job 28:20ff uses several of the same Greek words: “Whence then is wisdom found? and of what kind is the place of understanding? It has escaped the notice of every man, and has been hidden from the birds of the sky. Destruction and Death said, We have heard the report of it. God has well ordered the way of it, and he knows the place of it. For he surveys the whole earth under heaven, knowing the things in the earth:” (Brenton)
6θαλασσῶν ἐθεμελίωσεν – synonymous to Peter’s ἐξ ὕδατος ... συνεστῶσα “stood together out of water”
7ἐστερεώθησαν (“firm/strong”) is reminiscent of Peter’s verb regarding the earth (“confirm/stand together”).
8κατηρτίσθαι τοὺς αἰῶνας, another synonymous way of describing God’s creation of the world.
9Kent Hovind’s paraphrase. Matthew Henry expounded: “[T]hey 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 (1 Cor. 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.”
10ἀρχαίου (“ancient/original”), cf. εκπαλαι (“of old”) in 3:5.
11Gen. 9:11 “Thus I establish My covenant with you: Never again shall all flesh be cut off by the waters of the flood; never again shall there be a flood to destroy the earth.” (NKJV)
12https://skepticalinquirer.org/2018/03/twenty-one-reasons-noahs-worldwide-flood-never-happened/
13http://www.icr.org/article/more-whopper-sand
14“The present tense [‘being kept’] denotes that God is at the present time constantly watchful over and withholding his wrath against ‘the present heavens and the earth’ … Not only would the heavens and earth not retain the state they had held if God did not maintain that status, but if God did not keep or retain it under guard until judgment, His wrath would be let loose on ‘ungodly men’ before that awful day.” ~D.F. Zeller
A1904 "Patriarchal" edition of the Greek Orthodox Church, as published by E-Sword in June 2016. Annotated by NAW where the 27th edition of the Nestle-Aland GNT differs.
BNathan A Wilson’s translation
CKing James Version of the Holy Bible (a.k.a. Authorized Version), 1769 edition, as published by E-Sword in July 2019.
DTranslation of the Peshito Syriac New Testament into English by James Murdock. Published in 1851. Republished by E-sword in June 2016.
ERheims New Testament first published by the English College at Rheims, A.D. 1582, Revised by Bishop Richard Challoner, A.D. 1749-1752, as published by E-sword in June 2016.
FD.F. Zeller noted, “This has something of a temporal quality… a hint that this letter was written shortly after the previous letter.”
G“‘beloved,’ hereby evidencing that he added to godliness brotherly-kindness” (1:17) ~Matthew Henry
H“It is the predicate use of deuteran epistolēn in apposition with tautēn, not ‘this second epistle.’” ~A.T. Robertson
IA. T. Robertson and Blass & Debrunner considered this plural relative pronoun to refer to both of Peter’s epistles. This interpretation was followed by the KJV, NIV, and ESV, but not the Geneva or NAS Bibles.
JA. T. Robertson suggested,“[P]erhaps conative, ‘I try to stir up.’” D. F. Zeller followed up with “probably a conative.”
KMoule noted that this pronoun “of y’all” goes with the last two words in the verse (“sincere mind”) and is displaced from them for emphasis.
LLit.
“sun-judgment.” As an adjective, only here and Philip. 1:10 in
the Greek Bible, but as a noun, also in 1 Cor. 5:8; 2 Cor. 1:12, &
2:17. “εἵλη, to which this meaning is traced, means the
heat, and not the light of the sun. Others derive it from the root
of the verb εἱλίσσω, to roll, and explain it as that
which is separated or sifted by rolling, as in a sieve. In favor of
this etymology is its association in classical Greek with different
words meaning unmixed.” ~Vincent
“The word pure
can mean unbiased or
unconfused… but… can also
mean morally pure.”
~G. Clark
“Opposite to ‘having the
understanding darkened.’” ~A.R. Fausset
Mcf.
1 Peter 1:13 “... girding up the loins of y'all's mind...”
(NAW) Gordon Clark naturally suggested “intellect.”
Calvin
interpreted this as a future goal: “I stir up your mind [that it
may be] pure and bright,” but his editor (Owen) corrected him,
writing, “The Apostle evidently admits that they had a sincere or
a pure mind, that is, freed from the pollutions referred to in the
last chapter…” Nevertheless, Calvin’s application is good:
“[T]he sloth of the flesh smothers the truth once received, and
renders it inefficient, except the goads of warnings come to its
aid.”
N“The infinitive here is epexegetical (appositional) to the previous verse, ‘that you should remember.’” ~Robertson’s Grammar (via Hanna). Moule & Lenski agreed, but Robertson’s Word Pictures and D. F. Zeller labeled it purposive.
OCompound of “before” and “speak.” ESV and NET interpreted as “prediction,” but all the other English versions interpreted it as speech in the past.
P“...‘holy’ … in contrast to the… ‘false prophets’ of 2:1.” ~D. F. Zeller
QThe
Textus Receptus departed from the Majority text, following 5
manuscripts (the oldest being from the 9th century) which
read “our” instead of “your” (although the more-ancient
Peshitta also has this reading). The difference is only one letter
in Greek, but the Greek Orthodox and critical GNT’s follow the
majority reading “your.” The parallel passage in Jude 1:17,
however, reads “our Lord.”
Gordon Clark commented, “It
is likely that Peter and Jude at some time ministered to the same
congregations… These churches would think of them as particularly
their apostles.”
“The
meaning is that they should remember the teaching of their apostles
and not follow the Gnostic libertines.” ~ATR
Rcf. 2:21. “By the commandment of the apostles he means the whole doctrine in which they had instructed the faithful.” ~J. Calvin
S“of the commandment of the Lord and Saviour transmitted by the apostles to you” ~Hanna
T“‘first’ ... indicates that... It is important to get the apologetic for this negative factor straight in one’s thinking before going on with his argument. One must face the world as it is and realize there are those who deny such a thing as Christ’s coming before one can appreciate the great value of it... He presents the negative position of the false teachers/prophets first, then the truth.” ~D. F. Zeller
Ucf. 2 Peter 1:20 “knowing, first-of-all, that not any prophecy of Scripture originates from a private interpretation,” (NAW) “The participle occurs instead of a finite verb because of anacoluthon (i.e., the failure to complete a sentence as originally conceived), ‘know this.’” ~Robertson’s Grammar (via Hanna). Calvin, Geneva, NAS, NET, NIV, and NLT also interpreted this participle as an imperative verb, but the other English versions (KJV, ESV) rendered it as a simple participle. ATR called it a “nominative absolute.” D. F. Zeller argued against it being an imperative in favor of a “participle of means… [that is] how to ‘remember the words spoken...’”
VThe majority of Greek manuscripts (the oldest of which is a 9th century minuscule), followed by the Textus Receptus and one of the Greek Orthodox editions, read with a singular spelling (“last day” – matching the parallel passage in Jude 18), but the Patriarchal Greek Orthodox and the critical editions follow about 16 manuscripts (including all 5 pre-9th century ones) which read with a plural spelling. However, all the versions I consulted (even the KJV which normally followed the TR) read plural “last days.” This adjective, which is presumably attributive, is written in a predicate form without a definite article. Moule thought it was just missing its definite article, Blass solved it by taking “last” as a neuter substantive which could have its own prepositional phrase “of the days,” and Hanna suggested that eschatos was “definite enough without the use of the article,” citing 1 Peter 1:5 & 20. Cf. Jude 1:18. The “last days” began around the first coming of Christ (Acts 2:17, 1 Cor. 10:11, 2 Tim. 3:1, Heb. 1:2).
WThe majority of Greek manuscripts (the oldest of which is a 9th century minuscule), followed by the Textus Receptus and the Greek Orthodox editions, read simply “scoffers,” but the critical editions and ancient Greek and Latin and Coptic versions follow about 14 manuscripts (including all 5 pre-9th century ones) which insert εμπαιγμονη “scoffers with scoffing” (also adding the preposition εν/“with” found in a half-dozen of those manuscripts, but already denoted by the dative case of the word). This word appears nowhere else in the Greek Bible or Apocryphal literature, although a cognate is in Heb. 11:36. It is easier to imagine a redundancy dropping out than being added, but since it is basically the same word twice, little is lost in the traditional omission of the participial phrase. The NET Bible notes called it “a Semitism designed to intensify the word it is related to.”
XIn the Greek Bible only here, Isa. 3:4 (“caprices will rule over them”) and the parallel passage in Jude 1:18. The verb form shows up often in the Greek OT and the synoptics (but nowhere else in the GNT), mostly concerning Jesus before and during crucifixion (Mat. 2:16; 20:19; 27:29,31,41; Mark 10:34; 15:20,31; Luke 14:29; 18:32; 22:63; 23:11,36). There are synonyms, however in places like Psalm 1 (“seat of scoffers/λοιμῶν”), Psalm 119:51, and Isaiah 28.
YAbout half the time in the GNT, this phrase means literally “which came out” (Mk. 16:9, Luke 8:2, Heb. 7:13, & 11:15), but the other half of the time it indicates “since the time” (Luke 7:45, Acts 20:18, 24:11, Col. 1:6 & 9), and this seems to be a case of the latter.
ZThe only other verse in the Bible which has a form of “father” and a form of the verb “laid to rest” is Acts 13:36 "For David, after he had served his own generation by the will of God, fell asleep, was buried with his fathers, and saw corruption” (NKJV) “Fathers” may refer to the ancient “patriarchs” from the book of Genesis.
AARobertson commented in his Grammar, that the present tense of this verb “has a progressive sense in which the past and present time are gathered into one phrase, ‘all things have continued as they are.’”
AB“...in contrast to 2 Pet. 3:8, ‘Be not ignorant of this.’” ~A.R. Fausset
ACThe Greek literally reads “of them, this.” The “of them” matches the accusative plural participle “willfully,” but it is challenging to make “them willfully” the accusative of “they are unaware.” (The NIV’s attempt resulted in changing the verb from plural to singular.) The touto (“this”) is, by all accounts, nominative neuter, but what it is the subject of? Most English versions make it the object of “forget” rather than the subject. I tried to translate it in apposition to the subsequent nominative phrases (“the heavens have come into being of old and the earth has stood together”).
ADATR and R&R identified this as “almost adverbial,” but DFZ identified it as a participle of manner – “the manner in which they have ignored the facts… willful...”
AEThe only other instance of this compound in the Greek Bible is in 2 Peter 2:3 “...the judgment from of old is not inactive…” (NAW)
AFThe only other two places in the Greek Bible where you have this phrase “out of water” is in Ezekiel 19:10 “...her fruit and her shoot abounded by reason of much water.” (Brenton) and John 3:5 “...unless one is born of water and the Spirit, he cannot enter the kingdom of God.” (NKJV) This is not directly quoting the Genesis account.
AGCalvin explained this in terms of the air being displaced with water. Tittman, Bengel, Huther, Salmond, Fausset, and Vincent explained in terms of it being water which causes earth to stick together, but Owen preferred the meaning of “surrounded by water” (which is also the reading of the NLT). Hanna, citing Moule, commented, “the preposition with the genitive probably has a spatial sense, meaning ‘continuous land, rising out of and extending through water.’” (ATR and DFZ agreed.). The only other instances of this phrase “through water” in the GNT seem to be speaking of purification rather than creation: Num. 31:23 (“whatever shall not pass through fire shall be passed through water.”) Isa. 43:2 (“...when you pass through the waters...”); 1 Pet. 3:20 (“eight souls were saved through water”), and 1 Jn. 5:6 (“This is the One who came through water and blood…”).
AHAlthough
this word is not found in the creation account of the LXX, it is
found with several of the same key words in Job
28:20ff.
Although it is “feminine
singular, referring to earth
… agreement is often attracted to the number and gender of the
nearest noun. Since too the concluding phrase by
the word of God
presumably belongs with heavens
as well as with an
earth,
the intervening words also would seem to attach to both heavens and
earth.” ~Gordon
Clark
Most
of the N.T. uses of this word are translated “commend,” but Col.
1:16-17 is most
like this use in 2 Peter. The allusion might be to a poetic
recounting of Gen. 1:9. Unfortunately, the Geneva Bible deleted this
verb, while the NLT added a verb (“surrounded”) and changed the
feminine subject of this verb (“earth”) to a masculine “He”!
Meanwhile, the NAS, NIV, NET, and ESV all changed the active voice
of this verb (“it stood together”) to a passive (“was
formed”).
AIThis
relative pronoun “which” is plural, and could be any gender. The
only plural noun in the context is “heavens,” and, although G.
Clark tried to make a case for “heavens” being what destroyed
the earth in terms of the heavens containing the rain that destroyed
the earth, it is not convincing. “Scoffers” is the only other
plural noun in the context, but it would have to be accusative
rather than genitive to be the referrent. Beza and Whitby suggested
it referred to “the heavens and the earth” (which makes no sense
because it would make them both the object of destruction and the
means of destruction), Macknight suggested it referred to Christ and
God (an unacceptable stretch of the grammar), and Owen and Mayor
thought it was a misspelling which should have been singular
referring to “word” (which is extremely unlikely, since it is
plural in every known Greek manuscript – except for two of the
more recent ones). DFZ was adamant that it referred to “the word
of God,” but he attributed the irregularity to the “tricky”
nature of Greek neuters rather than to an error, which is more
plausible. Most interpreters, however, combine the two singular
instances of the neuter noun “water” as the antecedent (Fausset,
ATR).
“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... 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.” ~J. Calvin
AJWallace & DFZ agree with me that this is a participle of means, but there are other opinions: NET = temporal, KJV & NASB = simple participle, and NIV & ESV = indicative verb.
AK“By His word” is the reading of the majority of Greek manuscripts (including 2 of the 5 oldest-known ones) and of the traditional Greek Orthodox editions. (The original Textus Receptus also reads this way, except it dropped the definite article, which doesn’t change the meaning.) The NASB and Peshitta reflect this reading. However, all the other English versions read, “By the same word,” reflecting 18 Greek manuscripts (including 3 of the 5 oldest-known ones) which read αυτω instead of αυτου. It is especially curious that the Geneva and KJV followed the minority variant, and this resulted in the variant being published in Scrivner’s 1894 edition of the Textus Receptus, even though Stephens’ 1550 edition followed the majority.
ALThis
is a perfect paraphrastic in an unusual reverse order with the
perfect participle followed by the present verb of being. The
Perfect paraphrastic normally retains the Perfect tense meaning; the
NASB alone opts for the present tense. Wallace noted in his Greek
Grammar that a distinction should be made between the
English Perfect tense (which indicates uninterrupted action in the
past) and the Greek Perfect tense (which emphasizes the current
condition).
The only other time in the Bible that God is said
to “treasure up” something is Proverbs 2:7 “...he
treasures up salvation for them that walk uprightly...”
(Brenton, cf. Romans 2:5)
AMThis
phrase “they are in fire” is awkward to translate. The dative
case for “fire” leads me to believe it is speaking of the means
by which the destruction will come, although all the other English
versions interpreted it as objective or purposive “for/unto
fire.” DFZ called it a “dative of destination,” but Wallace
did not list this as an instance of such a dative.
Although
liberal theologians have suggested that this is just Greek Stoic
philosophy rehashed, Gordon Clark noted that “Stoicism cannot be
the source of the apostle’s ideas… In Stoicism the final
conflagration is a gradual, natural, [cyclical] process inherent in
the constitution of matter… Peter, on the other hand, announces a
sudden, non-cyclical, virtually instantaneous cataclysm... of...
divine punishment.”