Final Reminders for Continued Faithfulness - 2 Peter 3:15-18

2 Peter 3:15–18 (NKJV) — 15 and consider that the longsuffering of our Lord is salvation—as also our beloved brother Paul, according to the wisdom given to him, has written to you, 16 as also in all his epistles, speaking in them of these things, in which are some things hard to understand, which untaught and unstable people twist to their own destruction, as they do also the rest of the Scriptures. 17 You therefore, beloved, since you know this beforehand, beware lest you also fall from your own steadfastness, being led away with the error of the wicked; 18 but grow in the grace and knowledge of our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ. To Him be the glory both now and forever. Amen.

Introduction: Seatbelts/Safeguards

Proposition: God desires spiritual safety for His people.

Interrogative: How can we maintain spiritual safety in this threatening world?

I. Be careful of distorting Scripture - 3:15-16

15 and consider that the longsuffering of our Lord is salvation—as also our beloved brother Paul, according to the wisdom given to him, has written to you, 16 as also in all his epistles, speaking in them of these things, in which are some things hard to understand, which untaught and unstable people twist to their own destruction, as they do also the rest of the Scriptures.

A. The Common Teaching: Consider that the longsuffering of the Lord is salvation - 15

1. Consider/regard

a. As an opportunity to repent

b. As an do bring others to repentance and faith in Christ

3:15 On the one hand, believers should not fall prey to laxity, thinking that there will be no judgment and that they can live however they wish. They must live spotless and blameless lives to receive the reward of eternal life. They must diligently pursue godliness and resist the libertinism of the false teachers. On the other hand, those who are straying from God are not automatically excluded from eternal life. God does not count up good works as it were. Those who repent and turn to him will receive his mercy and reward, be it ever so late in their lives. Hence, Peter said, “Regard the patience of our Lord as salvation” (NRSV). He meant by this that we should consider the Lord’s patience, that is, his delay in coming, as an opportunity to repent and be saved.100 The NIV misses the connection with 3:9 by translating the verb hēgeisthe “bear in mind” instead of “regard” (NRSV, NASB) or “count” (RSV). The RSV is most satisfying because it preserves the echo of 3:9, “The Lord is not slow about his promise as some count slowness, but is forbearing toward you, not wishing that any should perish, but that all should reach repentance.” In both instances the RSV renders the verb hēgeomai as “count.” Furthermore, the central idea in each verse is similar. The adversaries in 3:9 counted the failure of the Lord to come as slowness, so slow that they thought he would never arrive. And yet what they called slowness grants believers the opportunity to repent. That thought is reiterated in 3:15. The alleged “slowness” of the Lord is really his patience, granting time for sinners to repent and to experience his favor. When the requisite number of sinners repents—and only God knows that number—then the end will arrive (cf. 3:12).

15 But if 3:14 instructs the addressees how to live while expecting the coming new age, how are they to deal with the delay that they are experiencing. Our author has advice for this as well: “Bear in mind that [or “count” or “consider”] our Lord’s patience means salvation.” The “scoffers” consider “our Lord’s patience” to be an indication that there will be no Parousia, that everything will go on as it has since the beginning of creation (2 Pet 3:4). They consider it to be a myth in the negative sense of that term. Others (perhaps the “scoffers” themselves in the course of their argument) consider “our Lord’s patience” to mean that he is slow to keep his promises (2 Pet 3:9); in other words, they attribute a dishonorable motive to the Lord. Our author has already argued that this is not the case. First, he argued that past historical precedents show that the idea that judgment is a myth is unfounded. Second, he has argued that the Lord’s slowness is not a moral fault (i.e., human slowness), a dishonorable motive or defect in character, but rather the honorable character trait “long-suffering”/“patience” because the Lord wants everyone to “come to repentance” so that they do not “perish.” Now our author picks up on that theme and abbreviates it.

“Consider” or “count” our Lord’s “patience” (or “long-suffering”—this is the nominal form of the verb that was used in 3:9 and which we discussed while exegeting that verse) “salvation” (which is a short way of indicating the result of repentance and the opposite of perishing). This salvation is probably eschatological salvation on that final day, which is how Jude 3 use the term and also how 1 Pet 1:5; 2:2 use the term. Salvation is not something that we have in the sense of experiencing it, but something that we have in the sense of a promise, something that will be revealed at the coming of Jesus. It is then that judgment will be given (and that judgment is the main subject of this chapter in 2 Peter), and the followers of Jesus (notice that our author refers to Jesus or perhaps God as “our Lord” and so includes his addressees among the true followers of Jesus) will experience his deliverance and reward in that day of judgment. This salvation, as we have seen (see the comment on 2 Pet 1:1) is from “our God and Savior Jesus Christ” and comes on that final day, for “the Lord knows how to rescue godly men from trials” (2 Pet 2:9), dividing between the righteous and the unrighteous, as examples from history have shown.

So this is how one is to think about the long wait that the church has endured with respect to the Parousia. It is salvation, salvation for many of those whom Peter addresses who had recently come to repentance, salvation for the millions of followers of Jesus who have lived throughout the ages, and salvation for peoples around the world about whom our author is not even dimly aware, but whom we know have come to repentance and thus will not perish, people living from Tierra del Fuego to the Arctic Circle and from the east coast of China right around to the west coast of the United States. And especially in our age we remember the millions of believers in the global South since the average believer today is not Caucasian or Western but black or otherwise colored and probably living in the southern hemisphere, far beyond the worldview of our author. But this is what our Lord’s patience has meant: it has meant that salvation has reached them, and it has meant that salvation has reached us.

This interpretation of the delay of the Parousia (a delay for which followers of Jesus are in part responsible since they can “speed its coming”; 3:12) is confirmed by “dear brother Paul.” “Dear [or “beloved”] brother” was a way of referring to a colleague in the Jesus movement. We find the complete phrase in Eph 6:21 (Tychicus) and Col 4:7 (also Tychicus), 9 (Onesimus), and the last part of it (“brother”) in 2 Cor 2:13 (Titus); Phil 2:25 (Epaphroditus); Col 1:7 (Epaphras); 1 Thess 3:2 (Timothy), Phlm 1 (Timothy) and 1 Pet 5:12 (Silvanus). “Beloved” or “dear” is probably not simply a term of courtesy, but it seems to convey affection since it is also attached to the names of co-workers (e.g., Acts 15:25 [Barnabas and Paul]; Rom 16:12 [Persis]; 3 John 1 [Gaius]). So we note that in the NT “brother” as a type of address is always used for some type of co-worker, and the adjective “beloved” indicates that this co-worker is a valued and honored co-worker, one whom the author views with some affection.

As a title for Paul it should be compared with 1 Clem. 47:1 (“the blessed Paul the apostle”), Ignatius, Eph. 12:2 (“Paul, the holy one who received a testimony and proved worth of all fortune”), Rom. 4:3 (Peter and Paul are “apostles” with authority the author does not have), Polycarp, Phil. 3:2 (“the blessed and glorious Paul”), and 9:1 (“Paul himself and the other apostles”). What is noticeable in 2 Peter is that our author does not refer to Paul as an apostle, which virtually all passages in the apostolic fathers do, but uses the normal term for a fellow worker in the fictive family9 of the Jesus movement, “brother,” and he uses a term of endearment rather than the terms of exaltation (e.g., “blessed”) that were used in the period of the apostolic fathers. Thus, if our author is a later pseudepigrapher, he is really good at remembering such details about the earlier period of the Jesus movement.

Notice that Paul is referred to as “our” beloved brother. Our author can use the second person plural when he is including himself with his addressees (“our God and Savior Jesus Christ” [1:1] or “Jesus our Lord” [1:2]), when he refers to himself together with an undefined group around him (“a faith as precious as ours”; 1:1), and when he refers to himself together with the other members of the Twelve who witnessed the Transfiguration (“We did not follow cleverly invented stories when we told you about the power and coming of our Lord Jesus Christ, but we were eyewitnesses of his majesty”; 1:16).10 But it is clear that he is not given to the use of the epistolary “we,” for he shifts to “I” when he is speaking of his own personal commitment (1:12–15; 3:1–2).11 Thus in our passage he is clearly including himself in a group that values Paul. But what group is it? Bauckham and Vögtle follow Schrage in arguing that “our” is the group of apostles, so Paul is a beloved fellow apostle to the apostles.12 On the other hand, Mayor believes that the reference is to “Christians generally.”13

In all probability we need to find a middle way. That is, if one feels that 2 Peter was written after there was a definite sense of an apostolic “college,” then certainly “our” refers to this group. But in our comments above on 2 Pet 3:1 we have questioned this idea. On the other hand, each of the places where Paul uses this exact linguistic formulation he is referring to a valued colleague and co-worker, but not necessarily to someone whom he would call an apostle. Nor is he referring to the group of apostles in his “our” but to himself and those associated with him in his ministry (and in Colossians to Timothy, who was a co-author of the letter). Thus, while it is possible that Peter means “all followers of Jesus, you as well as us, consider Paul a beloved brother,” the linguistic evidence points to his meaning “the group around me considers Paul a beloved brother.” Anything more than this assumes a solution to the authorship question and then, often, uses this verse as evidence for making that assumption, ignoring the various parallels in the Pauline corpus and other NT literature.

Could Peter have referred to Paul as “our beloved brother”? On the basis of Gal 2:11–14, usually combined with some assumption about early Catholicism and its tendency to reconcile the unreconciled and especially Peter and Paul, it is often assumed that this could not be the case and that this phrase is patent evidence that we are dealing with a pseudepig rapher writing in the name of Peter. However, just as we noted above that the fact that the letter refers to Paul in terms that were current in the second half of the first century but not in the apostolic fathers is compatible with the assertion that but does not prove that the letter is really written by Peter (a discerning writer immersed in such writings could use the earlier style), so this term of collegial affection does not prove the opposite. One text that everyone accepts as genuine (Gal 2:11–14) tells us that Paul once sharply rebuked Peter in public. We are not told the outcome of this conflict, which some take to mean that Peter never backed down and the conflict went on, and others take to mean that Paul realizes his readers know they were reconciled. But even taking the more negative interpretation of that silence (and any argument from silence is weak) and ignoring the post-Galatians texts that show Paul and Peter in agreement (Acts 15:7ff. suffers from the fact that its relationship to Galatians 2 is disputed; 1 Cor 9:5; 15:5 are certainly not negative about Peter, but also do not say anything about his relationship to Paul), there is no reason to believe that the conflict between Peter and Paul was not reconciled (as the iconic tradition asserts). It is difficult to believe that an author like Paul who wrote so much about reconciliation and peace in the community would not have put significant effort into such a reconciliation.14 Furthermore, on anyone’s reckoning a minimum of ten or fifteen years have passed. No one who has a valued colleague with whom he or she once had a sharp disagreement (and this author has more than one person in that category) would doubt the possibility that such reconciliation was possible.

What is clear is that Paul has written to these believers.15 The problem is that this Pauline letter (or letters) has been identified with a number of those in the Pauline corpus.16 Sometimes this is done on the basis of assumptions about the addressees of 2 Peter (e.g., Rome, or the same recipients as 1 Peter) and sometimes on the basis of content (i.e., which Pauline letter or letters contain the theme of 2 Pet 3:14–15 or that of the whole of 2 Peter 3). The fact is that 2 Peter gives no clear indication of where its addressees live, and the idea of living a holy life in the light of waiting for the Parousia of Christ is so common in the NT, including the Pauline letters, that, as we see has been done, a case can be made out for most of Paul’s letters. That these believers have received a letter from Paul does narrow the field of addressees somewhat (even though we know that some letters of Paul were lost, there is no evidence that he wrote to any group outside his area of ministry, with the one exception of Romans, so it is probable, but not absolutely necessary, that the addressees live within Paul’s area of ministry). But the attempt to identify the particular letter and thus the addressees is futile. Our author is not referring to a specific passage in a letter, but to the general agreement of Paul to what he has taught. We cannot get more specific than this, even though we would very much like to.

Our author does note that Paul wrote “with the wisdom that God gave him.” (The Greek text has “the wisdom that was given to him,” but the passive is probably a so-called “divine passive,” referring in the passive to God as the giver, so the NIV interprets it rightly.) Paul (1 Cor 12:8; Eph 1:17; Col 1:19) and James (Jas 1:5), among others in the NT, refer to wisdom as a divine gift. James mentions that one asks God for wisdom and that God gives generously. Paul cites wisdom as a gift of the Spirit and in Eph 1:17 refers to a “spirit of wisdom and revelation.” What our author is doing is attributing divine inspiration to Paul, parallel to that which he attributes to the prophets in 1:20–21, but referring to a gift of the Spirit rather than to the Spirit itself, that is, to how the inspiration was appropriated by Paul rather than to the agent of inspiration.17 Thus he is arguing that Paul, who had written to these addressees and who wrote under the inspiration of divine wisdom, confirms, at least in a general sense, the position that 2 Peter has just taken.

B. The Support: Paul’s Writings - 15b

as also our beloved brother Paul, according to the wisdom given to him, has written to you,

The Association: As our beloved Paul: He is one of us

The controversy

Galatians 2:11–15 (NKJV) — 11 Now when Peter had come to Antioch, I withstood him to his face, because he was to be blamed; 12 for before certain men came from James, he would eat with the Gentiles; but when they came, he withdrew and separated himself, fearing those who were of the circumcision. 13 And the rest of the Jews also played the hypocrite with him, so that even Barnabas was carried away with their hypocrisy. 14 But when I saw that they were not straightforward about the truth of the gospel, I said to Peter before them all, “If you, being a Jew, live in the manner of Gentiles and not as the Jews, why do you compel Gentiles to live as Jews? 15 We who are Jews by nature, and not sinners of the Gentiles,

b. The resolution

Other evidence exists in the Pauline letters and Petrine corpus (including here) that their relationship was one of mutual admiration and respect (Gal 1:18; 2:1–10; 1 Cor 15:1–11).

2. The Occasion: Is given the gift of wisdom (given by God), he writes

In the midst of such exhortations Peter suddenly brought Paul into the discussion. The reference to Paul, of course, has provoked much discussion; but before we launch into that subject, we should note the main idea communicated. The logic of vv. 14–15 can be summed up as follows: “Because you are waiting for God to destroy the present world and to form a new one, you should do two things. First, be diligent to live godly lives so that you will receive your eternal reward. Second, consider the Lord’s patience, or apparent delay in coming, as an opportunity for salvation. Both of these notions, that is, that we should live godly lives to receive salvation and that the Lord has exercised patience so that sinners can repent, are also taught by Paul.” Why did Peter emphasize that Paul also taught these two truths? Presumably because the opponents had seized on Paul’s writings to advance their own agenda. Some scholars think they distorted Paul’s writings (v. 16) by appealing to statements about a spiritual resurrection to support an overrealized eschatology (Eph 2:5–6; Col 2:12; 3:1; 2 Tim 2:17–18).101 Such a scenario is a possibility, but evidence is lacking that the opponents promulgated an overrealized eschatology.102 More likely the opponents latched on to Paul’s statements about freedom from law to advance libertinism (cf. Rom 3:20, 28; 4:15; 5:20; 7:5, 7; 1 Cor 15:56; Gal 5:1).103 This fits with the licentiousness of the false teachers, which is amply attested in 2 Peter. It also accords with the context since Peter emphasized that Paul also taught that believers must live in a godly way to experience God’s promise and that in the interval before Christ’s coming God grants people an opportunity to repent. We may also have an allusion to Rom 2:4 (cf. Rom 3:25–26; 9:22), where God’s patience with sinners is featured.104

Peter referred to Paul, then, to reclaim him and to explain that Paul was not on the side of the opponents. He was Peter’s “beloved brother,” that is, coworker in the gospel and fellow believer. The “our,” then, designates Paul as fellow worker with other apostles, not as a fellow believer with all other Christians.105 Paul’s letters are a manifestation of divine wisdom. Paul himself often emphasized that his apostolic calling was given by God (Rom 12:3; 15:15; 1 Cor 3:10; Gal 2:9; Eph 3:2, 7; Col 1:25). The word “given” (dotheisan) is a divine passive, emphasizing that Paul’s ability was not to be traced to his native gifts but God’s grace.106 The other question that arises is what it means to say that Paul wrote “to you.” Many scholars take this as evidence that Peter and Paul had both died and that the letters of Paul were now the common property of all the churches. But if 2 Peter is an authentic letter, as I have argued in the introduction, then Peter referred to letters that Paul actually wrote to the churches in Asia Minor.107 Or, possibly, some of the letters of Paul had been circulated so that readers had access to some of the letters that had been preserved. There is no need to conclude that the full corpus of Pauline letters had been collected, nor is there any firm evidence to suggest such here.108 Given the content of vv. 14–15, scholars have tried to discern what letters the readers might have had access to. If the letters were written in Asia Minor, Ephesians and Colossians are possibilities. We must admit, however, that ultimately we do not know. Paul encouraged a wider distribution of his letters in Col 4:16, and hence it is possible that they had received some of his other letters. Moreover, the necessity of living a godly life and God’s patience is widespread enough to include a number of Pauline letters.

C. The Danger - the distortion of Scripture

16 as also in all his epistles, speaking in them of these things, in which are some things hard to understand, which untaught and unstable people twist to their own destruction, as they do also the rest of the Scriptures.

1. His Writings:

a. uniform in doctrine with all his epistles

b. Speaking in them of these things.

c. As they do the rest of Scripture: Peter actually affirms them as authoritative Scripture (used 50 times to reference OT Scriptures)

Interestingly he cites Paul along with “the other Scriptures.” It is clear that this term refers to those works our author considers authoritative writings (the word “Scripture” means “writing”), for that is how the term “the Scriptures” is used in the NT (e.g., Rom 4:3; 9:17; 10:11; 1 Cor 15:3; Gal 3:8; 4:30; 1 Tim 5:18; Jas 2:8; cf. 2 Pet 1:20, which shows that even when the definite article is not used, usually such texts are meant).

2. The Problem

The reality of more difficult writings (sometimes Paul will indeed take you up into the Alps and the Himalayas of divine revelation as it were)

b. Twist to their own destruction

distort, stretch, twist

It occurs only once in biblical Greek, in 2 Sam 22:27, LXX (2 Kgdms 22:27 in LXX terminology): the NIV translates that verse, “to the pure you show yourself pure, but to the crooked you show yourself shrewd.” The LXX could be translated, “with the distorted you will be distorted” or “with the twisted you will be twisted.”

Used in in extra Biblical literature to refer to stretch and twist (rope or strings on an instrument)

The verbal and noun form of the term are used quite often in 2 Peter to designate God’s judgment on the wicked (2:1, 3; 3:6–7, 9).

c. The Specific problem

Luther plausibly suggests that they were abusing Paul’s teaching on justification by faith and freedom from the law to enjoy a life of moral laxity.

N.T. Responses to this:

James 2:14–26 NKJV

What does it profit, my brethren, if someone says he has faith but does not have works? Can faith save him? If a brother or sister is naked and destitute of daily food, and one of you says to them, “Depart in peace, be warmed and filled,” but you do not give them the things which are needed for the body, what does it profit? Thus also faith by itself, if it does not have works, is dead. But someone will say, “You have faith, and I have works.” Show me your faith without your works, and I will show you my faith by my works. You believe that there is one God. You do well. Even the demons believe—and tremble! But do you want to know, O foolish man, that faith without works is dead? Was not Abraham our father justified by works when he offered Isaac his son on the altar? Do you see that faith was working together with his works, and by works faith was made perfect? And the Scripture was fulfilled which says, “Abraham believed God, and it was accounted to him for righteousness.” And he was called the friend of God. You see then that a man is justified by works, and not by faith only. Likewise, was not Rahab the harlot also justified by works when she received the messengers and sent them out another way? For as the body without the spirit is dead, so faith without works is dead also.

1 Corinthians 5:9–11 (NKJV) — 9 I wrote to you in my epistle not to keep company with sexually immoral people. 10 Yet I certainly did not mean with the sexually immoral people of this world, or with the covetous, or extortioners, or idolaters, since then you would need to go out of the world. 11 But now I have written to you not to keep company with anyone named a brother, who is sexually immoral, or covetous, or an idolater, or a reviler, or a drunkard, or an extortioner—not even to eat with such a person.

1 Corinthians 6:12 (NKJV) — 12 All things are lawful for me, but all things are not helpful. All things are lawful for me, but I will not be brought under the power of any.

1 Corinthians 10:23–24 (NKJV) — 23 All things are lawful for me, but not all things are helpful; all things are lawful for me, but not all things edify. 24 Let no one seek his own, but each one the other’s well-being.

3. The People

a. They are Untaught - untrained, uneducated

The “ignorant” person (the term appears only here in the NT) is not the person who is stupid, but the person who is uninstructed. Philo uses the term eleven times, and Josephus, Ant.12.191 (12.4.7) writes, “Joseph [son of Tobias, a.d. 200] had once a mind to know which of his sons had the best disposition to virtue; and when he sent them severally to those that had then the best reputation for instructing youth, the rest of his children, by reason of their sloth and unwillingness to take pains, returned to him foolish and unlearned.”26

b. They are unstable - spiritually weak, particularly susceptible to falling to temptation. +

3:16 Verse 16 continues the discussion on Paul’s letters with the remark that Paul spoke “of these matters,” that is, of the importance of holiness (v. 14) and the patience of the Lord. The reference to “all his letters” indicates that Peter saw both these themes in all the Pauline letters with which he was acquainted. We would be overreading the text to deduce from “all his letters” that a Pauline corpus of letters was officially established or even that Peter was personally familiar with all of Paul’s letters.109 Peter referred to the particular Pauline letters with which he was acquainted. How many letters are in view is impossible to say, but it is obvious that a number of Pauline letters were known to Peter. This indicates that at quite an early stage the Pauline letters were valued enough to be read on a fairly wide scale, though any notion of a canon of letters is anachronistic at this stage.

The Pauline letters arose as a subject only because they were being distorted by the false teachers, and perhaps the converts of the false teachers as well. This explains why we are told that some things are “hard to understand” in them. The term dysnoētos is used of matters that are difficult to interpret.110 Misinterpretation, however, is inexcusable. The “ignorant” and “unstable” twist the Scriptures, but it is clear that such ignorance and instability were not merely due to lack of instruction. Elsewhere Peter spoke of believers as “firmly established” (estērigmenous) in the truth (1:12). Furthermore, we are informed that the teachers enticed “the unstable” (astēriktous, 2:14). Now we are told that the “unstable” (astēriktoi) distorted the Pauline writings.111 Their culpability is evident, for Peter went on to say that they did so “to their own destruction.” “Destruction” (apōleia) is a typical term for eschatological punishment. The verbal and noun form of the term are used quite often in 2 Peter to designate God’s judgment on the wicked (2:1, 3; 3:6–7, 9). Their errant use of Paul’s writings landed them in hell—hardly an innocent peccadillo. Bauckham says, “It was therefore not a question of minor doctrinal errors, but of using their misinterpretations to justify immorality, for it is 2 Peter’s consistent teaching that eschatological judgment … is coming on the false teachers because of their ungodly lives.”112 Those who were twisting and distorting Paul’s writings lacked the humility to learn from others, but they were perverting what Paul wrote to justify their licentious lifestyles.113 Luther plausibly suggests that they were abusing Paul’s teaching on justification by faith and freedom from the law to enjoy a life of moral laxity.114 It is quite reasonable to think that James responded to at least an oral distortion of Paul’s teaching about justification by faith in Jas 2:14–26. We know from Paul’s own letters that occasionally what he wrote was misconstrued. The famous lost letter to Corinth noted in 1 Cor 5:9–11 was misinterpreted by the Corinthians so that they thought Paul excluded all contact with unbelievers. Perhaps the Corinthians also misunderstood Pauline teaching on the law and cited one of his own formulations (“all things are lawful”) in a way he did not intend (1 Cor 6:12; 10:23, RSV).

When the false teachers misused Paul’s writings, they were hardly innovative. They distorted “the other Scriptures” (tas loipas graphas) as well. What is particularly interesting is that Paul’s writings appear to have been identified as Scripture. This could be disputed if one argued that “other” (loipas) refers to writings that are in a different category from Paul’s. But this view cannot be sustained, for the Greek word “other” refers to “other” of the same kind. This is evident where “other” (loipos) functions as an adjective. In each instance the “other” refers to others of the same kind: “other virgins” (Matt 25:11, NASB, ESV), “other apostles” (Acts 2:37), “other churches” (2 Cor 12:13), “other Jews” (Gal 2:13; cf. also Rom 1:13; 1 Cor 9:5; Phil 4:3). Peter clearly identified Paul’s writing as Scripture.115 And yet it may be objected that calling something “Scripture” does not necessarily place it on the same level of authority as the Old Testament Scriptures.116 But the term “scripture” (graphē) occurs fifty times in the New Testament and invariably refers to the Old Testament Scriptures, even in Jas 4:5.117 Hence, we have good grounds for concluding that Peter classed Paul’s writings as Scripture, on the same level as the Old Testament Scriptures.118 Many think that such a statement reveals that 2 Peter is a postapostolic document, that the Peter who was rebuked by Paul (Gal 2:11–14) would never classify Paul’s writings as Scripture. Furthermore, the statement could indicate that a completed corpus of Paul’s writings had been collected, something impossibly early for Peter’s lifetime.

Substantive responses can be given to each of the objections raised. First, New Testament scholars overinterpret the significance of Gal 2:11–14. Many subscribe to the view that Peter and Paul went separate ways after the incident at Antioch and that Paul was divided from the Jerusalem apostles henceforth. I am not suggesting that Peter and Paul were carbon copies of each other, but the differences between them are overestimated.119 Galatians 2:11–14 does not suggest that Paul and Peter adopted different theologies. The text says that Peter acted hypocritically, meaning that he agreed with Paul and acted contrary to his own convictions—because he feared what other Jews might think and do. Many New Testament scholars, of course, disagree with this assessment, but we ought to note that they depart from the text at this very juncture and insert their guess about what Peter really thought. Second, the Book of Acts—whose historical accuracy is doubted by some (perhaps many)—does not portray Paul as if he had severed ties with Jerusalem. When he returned to Jerusalem in Acts 21, he was well received according to Luke. Again, many scholars doubt the credibility of Luke’s account, but they lack textual evidence for their theories.120 Third, the recounting of one disagreement between Peter and Paul should not become the lens by which we interpret their entire relationship. Other evidence exists in the Pauline letters and Petrine corpus (including here) that their relationship was one of mutual admiration and respect (Gal 1:18; 2:1–10; 1 Cor 15:1–11). Fourth, I have already observed that a reference to Paul’s letters does not indicate that an entire corpus was collected or that his letters were part of a canon of Scripture.121 Paul himself taught that his words were authoritative (cf. 1 Cor 14:37), and this is evident because he enjoined public reading of his letters in the churches (Col 4:16; 1 Thess 5:27). Presumably from the strong words in 2 Peter, Peter saw his letter as authoritative as well. We conclude that Peter included the Pauline writings as authoritative for the churches and placed them on the same level as the Old Testament Scriptures. The implications for what belongs in the New Testament canon and for the authority of the Pauline writings today are, of course, immense. Finally, the fact that Peter addressed Paul as “brother” implies a partnership and equality with him that is not apparent in later church writers. Guthrie points out that the Apostolic Fathers speak of Paul in more exalted terms (e.g., “the blessed Paul”).122 The appellation “brother” is a genuine touch from the hand of Peter himself. In addition, Peter implied that Paul was not easy to understand even for himself. Such an admission likely would not be from a later writer.12316 But it was not just in the letter that Paul had written to the addressees of 2 Peter that he had written about the topics of concern to our author. He writes about “these matters” in “all his letters.” On the one hand, this remark shows that it is likely misguided to try to determine which Pauline letter was written to these addressees (since Paul treats the same topics in all his letters). On the other hand, it shows that our author is aware of several Pauline letters. This knowledge again raises the dating issue. We know that Paul himself on one occasion had requested that churches share his letters: “After this letter has been read to you, see that it is also read in the church of the Laodiceans and that you in turn read the letter from Laodicea” (Col 4:16). But it is a big jump in time from Colossians to the first concrete evidence we have of people who know more than one letter. This evidence shows up in 1 Clement, who not only knows Romans but can also write to the Corinthians, “Take up the epistle of the blessed Apostle Paul” (1 Clem. 47:1). It appears later in 2 Clement and in Ignatius’s Ephesians.18 Thus we are on solid ground when we assume that a collection of the Pauline letters existed by the end of the first century.19 It is also likely that some Pauline letters circulated independently of a collection (which is what one would expect as one church hears that another has a letter that might prove helpful in their situation),20 and that there were collections of a few Pauline letters before there was a collection of all of his letters.21 All of this is quite logical since Paul was a valued teacher in his circle of communities and, as he left an area and especially as he died, his letters were his continuing voice. Thus churches would share letters and, as they obtained funds (a few hundred dollars to a couple thousand dollars in today’s money), make copies. Copies would turn into collections, especially since it was possible to use one scroll for several of the shorter letters. Probably by the end of the first century the complete collection (i.e., all extant letters) was circulating to at least a limited degree (remember, these copies did not come cheap). The issue is which stage in this process 2 Peter is indicating.

The fact is that while Neyrey lists sixteen terms and four themes that 2 Peter shares with Paul, which come from Romans, 1 and 2 Corinthians, Philippians, and 1 Thessalonians,22 the only really plausible parallels are Rom 2:4 and 2 Pet 3:9, 15, 1 Thess 5:2 and 2 Pet 3:10, and a possible reflection of Romans in 2 Pet 2:19. The rest of the parallels are all to terms and ideas that were relatively common in the early Jesus movement or in the surrounding Greco-Roman culture; thus independent use is as or more likely than influence from Paul. Thus it is incorrect to assume that 2 Peter knows the whole Pauline collection and thus must be dated close to or after the end of the first century. He appears to know only two or three Pauline letters, and perhaps he has heard of, but not seen, others as traveling believers reported what they used in their communities. These data could fit a wide range of dates in the second half of the first century, depending on where one assumes our author was living when he wrote 2 Peter.23

Clearly our author believes that Paul’s writings in general agree with the position that he has laid out in the previous verses of 2 Peter 3, but also that he realizes that Paul’s writings are difficult. From our perspective that is just what we would expect, since a letter is one half of a dialogue that takes place without either body language or immediate feedback. Thus what was clear to the original recipients might not be clear to a reader who knew the culture yet did not know the specific situation of the original recipients. Furthermore, the lack of immediate feedback means that Paul himself may not be aware of misunderstandings that he is engendering in his readers,24 let alone in those who do not know the situation of his original readers. Thus our author says that Paul’s letters “contain some things that are hard to understand.” The term for “hard to understand” (dysnoētos) is not found elsewhere in biblical Greek and is rare in nonbiblical Greek (only fourteen occurrences in the period from five centuries b.c. to three centuries a.d.), but its meaning is clear enough: it refers to exactly what the NIV says, that is, “something that is hard to understand.”25 Perhaps its most interesting use is in Hermas, Sim. 9:14:4, where Hermas asks for an interpretation of a vision he has received since the vision is “difficult for people to understand.”

While our author recognizes that some of what Paul writes is difficult to understand (which is a great comfort to contemporary commentators), he does not inform us how difficult he finds Paul to understand. It is likely that he does have to work on understanding some of what Paul says (e.g., if he knows Romans, the broken grammatical construction in Rom 5:12 may have given him pause for thought), but his concern is not with people like himself who are well instructed in the faith but with “ignorant and unstable” people, whom he views as distorting Paul’s teaching. The “ignorant” person (the term appears only here in the NT) is not the person who is stupid, but the person who is uninstructed. Philo uses the term eleven times, and Josephus, Ant. 12.191 (12.4.7) writes, “Joseph [son of Tobias, a.d. 200] had once a mind to know which of his sons had the best disposition to virtue; and when he sent them severally to those that had then the best reputation for instructing youth, the rest of his children, by reason of their sloth and unwillingness to take pains, returned to him foolish and unlearned.”26

The term “unstable” has appeared earlier in our letter (2:14; cf. the verbal form of the contrasting idea in 1:12). Together the two words form the picture of a people who may be highly intelligent and well educated, but when it comes to knowing the narrative of Scripture and the major concepts of what we now know as the NT (in those days it would have been largely oral teaching) they are uninstructed and therefore unstable. Their knowledge is only superficial, so they are prey to the false teachers. They are like the student whom this writer once had who on an exam translated a passage in Romans from Greek as, “Therefore being justified by works without faith …,” apparently without realizing that it was impossible that Paul could have written that and therefore that his translation was faulty (as his professor would point out). This description shows the need for good catechesis in the church; that is, we should not simply expect that those newly committed to Jesus will simply pick up biblical knowledge, including the overall narrative and the main themes of Scripture, by sitting in church services, but we should set about to deliberately inculcate such knowledge in them so that, being rooted in the whole story, they will not easily be led astray.

For our author the issue is that such people “distort” Paul’s letters “as they do the other Scriptures,” and the result is “their own destruction.” The term for “distort” has two meanings, the first of which is to “torture” or “torment” (a person, including oneself, with anxiety) and the second of which is to “twist, distort” “something so that a false meaning results.”27 It occurs only once in biblical Greek, in 2 Sam 22:27, LXX (2 Kgdms 22:27 in LXX terminology): the NIV translates that verse, “to the pure you show yourself pure, but to the crooked you show yourself shrewd.” The LXX could be translated, “with the distorted you will be distorted” or “with the twisted you will be twisted.” In 2 Samuel the twisting is passive, but in our passage it is active: these uninstructed and unstable people are twisting Paul.

Our author appears to be attributing guilt to these people. First, while being uninstructed can be simply an unfortunate situation (think about people who desire an education but cannot afford one), it can, as we saw in the quotation above from Josephus, be the result of refusing instruction. Second, distorting something is an active process. It is more than saying, “I do not understand this,” or even than saying, “I do not like this,” but rather implies an active abuse of a text, a twisting of its meaning to fit one’s own purposes. Third, and most decisive, their distortions will result in their own destruction, which is what the false teachers receive in 2 Pet 2:1–2 and the ungodly sufferer in 2 Pet 3:7. Thus it looks as if the primary people in view here are not the victims of the false teachers of ch. 2 (2:14, 18) or those taken in by the “scoffers” of ch. 3, but rather the false teachers or “scoffers” themselves. Naturally their victims would be included to the extent that they picked up the way that these “teachers” abused Paul and the other Scriptures and distorted such writings themselves, but the focus seems to be on the leaders. They have refused the instruction of our author and the rest of the tradition; they are misusing Paul and finding novel ways to interpret Scripture to be compatible with their views.

How were they misusing Paul and the other Scriptures? We can only speculate as to the answer to this question, but some possibilities suggest themselves. We know that later Gnostics would use Paul’s doctrine of grace to justify their antinomian views.28 There are certainly strains of “grace” teaching in the church today that do just that, that suggest that sin may not be a good idea, but since we are saved by grace our ongoing sin has no effect on our salvation. There is also the possibility that they distorted Paul’s teaching on the resurrection (e.g., 1 Corinthians 15) so as to come up with a purely spiritual resurrection (one that happened at conversion or one that happened at death) and so do away with the need for a day of judgment. Again, parts of the church today interpret 1 Corinthians 15 that way. Finally, they may have distorted Paul and then rejected their distortion of Paul: “Paul teaches these weird ideas, and so it is clear that he did not know what he was talking about and we can safely dismiss what he has to say about the Parousia.” All of these and more are possibilities, but the fact is that 2 Peter does not give us enough information about how these “unstable” people were using Paul for us to know.29

What we do know is that he does not try to defend Paul, but cites him as an accepted authority who, he believes, supports his position if interpreted appropriately. His addressees had received a letter from Paul, so they are as likely as not in the Pauline group of churches, a group that would value Paul as an authority. Given that there was no NT when 2 Peter was written and that our author might not even have had a written gospel that he knew he shared with his addressees, this citing of Paul was about as close as he could come to citing the authority of the NT in support of one’s views today.30

Interestingly he cites Paul along with “the other Scriptures.” It is clear that this term refers to those works our author considers authoritative writings (the word “Scripture” means “writing”), for that is how the term “the Scriptures” is used in the NT (e.g., Rom 4:3; 9:17; 10:11; 1 Cor 15:3; Gal 3:8; 4:30; 1 Tim 5:18; Jas 2:8; cf. 2 Pet 1:20, which shows that even when the definite article is not used, usually such texts are meant). Naturally this included the Torah (Pentateuch), Prophets, and Writings that most Jews recognized (depending on when one dates 2 Peter, not all Jews recognized the Writings as authoritative), but also, given that 2 Peter, like most people in the early Jesus movement, cited the Scriptures in their Greek form, the extra books and additions to books found in what we call the Septuagint (LXX). Furthermore, since this is before any clear canon consciousness developed, it appears that the designation also includes some books that we would not include, such as the unknown work cited by James (Jas 4:5) or 1 Enoch, the content of which is cited by 2 Peter and the exact words of which are cited by Jude. Thus in the absence of later discussions about the canon and the binding of Scripture into codices (what we now refer to when we speak of “books”—before this there were separate scrolls), the term was not as clearly bounded as it is today. Whatever the exact delimitations of our author’s Scriptures, clearly he is including Paul among them. There is really no other way to interpret the term “other.”31

Does this fact that Paul is included among the “Scriptures” mean that we must date 2 Peter late in the first century? It is true that it is in the apostolic fathers that we first see absolutely clear examples of writings from the first generation of the Jesus movement being cited alongside the Jewish Scriptures (Barn. 4:14; 2 Clem. 2:4; 14:2; Polycarp, Phil. 12:1). Possibly Bauckham is correct that 1 Tim 5:18 (which quotes the saying of Jesus we know from Matt 10:10 alongside an OT text) shows that already at that time the writings of the Jesus movement were being considered Scripture.32 But even if 1 Tim 5:18 is a citation of the written Matthew (or a written source of Matthew), which some scholars will certainly dispute, it is a citation of the teaching of Jesus, the Lord and Master. This would not mean that Paul was being considered Scripture at the same time. Even the passages quoted by the apostolic fathers cite a gospel in two of the four cases, and one of the four (2 Clem. 14:2) simply refers to “the Scriptures and the apostles” without indicating whether non-Gospel apostolic writings were intended (although it would not be surprising if they were—at least one unknown writing is cited in 2 Clem. 14:3).

The truth is that we will likely never pin down when the psychological barrier between “the Scriptures” and the newly produced writings of the Jesus movement (including the writings of Paul) was crossed; it was probably crossed at different times in different communities and even in different individuals within the various communities. If a community had been founded by Paul, they certainly believed that they had heard “the word of the Lord” from him as he preached; he had been their source of truth and enlightenment, including their source of how to interpret the Jewish Scriptures. What would happen when such a community received a letter from Paul or a copy of a letter Paul had written to another community? Surely it would be valued from the start. Would they have had a chest somewhere in the group of house churches where they kept what Jewish Scriptures they owned and into which they now put this valued letter from Paul?33 Would the letters from their founder not have been read alongside the Jewish Scriptures? We cannot document the “when,” but under such circumstances it would not be at all surprising if such a community had not quickly mentioned Paul’s writings (such as they had) and the Jewish writings (i.e., the Scriptures) in the same breath. We would be unwise to expect this to have happened before Paul permanently left the area, but his leaving or his subsequent death would have surely elevated the value of these writings since the living voice was not available. It is anyone’s guess how soon that happened in any given community. And without knowing the history of the community or communities to which 2 Peter is addressed, his grouping of Paul’s letters with “the Scriptures” is impossible to use as a tool for dating the book.

What is clear is that the specious arguments from these “scoffers”/false teachers are not helping them in their cause. They are not convincing our author that they are right. Instead, they are displaying that they have not learned the true tradition, that they are not reading the passages they cite in the light of the whole narrative. These teachers probably see their interpretation as justifying their position. Our author sees it as rationalization that will lead to their own destruction (i.e., eschatological judgment). He uses the emphatic “their own,” which could mean that they were predicting dire consequences for the orthodox, among whom our author includes himself, but that they will themselves suffer dire consequences. It will not be Paul or the Scriptures that suffer; it will not be those who are well taught in the Scriptures and thus stable (assuming, as 2 Peter does, that being well taught implies a life conformed to what was taught); it will be they themselves, who think that they have justified their position over against that of the orthodox—they will suffer dire consequences when the Lord they have denied with their behavior returns in a coming that they do not believe will happen.

Applications:

Training is necessary to understand and interpret complex Scriptures. That is why God has given us the gift of the teacher (Eph 4:11)

Ephesians 4:11–13 (NKJV) — 11 And He Himself gave some to be apostles, some prophets, some evangelists, and some pastors and teachers, 12 for the equipping of the saints for the work of ministry, for the edifying of the body of Christ, 13 till we all come to the unity of the faith and of the knowledge of the Son of God, to a perfect man, to the measure of the stature of the fullness of Christ;

2. The clear texts should inform and help us interpret the complicated ones (rather than how we want to interpret it).

3. Biblical (Vertical) Theology is important, but Systematic (theology) is equally important.

4. Apparent Contradictions in Scripture are problems of accurate interpretation, not problems with the Scripture itself.

Transition: So we must be very careful about twisting Scripture, but what other pitfalls must we avoid?

II. Be on guard against spiritual threats - 17

17 You therefore, beloved, since you know this beforehand, beware lest you also fall from your own steadfastness, being led away with the error of the wicked;

A. The Command: Beware - know in advance

1. Know in advance

2. Be on guard

2 Thessalonians 3:3 (NKJV) — 3 But the Lord is faithful, who will establish you and guard you from the evil one.

Jude 24 (NKJV) — 24 Now to Him who is able to keep you from stumbling, And to present you faultless Before the presence of His glory with exceeding joy,

B. The Reasons:

1. Lest you fall from your own steadfastness

a. fall (into apostasy)

Romans 11:11 (NKJV) — 11 I say then, have they stumbled that they should fall? Certainly not! But through their fall, to provoke them to jealousy, salvation has come to the Gentiles.

Romans 11:22 (NKJV) — 22 Therefore consider the goodness and severity of God: on those who fell, severity; but toward you, goodness, if you continue in His goodness. Otherwise you also will be cut off.

Romans 14:4 (NKJV) — 4 Who are you to judge another’s servant? To his own master he stands or falls. Indeed, he will be made to stand, for God is able to make him stand.

1 Corinthians 10:12 (NKJV) — 12 Therefore let him who thinks he stands take heed lest he fall.

Hebrews 4:11 (NKJV) — 11 Let us therefore be diligent to enter that rest, lest anyone fall according to the same example of disobedience.

Revelation 2:5 (NKJV) — 5 Remember therefore from where you have fallen; repent and do the first works, or else I will come to you quickly and remove your lampstand from its place—unless you repent.

b. Steadfastness – stability (ESV, HCSB), security - fall from your secure position

2 Peter 1:3–4 (NKJV) — 3 as His divine power has given to us all things that pertain to life and godliness, through the knowledge of Him who called us by glory and virtue, 4 by which have been given to us exceedingly great and precious promises, that through these you may be partakers of the divine nature, having escaped the corruption that is in the world through lust.

Galatians 5:4 (NKJV) — 4 You have become estranged from Christ, you who attempt to be justified by law; you have fallen from grace.

2. Being led away with the error of the wicked

a. led away - carried away

Galatians 2:13 (NKJV) — 13 And the rest of the Jews also played the hypocrite with him, so that even Barnabas was carried away with their hypocrisy.

b. with the error of the wicked

1) error - lawlessness

2) wicked

3:17 Verses 17–18 could be divided from the previous verses, for the “therefore” (oun) introducing them really functions as the conclusion of the entire letter. The two imperatives in these verses summarize the entire letter well. On the one hand, the readers must be on their guard (phylassesthe), so that they do not fall prey to the false teachers and lose their eschatological reward. On the other hand, they will only remain vigilant if they “grow” (auxanete) in grace and in the knowledge of Jesus Christ. The “you” (hymeis) is emphatic, and “dear friends” (agapētoi) signals a new section and God’s love for the readers.

They were to be on their guard because they knew in advance (proginōskontes) the danger at hand. Bigg maintains that the participle “knowing in advance” is synonymous with “knowing this first of all” (touto prōton ginōskontes; 1:20; 3:3).124 But the meanings are different.125 In the latter case the idea is that something is of primary importance, while in the former the idea is that they knew in advance what is coming. The advance warning for the readers comes both from the Old Testament, the teaching of the apostles (3:2), and what Peter had written in his letter.126 Hence, they had no excuse for falling away—any plea of ignorance would be rejected. All that Peter had written, all that he had warned them of, was so that they would be vigilant. Elsewhere in the New Testament we are told that the Lord will “guard” (phylassō) those who are his, ensuring that they will not fall away irretrievably (2 Thess 3:3; Jude 24). Such promises, however, should never cancel out the injunction to watch ourselves so that we do not apostatize. And this latter thought is precisely what Peter relayed here. He desired his readers to be on guard “so that you may not … fall from your secure position.” The word “fall” (ekpesēte) refers to apostasy (cf. Rom 11:11, 22; 14:4; 1 Cor 10:12; Heb 4:11; Rev 2:5), to departing from the Christian faith. Peter had clarified in the entire letter that those who fall away, like the teachers, are destined for eternal destruction. Believers maintain their secure position, in other words, by heeding warnings, not by ignoring them. Experienced mountain climbers ensure their safety by studying their climb, taking necessary precautions, and knowing their climbing partners. Paying attention to warnings does not quench confidence but is the means to it. So also Peter was not putting a damper on the assurance of his readers. He knew that assurance becomes a reality by heeding warnings. Those who are on their guard will not fall from their secure position, while those who are careless are apt to slip away because they ignored warning signals. We should add here that any who finally do turn aside and fall away reveal that they were never part of the people of God (1 Cor 11:19; 1 John 2:19). But Peter’s purpose in a warning was not to handle that question. The warning is prophylactic and prospective, not a restrospective analysis of those who have departed.

The NIV turns the participle “carried away” into a finite verb, so that it is parallel with the verb “fall.” But the relationship between the two verbs is captured better if we translate the Greek as follows, “Be on your guard, so that you do not fall away by being carried away by the error of lawless men.” The participle “carried away” (synapachthentes) delineates how the readers could possibly apostatize. They might be swept away by the influence of the false teachers. The verb “carried away” is used in Gal 2:13 to describe how Barnabas was swayed by Peter and those from James and ceased eating with Gentiles in Antioch. Peter warned that the “error” (planē) of lawless false teachers could affect his readers (cf. 2:18). It is difficult to discern whether “error” here is active or passive; perhaps it is both. If passive, it would denote their false doctrine. If active, it would refer to the promulgation of that false teaching to others. That the adversaries were “lawless” (athesmos) has been suggested by the parallel to Sodom in 2:7.

17 Again our author addresses his addressees, signaling that a new block of thought is beginning. In this case it is his final block of thought. The expression “dear friends” (“beloved”) we have encountered before (3:1, 14), and have argued that it (one word in Greek) indicates a sense of endearment. Yet the NIV does us a disservice when it starts its translation of our verse with “Therefore, dear friends.” This is because there is an emphatic “you” that starts the sentence in Greek. “You, therefore, dear friends” contrasts with the implied “them” of the “ignorant and unstable people” in the previous verse. Those people distorted the Scriptures and Paul and therefore did not know, but “you” “already know.”1 This fits with the theme of the letter, that Peter is reminding them, not telling them something of which they are totally unaware (1:12–15; 3:1, 8, 15, the last two verses more by way of implication than as verses using a verb of reminder).2 In essence he is saying, “You already know truth that the false teachers do not; you already knew this before I wrote, since I am just reminding you, and you still know it now.” Whether this is a charitable assumption on his part (i.e., his addressees could have forgotten what they were taught or never really have learned it properly, but he is charitably assuming that they do know it) or not, we cannot tell. Our author’s interest, however, is not in when or to what degree they knew this information beforehand, but that they know it now. That is what leads to the main point of the verse.

Our author’s chief interest, then, is that they “be on [their] guard.” This is the main verb of the sentence. While this verb can mean things like “keeping” the law (Mark 10:20 par. Matt 19:20 par. Luke 18:21; cf. Acts 7:53; 21:24; Rom 2:26; Gal 6:13), its meaning here is more closely related to that in such passages as Luke 12:15 (“Watch out! Be on your guard against all kinds of greed; a man’s life does not consist in the abundance of his possessions.”); 1 Tim 6:20 (“guard what has been entrusted to your care”); 2 Tim 4:15 (“You too should be on your guard against him, because he strongly opposed our message”); and 1 John 5:21 (“Dear children, keep yourselves from idols”).3

What are these people to be on their guard about? The answer is, “so that you may not be carried away by the error of lawless men and fall from your secure position.” “Error” for our author is the situation of those who are outside the community of the followers of Jesus (2 Pet 2:18; cf. Jude 11, where it characterizes Balaam, and 2 Pet 2:15, where the verbal form of our word is used for Balaam), and “lawless people” for him were the people of Sodom (2 Pet 2:7); in both passages he is implying that error or lawlessness is also the situation of the false teachers, whose lack of morality he is unmasking in ch. 2. Being “carried away” is what happened to Barnabas in Gal 2:13, where, despite being a colleague of Paul, he lost his bearings and joined Peter and other Jews in separating himself from Gentiles in the celebration of the Lord’s Supper (which was then a full meal).4 The fact is that most people do not set about to err or to give themselves over to lawlessness. However, group pressure, the spirit of the age, plausible arguments, and the like can lead to one’s being carried away by error, perhaps because one is ignorant of or ignoring the fact that the proponents of the error are in fact lawless. Before they notice, they are themselves involved in lawlessness, and then, perhaps, either caught in a web of rationalization or else feeling trapped because they feel too guilty to return.

Peter’s answer to this danger is to “be on your guard so that you may not … fall from your secure position.” We have already met instability in our letter: 3:16 points out that the uninstructed and unstable are those who distort the Scriptures, and 2:14 that unstable persons are vulnerable to the seduction of false teachers. But since the author of 2 Peter is, as we have seen, reminding his readers of what they already know, it is clear that they are in a stable (NIV, “secure”) position.5 This is the position that he has described in 1:3–4. Yet following 2 Pet 1:3–4 and its presentation of a secure and stable position, we have an encouragement to growth in virtue and the reminder that “if you do these things, you will never fall” (2 Pet 1:10, using a different verb, but with a closely related idea). Thus it should not surprise us that the book closes with a warning not to fall from a stable position. While “falling” can be literal in the NT (e.g., Acts 12:7) or literal with a metaphorical meaning (Jas 1:11; 1 Pet 1:24), the sense here is clearly metaphorical and rather close to Paul’s in Gal 5:4 (“You have fallen away from grace”). That is, to fall from one’s secure or stable position is to become apostate, to leave meaningful commitment to Jesus as Lord, as the false teachers have done.6 If one is on one’s guard, one will be aware of the danger and so not fall from the wonderful privileges and freedoms that he or she has received in Christ.

This, then, is the purpose of this book. It is a reminder in case the addressees have forgotten. It is a wake-up call, in case they are letting down their guard. It is a pointing out of the error of lawless men and women so that, seeing the error and its danger, the addressees will recoil from it and remain secure. Now that he has fulfilled his purpose and believes that his addressees are on their guard and will remain secure, our author can close his letter.\

Implications:

Genuine believers hold a secure position in Christ.

But we are called to be on guard to hold that secure position.

The divine perspective is that we our secure, but from our perspective we must be on guard.

A professing Christian who is casual and careless about spiritual threats of evil should see if they are really in the faith at all.

2 Corinthians 13:5 (NKJV) — 5 Examine yourselves as to whether you are in the faith. Test yourselves. Do you not know yourselves, that Jesus Christ is in you?—unless indeed you are disqualified.

Transition:

III. Be sure to continue to grow in grace - 18

18 but grow in the grace and knowledge of our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ. To Him be the glory both now and forever. Amen.

A. The Command: Grow in Grace

2 Peter 1:1–2 (NKJV) — 1 Simon Peter, a bondservant and apostle of Jesus Christ, To those who have obtained like precious faith with us by the righteousness of our God and Savior Jesus Christ: 2 Grace and peace be multiplied to you in the knowledge of God and of Jesus our Lord,

2 Peter 1:5–6 (NKJV) — 5 But also for this very reason, giving all diligence, add to your faith virtue, to virtue knowledge, 6 to knowledge self-control, to self-control perseverance, to perseverance godliness,

Titus 2:11–15 (NKJV) — 11 For the grace of God that brings salvation has appeared to all men, 12 teaching us that, denying ungodliness and worldly lusts, we should live soberly, righteously, and godly in the present age, 13 looking for the blessed hope and glorious appearing of our great God and Savior Jesus Christ, 14 who gave Himself for us, that He might redeem us from every lawless deed and purify for Himself His own special people, zealous for good works. 15 Speak these things, exhort, and rebuke with all authority. Let no one despise you.

B. The Method: in the knowledge of our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ

2 Corinthians 10:15 (NKJV) — 15 not boasting of things beyond measure, that is, in other men’s labors, but having hope, that as your faith is increased, we shall be greatly enlarged by you in our sphere,

Ephesians 4:15 (NKJV) — 15 but, speaking the truth in love, may grow up in all things into Him who is the head—Christ—

1 Peter 2:2 (NKJV) — 2 as newborn babes, desire the pure milk of the word, that you may grow thereby,

C. The Goal: To him be glory

2 Timothy 4:18 (NKJV) — 18 And the Lord will deliver me from every evil work and preserve me for His heavenly kingdom. To Him be glory forever and ever. Amen!

3:18 Peter now turned from the negative to the positive. It is insufficient to be prepared to ward off the false teaching of the opponents. Believers will only persevere to the end and receive their eternal reward if they “grow in the grace and knowledge of our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ.” The nouns “grace” and “knowledge” could be construed as parallel, so that they are both connected to Jesus Christ. Christ could be understood to be the source of both grace and knowledge.127 Or Jesus Christ could be the source of grace in the first instance and the object of knowledge in the second. The third option is the most likely, that grace is not connected to Jesus Christ in the sentence.128 The first admonition is simply to “grow in grace.” At the inception of the book the grace of God in Jesus Christ was primary. His grace was expressed in his saving righteousness that gave faith to believers (1:1), and Peter prayed that grace would be multiplied in the lives of believers (1:2). Furthermore, his grace has granted believers everything they need to live a godly life (1:3–4), so that they will experience in full God’s saving promises. Grace is the foundation of the lives of believers and is entirely God’s gift, and yet believers are exhorted to grow in it, to be nurtured in it, and to be strengthened by it. Grace is not a static reality. Believers are to grow in it until the day they die. Otherwise they might be carried away by the lawlessness of the false teachers. Second, believers are to grow in the knowledge of Jesus Christ. Jesus Christ is clearly an objective genitive here; he is the one whom believers know. Again a theme that has been prominent in the entire letter is echoed at the end. In 1:2 grace and peace will be amplified in knowing Jesus Christ as God and Savior. Everything needed for life and godliness is available through knowing God (1:3). Growing in knowledge is necessary for living the Christian life (1:5–6). Only those who progress in godly virtues reveal that their knowledge of Jesus Christ is fruitful (1:8). Conversely, those who renounce Christ after coming to know him are worse off than those who never professed faith in Christ (2:20–21). Growing in the knowledge of Jesus Christ, then, is not optional. It is essential for eternal life, and Peter fittingly placed this theme at the conclusion of the letter.

Doxologies that are clearly directed to Jesus Christ seldom occur in the New Testament, though 2 Tim 4:18 and Rev 1:5–6 are doxologies to Christ. A doxology to Christ constitutes another way that the letter is framed, for we already saw in 1:2 that Peter identified Jesus Christ as God and Savior. Doxologies, of course, are only directed to God himself, and so the deity of Jesus Christ is communicated in the doxology.129 Glory should be attributed to Christ because the salvation and perseverance of believers is ultimately his work, and the one who does the work deserves the glory. We are reminded of the transfiguration, where glory and honor are given Jesus Christ (1:17). Peter did not call on believers to exercise incredible self-effort and be saved. God grants grace so that believers can grow in the knowledge of himself. The glory belongs to Jesus Christ both in the present age and “forever.” The Greek literally says “to the day of eternity” (NRSV, eis hēmeran aiōnos). The expression is unusual (cf. Sir 18:10), but it designates the age to come. The false teachers denied the accession of such an age, but Peter reminded his readers again that it will surely come, and that age will be characterized by glory to Jesus Christ forever and ever. It is difficult to know whether “Amen” is original. The external evidence clearly supports its inclusion, but on the other hand some manuscripts (such as Vaticanus) do omit it. Scribes would tend to insert “amen” after a doxology, but they would not be disposed to omit “amen” if it were originally present in the text.130 I incline, therefore, to the view that “Amen” is secondary and a later insertion.

The Letters of 2 Peter and Jude IV. Letter Closing (3:17–18)

18 The final letter closing is a general exhortation that serves as a benediction, to which is attached a doxology. We need to examine this more closely.

First, notice how similar this is to other NT letters, as seen in the chart on page 313.7 While the other letters frequently include greetings and/or final instructions or information (Neyrey calls these postscripts),8 which we have removed in the examples below, they often, like our letter, include a final general exhortation (1 Corinthians, 2 Corinthians, Galatians, 1 Timothy) and a blessing that includes grace (in fact, all except Romans, Hebrews, and 1 Peter mention grace). Furthermore, it is not unusual for letter closings to include a doxology, either before or after their greetings/postscript and their wishing grace on the addressees. We will highlight these doxologies in boldface in the table on page 314. As a final comparison, let us look compare 2 Peter with Jude in terms of their closing, underlining common elements:

Jude 24–25

2 Peter 3:17–18

To him who is able to keep you from falling and to present you before his glorious presence without fault and with great joy—to the only God our Savior be glory, majesty, power and authority, through Jesus Christ our Lord, before all ages, now and forevermore! Amen.

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

1 Corinthians 16:22–24

2 Corinthians 13:11, 14

Galatians 6:16–18

Ephesians 6:23–24

1 Thessalonians 5:23–24, 28

If anyone does not love the Lord—a curse be on him. Come, O Lord! The grace of the Lord Jesus be with you. My love to all of you in Christ Jesus. Amen.

Finally, brothers, good-by. Aim for perfection, listen to my appeal, be of one mind, live in peace. And the God of love and peace will be with you.

Peace and mercy to all who follow this rule, even to the Israel of God. Finally, let no one cause me trouble, for I bear on my body the marks of Jesus.

Peace to the brothers, and love with faith from God the Father and the Lord Jesus Christ.

May God himself, the God of peace, sanctify you through and through. May your whole spirit, soul and body be kept blameless at the coming of our Lord Jesus Christ.

May the grace of the Lord Jesus Christ, and the love of God, and the fellowship of the Holy Spirit be with you all.

The grace of our Lord Jesus Christ be with your spirit, brothers. Amen.

Grace to all who love our Lord Jesus Christ with an undying love.

The one who calls you is faithful and he will do it.

The grace of our Lord Jesus Christ be with you.

2 Thessalonians 3:16, 18

1 Timothy 6:20–21

Titus 3:15b

Philemon 25

Revelation 22:20–21

Now may the Lord of peace himself give you peace at all times and in every way. The Lord be with all of you.

The grace of our Lord Jesus Christ be with you all.

Timothy, guard what has been entrusted to your care. Turn away from godless chatter and the opposing ideas of what is falsely called knowledge, which some have professed and in so doing have wandered from the faith.

Grace be with you.

Grace be with you all.

The grace of the Lord Jesus Christ be with your spirit.

He who testifies to these things says, “Yes, I am coming soon.” Amen. Come, Lord Jesus.

The grace of the Lord Jesus be with God’s people. Amen.

Romans 16:25–27

Philippians 4:20, 23

2 Timothy 4:18, 22

Hebrews 13:20–21, 25

1 Peter 5:10–11, 14

Now to him who is able to establish you by my gospel and the proclamation of Jesus Christ, according to the revelation of the mystery hidden for long ages past, but now revealed and made known through the prophetic writings by the command of the eternal God, so that all nations might believe and obey him—to the only wise God be glory forever through Jesus Christ! Amen.

To our God and Father be glory for ever and ever. Amen.

The grace of the Lord Jesus Christ be with your spirit. Amen.

The Lord will rescue me from every evil attack and will bring me safely to his heavenly kingdom.

To him be glory forever and ever. Amen. The Lord be with your spirit.

Grace be with you.

May the God of peace, who through the blood of the eternal covenant brought back from the dead our Lord Jesus, that great Shepherd of the sheep, equip you with everything good for doing his will, and may he work in us what is pleasing to him, through Jesus Christ,

to whom be glory forever and ever. Amen.

Grace be with you all.

And the God of all grace, who called you to his eternal glory in Christ, after you have suffered a little while, will himself restore you and make you strong, firm and steadfast.

To him be the power forever and ever. Amen.

Greet one another with a kiss of love. Peace to all of you who are in Christ.

Both refer to falling, although Jude calls on God to keep his readers from falling, while 2 Peter exhorts his addressees to guard themselves from falling. Jude clearly implies a secure or stable position, while our author states that his addressees have one. Both include a doxology using similar titles and names, although Jude attributes the Savior title to God and separates Jesus from God. Both call for glory to be given to God or Jesus, ending with a “now and forever” formula (slightly different in the two cases). Many of these elements are quite common in the NT, as we have seen in the other letter endings. But given that we know that 2 Peter has used Jude, we should not rule out 2 Peter’s being inspired by Jude’s closing in writing his own.

Looking at our final verse in more detail, we first notice that it forms something of an inclusion (inclusio) with 2 Pet 1:2 (“Grace and peace be yours in abundance through the knowledge of God and of Jesus our Lord”). That is, we have the same elements of grace and knowledge and Jesus (along with his title, “our Lord”), even if, as we shall see, some of the terms are slightly different in form. That the full title “our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ” is not found in 2 Pet 1:2 is not surprising, for it is found in 1:11 and, as “our God and Savior Jesus Christ,” in 1:1. Furthermore, 1:5–11 is about growing in the grace and knowledge that one already has. Thus we see that 2 Pet 3:18 makes specific reference back to 1:2, but a general reference back to 1:1–11. Our author is clearly signaling that he is closing his work by putting a closing “bracket” to match his opening “bracket.”

The specific wish (since there is a general tendency for letter closings to contain benedictions or health wishes, we are taking this to be as much a wish or benediction as a command) is that they continue to grow “in the grace and knowledge of our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ,” which is similar to the wishes of 2 Cor 10:15; Eph 4:15; 1 Pet 2:2. Our author is wise and realizes that if they attempt to stand still, they will have a far greater tendency to fall than if they are moving forward. Commitment to Jesus works best as a centered set, which means that we define the members of the set in relationship to the center (in this case, Jesus Christ) and their direction in relationship to the center (in this case toward) rather than as a bounded set, which would mean that we define the members of the set in relationship to the boundary. Often Christians have used the latter definition, focusing on such issues as whether the person is outside the boundary and thus in heresy or apostasy or whether the person has crossed the boundary and so is saved (after which we have often breathed a sigh of relief and relaxed in a way that would seem rather strange to 2 Peter). Our author’s wisdom says that safety is found in moving toward Jesus Christ. Direction is critical; speed is almost immaterial. If one is moving in the right direction, one is far more secure than if one is simply trying to “hold your ground.”

But what is it that our author wants his addressees to grow in? That is a disputed point because the grammar of the phrase is not clear. Is it “in grace and in the knowledge of our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ” (only “knowledge” being “of our Lord”) or “in the grace and knowledge of our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ”? Among the English translations, the NIV, NKJV, NLV, NRSV, RSV, ASV, ESV, TEV, NET Bible, and NASV all use the latter translation, while only the KJV and NAB use the former translation. Commentators are equally divided because there is no definite article (“the”) in the Greek text, so without the article to indicate the grouping, one has to decide whether the “in” is functioning as a grouping agent, as it sometimes does, or not. The problem here is that normally “grace” is understood as “the grace Jesus gives” (Greek subjective genitive) and in our letter “knowledge” has been understood as a coming to know or a growing in the knowledge of Jesus (Greek objective genitive). Thus if grace and knowledge are viewed as a single unit, we seem to have Jesus functioning in two ways in a single phrase, as the subject (giver) of grace and the object of knowledge. Thus some commentators follow the translation of the KJV and NAB: we are talking about two different things, grace and the knowledge of our Lord Jesus Christ.9 Others argue that despite the awkwardness, we are talking about two things grouped with Jesus, the grace he gives and our knowledge of him.10 Still others avoid a decision.11

Vögtle, however, grasps the nettle a different way in that he argues that both grace and knowledge are gifts of Jesus (i.e., we have two subjective genitives).12 That grace is the favor granted by God or Jesus, much as a potentate grants his favor to those whom he wills, is not disputed. At issue is the meaning of knowledge. It is true that here we do not have the Greek term that indicates the knowledge that is a coming to know Jesus (2 Pet 1:2; 2:20).13 The term that we do have, however, can be used for knowing Jesus (2 Cor 2:14; 4:6; Phil 3:8; cf. Col 2:3) or salvation (Luke 1:77), but often it is used in the more general way of religious or other knowledge in general, and especially as a virtue that one can grow in (as in 2 Pet 1:5) or a gift from God (2 Cor 12:8; 13:2). More specifically, knowing Jesus can be just such a divine gift (2 Cor 4:6; cf. 2 Cor 2:14).

It seems to us, therefore, that what we have here are two gifts of Jesus: we continue growing (the present tense of the imperative indicates something that is ongoing, not something new) in the grace/favor that Jesus gives and in the knowledge that he gives, a knowledge that is surely a knowledge of him (since without growing in knowledge of God and of Jesus it is difficult to conceive of any growth in the Christian sphere that could be called true knowledge), but at the same time more than just knowledge of him, including knowledge of the Scriptures, knowledge that allows us to discern the falsehood of the false teachers and to recognize their seduction, knowledge that keeps us stable in every way. This is what our author wishes for his addressees and would surely wish for us, if he had known of us.

Having mentioned “our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ” for the final time (see the comments on 2 Pet 1:1, 2, and 11 for discussion of this phrase), our author adds a doxology, which, as we saw in the tables above, is not uncommon at the end of letters from the early Jesus movement. What is a bit unusual is that this one is to Jesus and not to God. However, while it is unusual, it is not unprecedented, for of the six doxologies we found in letter closings above (the number “six” includes Jude 24–25), four are to God the Father, and two are to Jesus (2 Tim 4:18; Heb 13:21). Furthermore, to this we should add the doxology at the beginning of the apocalyptic letter Rev 1:5–6 (i.e. Revelation is an apocalypse with a letter structure surrounding it). All of these are later works in terms of the NT collection, although it is disputed how late each of them was written.14 What is clear is that in a work that begins by speaking of “our great God and Savior Jesus Christ” it is not surprising that we have a doxology to him (i.e., a form of worship) at the end.

This doxology ascribes to him “glory” (Greek doxa and therefore the term “doxology”), that is, ultimate honor, on an eternal basis. The “now” is what his followers are doing in the present, but the phrase “forever” is unusual in that usually the Greek expression “unto the ages” is used for “forever” but here in 2 Peter is “unto the day of the ages.” Given that the Parousia has been a major topic of this letter, it is likely that Bauckham is correct to see this as meaning “the eschatological age as a day which will dawn at the Parousia.”15 That such a “day” can be a long period of time is clear from Sir 18:10 (“Like a drop of water from the sea and a grain of sand, so are a few years among the days of eternity”; NRSV), which is itself dependent on Ps 90:4 (“For a thousand years in your sight are like a day that has just gone by, or like a watch in the night”), understood to indicate the incomprehensibility of God’s perspective of time. The “days of eternity” are, then, without limit. It is this temporal limitlessness that our author wishes with respect to the honor of our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ. May he be honored now, as he is among us who are his followers and, unseen by human beings, in the halls of heaven where he and his Father wait patiently, enduring the evil of humanity, and may he be honored openly and fully on the day of his Parousia, a day that stretches limitlessly onward. Thus may he be honored eternally.

Concluding Applications:

Be very careful not to distort the Scriptures— it is dangerous to do so.

Be on guard against spiritual threats that draw you away from a secure place in Christ.

We must consistently grow in grace through the knowledge of Jesus Christ.