For coming see comments on 1.16. The second coming of Jesus Christ as judge is a very important part of apostolic teaching and is echoed in some words of Jesus recorded in the Gospels (for instance, Matt 24.3; Mark 9.1). The delay of this event created tremendous problems for the early church, as can be seen in some of Paul’s letters, such as his letters to the Thessalonians. This same problem is a major concern of the readers of 2 Peter. Apparently some people (most probably the false teachers mentioned in chapter 2) have been raising questions about this doctrine, or even denying its truth, and making fun of those who still hold on to it. So these people ask Where is the promise of his coming? In the Old Testament, doubts or denials are frequently expressed in the form of a rhetorical question with the same structure as above, as in Mal 2.17, “Where is the God who is supposed to be just?” (Good News Translation) or Jer 17.15, “Where are those threats the Lord made against us? Let him carry them out now!” (Good News Translation; see also Psa 42.3; Jer 17.15; Luke 8.25). So this rhetorical question form is very appropriate to express the cynical attitude of those who reject the Parousia because of its delay. Promise here refers to statements regarding the Parousia; these may be Old Testament prophecies, or teachings of the apostles, or even the very words of Jesus himself in which he spoke of his imminent return. Where is the promise seems to ask for the location of the promise, but in fact this is an idiomatic expression that means “Where is the fulfillment of the promise?” The aim of the question is not to find out where these promises are, but to express doubt and skepticism regarding them. Good News Translation offers a model for restructuring:
• “He promised to come, didn’t he? Where is he?”

Another way is to put this in the passive:
• “Hasn’t it been promised that he would come? What happened to that promise?”

(See also Knox: “What has become of the promise that he would appear?”) Another possibility is to change the rhetorical question into statements such as
• “His promise to come is not true! He is not coming at all!”

Or even:
• “He lied when he said, ‘I am coming again.’ Actually he is not coming at all.”

In restructuring rhetorical questions, translators must make sure that the impact of the text is retained in the translation, namely, that this is an emphatic statement.

Some commentators take fathers to refer to important people in the Old Testament, since the word was used with this meaning in the literature of that time. In the present context, however, it makes more sense to take it as referring to the first generation of Christians, that is, the first Christian disciples who were given the promise of the early return of Christ, and in whose lifetime this event was expected to happen. “Died” is literally fell asleep, a euphemism or indirect way of referring to dying. Ever since marks the beginning of the period that concerns the doubters: the period from the death of the first-generation Christians to the time of the writing of the letter. The sense of the Greek is captured in Good News Translation: “Our fathers have already died, but….” (See also New English Bible “Our fathers have been laid to their rest, but still….”)

All things have continued as they were: the Lord’s return has been proclaimed as coming with upheavals of various kinds in the world. The mockers contend that all things are exactly the same, and in fact things have been this way ever since the beginning of creation. The regularity of the world and the stability of existence are used as arguments against the Parousia. Creation refers to “the creation of the world” (Good News Translation, also New English Bible “since the world began”), with God as the agent, hence we can also say “from the time God created the world.” The statement all things have continued as they were from the beginning of creation is of course an exaggeration, but this should be clearly marked in the translation. One way of doing it is shown in Good News Translation, where an exclamation point is used at the end of the statement. Similar rhetorical devices may be employed as far as they are appropriate in the receptor language.

Quoted with permission from Arichea, Daniel C. and Nida, Eugene A. A Handbook on The Second Letter from Peter. (UBS Handbook Series). New York: UBS, 1980. For this and other handbooks for translators see here .

This verse has some similarities with Jude 9. However, Peter omits any reference to the story of Michael and the body of Moses, and instead comes up with a general statement. Could it be that he could assume a knowledge of Jude among his readers? A more probable reason is that this is in keeping with his tendency to reduce if not eliminate altogether quotations from and allusions to literature outside the Old Testament. (See, for example, comments on his treatment of Jude 6 in 2.4, and on Jude 7 in 2.6).

The verse starts with whereas, which marks the contrast of what follows to the previous statement. In some languages it will be quite natural to express this contrast as follows: “Consider the angels (or, God’s messengers)! They are so….”

The angels are described as greater in might and power. Might and power are words of similar meaning. Their being mentioned together may be either a hendiadys (two expressions for a single idea), with might describing power, hence “mighty power,” or a way of marking intensification, hence “having so much more power.” A third possibility may be mentioned, and that is to interpret might as emphasizing outward physical strength, and power as emphasizing inward, spiritual virtue. It should be noted, however, that power can also be used to describe physical strength, and it is clearly understood as spiritual strength when properly marked as such by the context. Therefore the phrase angels, though greater in might and power may also be rendered as “angels, though they are much more powerful physically and spiritually (in their hearts)” or “angels, who are so much more powerful….”

The Greek text does not make clear who the angels are being compared with. Are they being compared with the false teachers or with the “glorious ones” in verse 10? Either alternative seems to be acceptable, depending on how them (in do not pronounce … upon them) is interpreted. The verse then can be saying one of the following:

1. The false teachers insult the glorious ones, but in contrast the angels, who are much more powerful than the false teachers, do not even do this (that is, insult the glorious ones). Here them refers to the false teachers, and the ones that the angels do not insult are the glorious ones.

2. The false teachers insult the glorious ones, but in contrast the angels, who are even more powerful than the glorious ones, do not even do this (that is, insult the glorious ones.) Here them is interpreted as referring to the glorious ones rather than to the false teachers.

3. The false teachers insult the glorious ones, but in contrast the angels, who are even more powerful than the false teachers, do not insult the false teachers. Here them refers to the false teachers, who are also the ones the angels do not insult.

4. The false teachers insult the glorious ones, but in contrast the angels, who are more powerful than the glorious ones, do not insult the false teachers.

Good News Translation takes the first of these interpretations, except that it is not very clear who are the ones that the angels do not insult. It seems clear in New International Version that the angels do not insult the glorious ones, but it is not clear with whom the angels are being compared. An American Translation follows the second of these alternatives: “even angels far superior to these beings in strength and power bring no abusive charge before the Lord.” Most other translations leave all these ambiguities alone.

It is best to resolve the above ambiguities in translation. For the purposes of this Handbook, the first two alternatives seem preferable, and of these two the second is slightly favored.

Reviling judgment is similar to the expression found in Jude 9, and we may refer to the discussion there. As the New Revised Standard Version footnote indicates, there is a textual problem connected with before the Lord: “Other ancient authorities read before the Lord; others lack the phrase.” Some very important manuscripts have the reading “from the Lord,” whereas some other manuscripts omit the phrase altogether. The difference in Greek between “from the Lord” and “before the Lord” is a matter of a suffix only: para kuriou (genitive case) as against para kuriō (dative). Most modern translations follow the reading “before the Lord,” which means “in the presence of the Lord” (Good News Translation), who functions as judge. “Lord” here most probably refers to God. The picture is that of a heavenly court, where the “glorious ones” are on trial, and the angels are witnesses, but they refrain from harsh and insulting words in their testimony. The phrase before the Lord may also be expressed as “when they were before the Lord (God),” “when they were in the presence of God,” or in certain languages it will be necessary to say “when they were standing before God.” If “from the Lord” is the accepted reading, then the Lord will not be judge but accuser, and the angels are the Lord’s messengers, who, however, do not use slanderous words in presenting the Lord’s accusations before the court, because of their respect for these celestial beings. The omission of the words before the Lord in some manuscripts can be explained as an influence of the text of Jude 9.

An alternative translation model for this verse is:
• Consider the angels (or, God’s messengers)! They are much more powerful than the false teachers. But they do not use insulting language when they accuse these teachers in the presence of God.

Quoted with permission from Arichea, Daniel C. and Nida, Eugene A. A Handbook on The Second Letter from Peter. (UBS Handbook Series). New York: UBS, 1980. For this and other handbooks for translators see here .

Peter continues to describe the false teachers, contrasting their attitude with those of the angels in verse 11. This verse is very much influenced by Jude 10 but rearranged and restructured to fit Peter’s style and purpose.

These, of course, refers to the false teachers and may be translated thus. These false teachers are compared with animals. This fact alone, together with the descriptions that follow, shows how Peter is angry and furious with the false teachers. This emotional aspect needs to be clearly shown in translation. The false teachers are first of all compared to animals that are irrational, or without any reasoning power. For a further discussion of this, see Jude 10.

Secondly, these animals are creatures of instinct, which is similar to the expression “they know by instinct” in Jude 10. The phrase creatures of instinct is sometimes related to what follows, namely born to be caught and killed (as, for example, New English Bible “These men are like brute beasts, born in the course of nature to be caught and killed”; Barclay “They are no better than brute beasts, born by nature to be caught and killed”). While this is possible, it is more likely that creatures of instinct is related to irrational (as in Good News Translation “wild animals”), since instinct by definition is action without the use of reason. On how this is related to the false teachers, see discussion on Jude 10.

Thirdly, these animals are born to be caught and killed (literally, “born to be caught and destroyed in the same destruction”). This accents the uselessness of these animals, especially the wild, irrational ones. The thought that is expressed here is that, since these animals are not beneficial but rather harmful to society, then it is better for them to be captured and killed. The word for caught is the word used in reference to capturing or catching animals for food. The word for killed can also mean “destroyed,” “ruined,” but here primarily “slaughtered.” Understood in this manner, what is being emphasized is not the wanton irresponsible destruction of these wild animals but capturing them for consumption. There is a play on words here, since the same word for killed is also used twice at the end of the verse (literally, destroyed in the same destruction). In some languages translators must translate this clause in the active; for example, “born for people to catch and slaughter.”

It should be noted that Good News Translation takes creatures of instinct not as a description of the animals but of the false teachers themselves: “these men act by instinct.”

Peter now abandons figurative language and directly describes the false teachers, describing them as people reviling in matters of which they are ignorant. This is similar to “revile whatever they do not understand” in Jude 10, for which see the discussion there. Here of which they are ignorant states positively what is stated negatively in Jude 10, “whatever they do not understand.”

The last part of the verse can mean that the false teachers will be destroyed at the same time as the animals, which is what Revised Standard Version seems to say. However, it is more likely that the destruction of the false teachers will be similar to the destruction of the animals. This may refer to the way the destruction is brought about, that is, violently and unexpectedly. Or it may refer to the actual destruction itself, that is, in much the same way in which animals are killed when they are captured, so also these false teachers will be punished when they receive their final judgment on the last day.

An alternative translation model for this verse is:
• But these false teachers act by instinct (irrationally) like animals of the jungle, which are born for people to capture and slaughter; they say bad things about matters they do not understand. God will destroy them just as people slaughter animals of the jungle.

One final note: All this discussion about the uselessness of wild and irrational animals may be disturbing to many people today who see such animals not as a nuisance, but as important parts of nature that need to be protected. While it is obvious that translators cannot change the text, they can at least make justifiable adjustments in order to de-emphasize the negative message of the text, especially with regard to animals. Several ways of doing this have already been suggested in the analysis of the text. One other way needs to be mentioned, and that is to get rid of the figurative language altogether and translate the meaning directly. It should be noted, however, that every time this is done, there is a corresponding loss of emotive aspects which then need to be compensated through the addition of appropriate rhetorical features (for example, exaggeration, use of exclamation marks, and so forth).

Quoted with permission from Arichea, Daniel C. and Nida, Eugene A. A Handbook on The Second Letter from Peter. (UBS Handbook Series). New York: UBS, 1980. For this and other handbooks for translators see here .

The first part of this verse is still a part of the sentence that began in verse 12, and explains why the suffering of these false teachers is justified: they suffer as a result of their wrongdoings. In the last part their evil acts have an adverse effect not only on themselves but also and primarily on others.

There is a play on words here on suffering wrong and wrongdoing (Greek adikoumenoi and adikias; the whole expression translated literally is “being treated wrongly as a reward for doing wrong”). Some translations have tried to retain this play on words; for example, Barclay “Injury they inflicted, and injury they will receive in return,” and New English Bible “suffering hurt for the hurt they have inflicted.” Another way to restructure this clause is as follows: “As they have hurt other people, so they also will suffer hurt.” It may not be possible, of course, to retain or even to compensate for these wordplays in another language. But it is still good to be aware of this rhetorical feature in order to do justice to it whenever possible.

In verses 13b-15 Peter further describes the wickedness of the false teachers. Of special interest to translators is the fact that this subsection consists of only one sentence, a form that is difficult and sometimes impossible to retain in translation. Furthermore it consists of a series of participial clauses, with the only finite verb occurring in verse 15 (“have gone astray”). Normally participial clauses are dependent on a finite verb, but here every participial clause seems to stand alone and is complete in itself. This helps in splitting the long sentence into shorter sentences, since every participial clause can be translated easily as one complete sentence.

It is also possible to start a new paragraph here, since there is a natural break at the end of verse 13a. However, if these verses are understood as describing “wrongdoing” in 13a, then a new paragraph is not necessary.

The word for count is literally “consider,” “regard,” “think.” Many translations omit this by restructuring the verse, as in Good News Translation “Pleasure for them is…,” and in New English Bible “To carouse … is their idea of pleasure.” We can also say “They get their pleasure from” or “They gain pleasure from.” Pleasure can also be “enjoyment,” but the term is used only in a negative sense in the New Testament. To revel translates a Greek noun that primarily means “luxury,” but in the present context it means excessive self-indulgence in eating and perhaps in sexual activity. The purpose of such activity is of course their own self-satisfaction. In certain languages “reveling” can be expressed with words for particular activities, sometimes idiomatically; for example, “partying-licentiously-uproariously” (Thai). In the daytime is literally “in the day,” but this is contrasted with night, hence Good News Translation “in broad daylight.” We may also say “while the sun is shining.” If excessive partying is done at all, it is usually during the night. This does not mean that self-indulgence at night time is acceptable, but that the dark of night helps people keep shameful deeds from the view of others. In this case the very fact that these people can engage in this activity in broad daylight shows how wicked and immoral they really are.

These people are further described as blots and blemishes. Blots translates a word that is very similar to a word used by Jude (verse 12), one which can mean “reefs” or “half-submerged rocks.” (In Greek, spilas is “blot,” while spilos is “reef.”) A blot or a spot dirties and spoils a clean garment. Blemishes, on the other hand, translates a word that means “defects,” understood physically or morally, hence “disgrace” (Good News Translation), “causing shame.” Blots and blemishes may also be rendered as “they are like dirty spots and blemishes (or, physical defects) and cause you shame and disgrace” or “they are like … causing you to lose face greatly.” It is interesting to note that later Peter admonishes the Christians to be “without spot or blemish,” using the negative forms of the above words (3.14). So the idea here may be that these false teachers, by being “spots and blemishes” within the church, are preventing the church from being what it should be.

As the Revised Standard Version footnote shows, there is a textual problem here: some manuscripts have “love feasts” (which appears in Jude 12) rather than dissipation. The two words look very similar in Greek (agapai for “love feasts” and apatai for dissipation.) Since “love feasts” is used in Jude, and since scholarly consensus holds that 2 Peter used Jude as a primary source, it can be concluded that the original text of 2 Peter probably had dissipation deliberately rather than “love feasts.” A further question is why Peter changed Jude here, and what dissipation in fact means. Dissipation translates a word that can mean “pleasure” but in this context should most probably be taken with the more usual meaning “deceit” or “deception.” Some scholars suggest that Peter was still referring to “love feasts” here but made a deliberate change of the Greek word to stress the fact that the love feasts have become “deceptions” because of the behavior of the false teachers. It is more likely, however, that Peter is actually referring to the behavior of these false teachers and their attitude during the common meals of the Christian community. In this case there are two possible ways of interpreting Peter’s intention. First, the false teachers took advantage of their erroneous ideas to justify their actions during the common meals, thus using these meals as occasions for self-indulgence and not for real fellowship. Secondly, while they join the Christian community in their common meals, they nevertheless continue in their erroneous ways, thus deceiving the church. This seems to be the position reflected in Good News Translation and some other translations (for instance, New English Bible “while they sit with you at table they are an ugly blot on your company, because they revel in their own deceptions”).

Carousing translates a Greek word that simply means “eat with someone,” without any negative sense (Good News Translation “as they join you in your meals”). This seems to provide the context of all of verse 13b. This means that it is when Christians get together for a common meal that the false teachers indulge in their debauchery and deceptions. Whether these meals are religious meals or simply social meals is not made clear in the text, although the parallel passage in Jude 12 makes it clear that what is meant are the “love feasts,” that is, common meals that included the celebration of the Lord’s Supper or holy communion. It is not necessary, however, to bring this into the present passage, since the meaning is the same, whether the meals are religious or social in nature.

An alternative translation model for the second part of this verse is:
• Because they enjoy their deceitful ways, they get their pleasure from eating and drinking in an immoral fashion in broad daylight (or, while the sun is shining); they are like spots and blemishes that cause you to lose face greatly every time they eat food with you.

Quoted with permission from Arichea, Daniel C. and Nida, Eugene A. A Handbook on The Second Letter from Peter. (UBS Handbook Series). New York: UBS, 1980. For this and other handbooks for translators see here .

The letter now moves from the common meals to the day-to-day behavior of the false teachers.

They have eyes full of adultery is literally “having eyes full of an adulteress,” with “adulteress” understood in a general way as referring either to the act of adultery or to adulterous women (Good News Translation “immoral women”). The inclusion of the word full indicates that they are entirely engrossed and preoccupied with what they are doing. The whole expression can then be understood in two ways:

1. Every time they look at a woman, they think of committing adultery with her, or negatively, they cannot look at a woman without thinking of themselves as being in bed with her.

2. They are always engrossed in looking for immoral women so that they can have illicit sexual relations with them.

While the first of these alternatives makes more sense, the second takes seriously the fact that the text says “adulteress,” not “adultery”; in other words it focuses on desire for the person rather than on desire for the act. Languages have varying ways to translate “immoral women.” Examples are “easy women” or “women with easy hearts.”

Insatiable means “unceasing,” “restless,” “unsatisfied.” In the Greek text insatiable for sin is connected with the previous statement and directly related to eyes, which means that not only are their eyes always looking for women with whom they can commit adultery, but they are also looking for other opportunities to commit sin. Eyes is used figuratively here to refer to the whole person, and the translator may need to express the meaning in plain terms, especially if this figurative usage of “eyes” is not natural in the language of the translation; for example, “they are never happy unless they are sinning,” or “they never stop wanting to do sinful things.”

Not only are they preoccupied with adultery and other sexual perversions, but the false teachers also entice unsteady souls. Entice comes from the world of fishing and hunting; it means “to lure with a bait,” hence Good News Translation “lead … into a trap.” In certain languages this idea is rendered idiomatically; for example, “lure the hearts of” or “seduce the hearts of.” Souls here means people, and these people are described as unsteady. This translates a word that occurs only here and in 3.16 in the whole Bible; it means “weak” (Good News Translation), “unstable,” “wavering” (Knox). The “unstable” people are those whose foundation in the Christian faith is rather weak, and who therefore can be led astray very easily, not only in their understanding of the Christian message, but also in their actions. Some identify these people as new converts in the Christian faith. Other ways of expressing this are “weak-hearted people,” “people who have little faith,” or “people who are not sure of what they believe.” The sentence may be rendered “They entice people who are not sure of what they believe to commit sin.”

In contrast to the unsteadiness of their victims, the false teachers have hearts trained, but their training is in greed. The heart is the center of emotion, will, and affection; it can be used figuratively to mean the whole person. Trained translates a participle of a verb that comes from athletics; it means “to exercise” and is used of an athlete exercising in the gymnasium and preparing to participate in athletic contests. Here it is the opposite of “unsteady,” which was used to describe the victims of the false teachers. Unfortunately, however, they are well trained not for good but for ill. The term greed is related to the earlier term insatiable; it means “avarice,” “covetousness,” and is an apt description of a person who is never satisfied and always desires to have more. Trained is a perfect participle, which means that greediness has already become a habit for these false teachers; they have become experts in taking advantage of others in order to acquire for themselves the things for which they crave. Other ways of expressing this clause are “They train their hearts or minds to be greedy,” “They train their hearts or minds to continually want what other people have,” or “They are experts in acquiring whatever they want.”

Having described the false teachers in this very disapproving manner, it is no surprise that Peter now pronounces a curse on them. The expression Accursed children is literally “children of a curse,” which is an idiom based on a Hebrew way of speaking. To be a child of something is to be included in something and share in its characteristics, as for example “children of iniquity” (Hos 10.9, KJV), which Revised Standard Version translates as “wayward people” (positioning it in verse 10 of that chapter). Therefore to be “children of a curse” means that these people share the characteristics of being accursed. A literal translation may give the wrong meaning, for it may give the idea that these people are real children when in fact they are adults.

A curse is something that one person can pronounce on another but in fact cannot bring it to pass, for a curse is always addressed to a higher power, calling on that higher power to do something bad to the person upon whom the curse is pronounced. So here the higher power invoked is most probably God (as in Good News Translation “They are under God’s curse!”), and the statement means that God is sure to punish them because of all the bad things that they have done. The expression here means the same thing as “Woe to them” in Jude 11.

An alternative translation model for this verse is:
• They are continually looking for easy women; they never stop wanting to do evil things. They seduce to commit sin the hearts of people who believe in Jesus weakly. They themselves are experts in acquiring whatever their hearts desire. Because of all the evil things they do, God will punish them.

Quoted with permission from Arichea, Daniel C. and Nida, Eugene A. A Handbook on The Second Letter from Peter. (UBS Handbook Series). New York: UBS, 1980. For this and other handbooks for translators see here .

This verse has a great deal of similarity with Jude 11.

Forsaking the right way they have gone astray is related to “Balaam’s error” in Jude 11. Right is used here in the sense of “correct,” “right,” “true.” Way is literally a road, but it is also used metaphorically to mean “a course of conduct,” “a way of doing things.” In the Bible “straight path” (Good News Translation) is used to describe proper and upright conduct (see 1 Sam 12.23; Hos 14.9; Acts 13.10). Some have taken the right way here as equivalent in meaning to “the way of truth” in 2 Peter 2.2 (for which see discussion there). Other ways of expressing the right way are “behave in a just or righteous way,” “have good conduct,” or “walk good lives.”

Forsaking can also be “They have abandoned” (New English Bible). It is a present participle in the Greek, but most modern translations understand it to function as a perfect tense, “having forsaken.” It may be simply translated as a perfect verb, which is what Revised Standard Version and Good News Translation (and most translations) have done. Forsaking the right way may also be expressed as “They have left the way of righteousness,” “They have stopped doing good,” “Their conduct has become evil,” or “They no longer walk good lives.”

The result of all this is that the false teachers have gone astray, a most logical conclusion. This expression is used figuratively here to mean they have been corrupted both spiritually and morally; they have accepted and followed doctrines and disciplines of life that led them to reject God rather than trust in him. In some languages this may be translated as “their hearts have become corrupt (or, evil),” or “they do evil things.”

So, instead of following the right way, they follow the way of Balaam, the son of Beor. Balaam is also mentioned in Jude 11. In the Old Testament Balaam’s father is named “Beor” (see Num 22.5; 24.3, 15), which explains why “Beor” is the form in many of the Greek manuscripts. It is very likely, however, that the variant form “Bosor” is the original in the Greek. In any case, rendering “Bosor” as “Beor” is justified here on the principle of using only the more common name when someone or something is known by two or more names. The clause they have followed the way of Balaam may be expressed as “They have done exactly what Balaam … did,” “They have imitated Balaam…,” or “They have followed the example of Balaam….”

The way of Balaam is not explained any further; there are three suggested possible points of comparison: greed, leading people to sin, and claiming to be God’s prophet or teacher. Perhaps the first of these, namely “greed,” is the most probable point of comparison, since it is mentioned in verse 14. This also fits what follows, since Balaam is described as one who loved gain from wrongdoing. We are told in the Old Testament that it was love of money that caused Balaam to lead Israel to sin (see Num 22-24; 31.16, and especially Jude 11 for further discussion of Balaam). In certain languages gain will need to be rendered as “the money he would be paid,” or in the active as “the money they would pay him.”

An alternative translation model for this verse is:
• They have stopped doing good and turned to evil ways (or, their hearts have become corrupt). They have followed the example of Balaam, who loved the money people would pay him for doing evil.

Quoted with permission from Arichea, Daniel C. and Nida, Eugene A. A Handbook on The Second Letter from Peter. (UBS Handbook Series). New York: UBS, 1980. For this and other handbooks for translators see here .

Balaam, however, did not get away with his wickedness; in fact, he was rebuked for his own transgression.

Rebuked may also be rendered as “scolded.” Instead of the passive form was rebuked, some languages will employ an expression using the equivalent of the English word “suffer” and say “But he suffered scolding for his sins”; but in other languages it will be necessary to use the active and say “But God scolded him for his sins” or “But God scolded him for the evil he had done.” Transgression translates a word that means “lawlessness,” “evil act” (Good News Translation “sin”), and refers to a particular action, perhaps Balaam’s readiness to accept a bribe, or even his readiness to curse Israel.

The reference to the dumb ass speaking to Balaam is found in Num 22.21-35. The word for ass (Good News Translation “donkey”) is a term that is literally “under the yoke”; that is, it means a beast of burden, or an animal that is used to carry things—a fitting description for a donkey. Dumb here means “unable to speak,” not “unable to think.” This dumb donkey, however, spoke with human voice, that is, it used human language to communicate with Balaam. The account in Numbers mentions an angel who spoke after the donkey spoke, but Peter is apparently not intending to be thorough at this point. It is not the details that he is interested in but the result of such an unusual event: it restrained the prophet’s madness. Balaam is here called a prophet, that is, he was a person who spoke for God and who proclaimed the message that God revealed to him. (For further discussion of prophet see 2.1.) Here prophet stands in sharp contrast to dumb ass. See comments on 2 Peter 2.1 for ways to translate “prophet.” Restrained translates a verb that means “hinder,” “prevent,” “forbid,” “stop.” Madness on the other hand means “insanity” (as in Good News Translation), “senselessness.” Balaam is therefore described as someone who was not in his right mind in agreeing to curse Israel for the sake of material gain. However, his stupidity was stopped by the human voice of a dumb ass. The whole expression is translated by Knox as “to bring a prophet to his senses.” The final clause restrained the prophet’s madness may also be rendered “stopped the prophet from doing an insane thing” or “stopped the prophet from acting irrationally.”

There is humor here as well as irony. In verse 12 the false teachers were compared to “irrational animals.” Here they are compared to a stupid and insane prophet, who is rebuked by a dumb donkey.

An alternative translation model for this verse is:
• But God scolded him for the evil that he had done. His donkey spoke using human language and stopped the prophet from acting irrationally.

Quoted with permission from Arichea, Daniel C. and Nida, Eugene A. A Handbook on The Second Letter from Peter. (UBS Handbook Series). New York: UBS, 1980. For this and other handbooks for translators see here .

Verses 17-22 further describe the foolish teachers and stress their inevitable doom.

These is emphatic and refers to the false teachers, and this information can be included in translation (for example, Good News Translation “These men”). This verse has similarities with Jude 12-13; however, instead of “waterless clouds carried along by winds” (see Jude 12), Peter compares the false teachers to waterless springs and mists driven by a storm. This actually consists of two metaphors from nature, but each with the same message: there is a great difference between expectation and fulfillment. The word for “spring” includes “water” as one component of its meaning and refers to a living fountain. Many languages have words for a “spring,” but in some it will be necessary to describe it and say, for example, “a place where water pours out of the ground or rock.” Waterless indicates the actual state of the spring, which is contrary to what is really expected. So waterless springs may be expressed as “springs have no water” or “places where water should pour forth, but it doesn’t.”

The same is the case with the mists. There are several possible grounds of comparison that may be intended here.

1. Some have suggested that it is the ease with which the mists are blown away by the storm, indicating how easily the false teachers will be destroyed.

2. Another suggestion is that the focus here is the quality of darkness that characterizes the mist, and which therefore indicates obscurity and instability.

3. A further suggestion is that the focus here is on the function of mists: they are supposed to refresh the ground, especially during the dry seasons; but here instead they are driven (away) by a storm and therefore never get a chance to provide moisture. The word for storm indicates a whirlwind or a hurricane (or typhoon), characterized by violent winds.

This third possibility seems preferable, since it connects the second metaphor with the first. Both figures therefore indicate the uselessness and worthlessness of the false teachers, together with their teaching, despite all the promises that they have made. In certain languages mists driven by a storm may be translated as “clouds that suffer storm blow along,” “clouds that the storm or hurricane or typhoon drives along,” or “clouds that violent winds drive away.”

It should be noted that Revised Standard Version retains the metaphor form, that is, These are waterless springs …. It may be advisable and even necessary to change the metaphor into a simile (that is, “These … are like…”) as Good News Translation has done; it is important, however, to make sure that the impact of the passage is not lost if this is done.

Due to the wickedness of the false teachers, their punishment is certain. The nether gloom of darkness is a description of Sheol, the world of the dead. (For a further discussion of this term, see comments on Jude 13.) As in Jude 13, the passive construction here is a divine passive, with God as the unnamed agent, a fact made clear in Good News Translation. “Sheol” of course refers to a place below the earth; this may be relevant in some languages. However, in languages where this information is difficult to include, the element of “deep darkness” may be sufficient to describe the place where the false teachers are destined to go. Therefore for them the nether gloom of darkness has been reserved may also be rendered as “God has prepared a place for them in deepest darkness,” “God has prepared for them a place that is completely covered by thick darkness,” “… a place of darkness where there is no light at all,” or “the world of the dead which is covered by thick darkness.”

Quoted with permission from Arichea, Daniel C. and Nida, Eugene A. A Handbook on The Second Letter from Peter. (UBS Handbook Series). New York: UBS, 1980. For this and other handbooks for translators see here .