Self-control is once again a Greek virtue, one which is possessed by people who are masters of their own selves and who by self-discipline can tame their passions and desires and thus refrain from excessive physical indulgence. While it is rare in the New Testament, it is nevertheless mentioned several times (see, for instance, Gal 5.23; Acts 24.25; 1 Cor 7.9; 9.25; Titus 1.8), indicating that it was a recognized Christian virtue. Its mention here is significant in that it contrasts the disciplined Christian life with the licentiousness and animal-like lifestyle of the false teachers (see, for example, 2.2, 12; 3.3). In some languages this virtue of self-control can be expressed as “knowing how to control (or, restrain) yourself,” or “being able to refuse what your body wants to do,” or “having control of your desires.”

Steadfastness is mentioned many times in the New Testament (Rom 5.3, 4 “endurance”; 1 Tim 6.11; 2 Tim 3.10; Titus 2.2; Rev 2.19; and many other places). In Greek culture it refers primarily to personal courage and endurance in the face of suffering and evil. As a Christian virtue steadfastness stems not so much from a person’s own bravery as it does from the believer’s trust in God and hope for the fulfillment of all of God’s promises. Here it perhaps refers in particular to the patient waiting for the return of the Lord, which is discussed in chapter 3. It will be necessary in many languages to translate steadfastness as “the ability to endure.” However, in certain languages translators will have to render this expression in an idiomatic way; for example, “have a heart (or, liver) that endures” or “have a big heart.”

Godliness is the same word used in 2 Peter 1.3. In Christian lists it appears only here and in 1 Tim 6.11. Its rare use is not only because it is a Greek characteristic, but because it is too general, since it includes both devotion to God and a sense of duty toward human beings. Its mention here is appropriate, since later on the false teachers are labeled as “ungodly” (2.6; 3.7). In this context its main meaning is probably devotion to or complete commitment to God. Translators can thus render it as “complete commitment to God,” “have a life wholly devoted to God,” or “turn your life over completely to God, doing what God wants us to do.”

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 .

One important thing to note is that, in the Greek, verses 17 and 18 form one sentence, with verse 17 as a dependent clause and verse 18 as the main clause of the sentence. If this is retained in translation (as in Revised Standard Version and other formal translations), the sentence becomes too long, and at least in English it does not conform to good style. Most modern English translations divide these verses into two separate sentences, thus making the sentences shorter and making the translation conform to natural style as well. In certain languages, though, where dependent clauses always come before the main clause, it may be helpful to maintain verses 17 and 18 as one long sentence.

Since verse 17 is a dependent clause in the Greek, it has to be related to verse 18 in some way. And since the focus of verse 18 is the presence of the disciples at the scene, this should also be the focus of verse 17. This feature is captured in Good News Translation by starting verse 17 with “We were there when….” Another way is to combine these two verses in order to come up with a clearer and more natural translation. For example, the place setting of the whole episode is given in verse 18, “the holy mountain.” In many languages this place setting needs to be put at the beginning of the episode. A possible restructuring is as follows:
• We were with him on the holy mountain when he was given honor and glory by God the Father. At that time the voice came to him from the Supreme Glory, saying, “This is my own dear Son, with whom I am pleased!” We ourselves heard this voice coming from heaven.

The Transfiguration scene is now described. First, Jesus received honor and glory from God. These two words are paired in many parts of the Bible (for instance, Psa 8.5; Rom 2.7; 1 Tim 1.17; 1 Peter 1.7; Rev 4.9). Various possibilities of interpreting these are as follows:

1. Taken separately, honor refers to the exalted status that Jesus received as a result of being named as the beloved Son of God, and glory refers to the radiance of his appearance when he was transfigured before the disciples (Mark 9.3).

2. Taking the two terms together, glory can be interpreted as describing honor, hence “great honor,” or “honored greatly.”

3. Glory can be understood as a way of honoring Jesus, which means that God conferred honor on Jesus by glorifying his appearance, that is, by making his appearance glow with heavenly light.

4. A fourth possibility is to take glory as meaning “praise” and therefore having the same meaning as honor.

Of these possibilities, the first two seem to be the most likely alternatives. The expression he received glory and honor, or even the form “was given” (Good News Translation), may be rendered in the active form in many languages; for example, “God the Father honored him and caused him to be radiant (or, show glory).” However, if the second alternative is chosen above, we may render this as “God the Father honored him greatly.”

It is therefore clear that the source of honor and glory is God himself. This is an important declaration in view of the Greek background of the readers, since in those days there was popular belief in the idea of a “divine man.” Jesus was not such a “divine man” but true God who became a real human being and was invested by God with honor and glory because of the task he was sent to perform. God the Father will be expressed in a number of languages as “God who is the Father.”

In certain languages it will be helpful to insert the words “At that time” before the phrase the voice was borne to him and say “At that time the voice came…,” “It was at that time that the voice came…,” or “When we were there the voice came….” In many languages it will be difficult to translate the voice was borne to him, or even “the voice came to him” (Good News Translation). In such cases it will be helpful to introduce the information that Jesus heard the voice (see below), and say “when he heard the voice from God the Supreme Glory saying….”

The term Majestic Glory (Good News Translation “Supreme Glory,” Jerusalem Bible “Sublime Glory,” New English Bible “sublime Presence”) is a euphemism for God and is used in order to avoid mentioning the divine name. In some writings during the first and second centuries B.C. (the intertestamental period), God is called the “Great Glory,” as in Testament of Levi 3.4; 1 Enoch 14.20. A meaningful translation of this term can be used provided it is understood by the readers as a reference to God. Another possible way is to include the name of God in the translation; for example, “God the Supreme Glory,” “God the Sublime Presence,” or “God the Sublime Glory.”

God’s declaration is called literally the voice. The quotation is taken from Matt 17.5 minus the last part (“Listen to him”). In Matthew’s setting the saying was addressed to the disciples and not to Jesus; here it is stated that the voice came to Jesus himself. Most commentators are of the opinion that there is a conscious echo here of Psa 2.7, where the words of the Lord God are addressed to the king. This psalm has been interpreted as a messianic psalm, and the king in the psalm has been identified with the Messiah.

“This is my Son, my Beloved” is the wording in many important Greek manuscripts, as the Revised Standard Version footnote makes clear, while some others have my beloved Son. In translating this, however, there may not be that much difference between the two versions of the text, since they practically come out the same in the translation. In many languages, for instance, it is not natural to say “my son, my beloved,” but it is perfectly natural to say “my beloved son” or “my son whom I love.” The adjustments made will be translational decisions rather than decisions based on the text and its interpretation.

Some scholars interpret this part of the quotation in the light of Old Testament passages. For example, if interpreted in the light of Gen 22.2 (“your only son”), it will indicate the uniqueness of Jesus’ divine sonship. If, however, it is interpreted in the light of Isa 42.1 (“my chosen”), then it emphasizes Jesus’ election to the messianic office. No matter how valid these opinions are, it is still an essential part of the translation task to remain faithful to the text through the use of valid principles of translation and interpretation, and to avoid any translation that is not based on the text.

The second part of the quotation, with whom I am well pleased, is taken from Isa 42.1. The verb is in the aorist tense, indicating past completed action, which means that God’s pleasure in choosing Jesus has already occurred in God’s eternal time, before it was declared publicly at the Mount of Transfiguration. A further point to note is that in the Greek the pronoun I is in the emphatic position; it is God and God alone who chooses Jesus and pronounces good pleasure on his chosen one. The unspoken argument is that, if this is the case, then everything said about Jesus, including his imminent return, is not a human legend but is firmly grounded on God’s will and purpose. In many languages it will be helpful to divide this final complex sentence into two sentences and say “This is my son whom I love. I am very pleased with him.”

An alternative translation model for this verse, using information from verse 18, is the following:
• We were with him on the holy (or, sacred) mountain when God the Father honored him and caused him to be radiant (or, show dazzling light). When we were there he heard the voice from God, the Supreme Glory, saying, “This is my own son whom I love. I am very pleased with him.”

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 .

Through translates the same preposition rendered “by means of” in verse 5. Which is a plural relative pronoun and can be interpreted in many ways, three of which are worth mentioning:

1. It goes back to “word” in verse 5. This makes verses 5, 6, and 7 structurally parallel: heaven and earth were created, the world was destroyed by water, and all creation will be destroyed by fire, all by means of God’s word. However, the plural form of the Greek for which argues against this position.

2. It refers to both “word” and “water.” These three verses will then be structurally connected thus: word and water (verse 5), word and water (verse 6), word and fire (verse 7).

3. It refers to “water.” The plural form can either refer to the two types of water (water above and water below the heavens) from which the flood had come (Gen 7.11), or be taken as a Hebrew idiom, since in Hebrew, water, like heaven, is usually plural in form.

This third possibility is the choice of by far the most translations. There is a need, however, to restructure the verse because of the mention of water in the second half (through which [water] the world … was deluged with water and perished), which makes the sentence somewhat awkward. A possible way of resolving this problem is to identify “water” in the first part of the verse with “water” in the second part, which is what Good News Translation has done (“and it was also by water, the water of the flood, that the old world was destroyed”). We may also translate “and God also used water, the water of the flood, to destroy the old world.”

World translates the Greek word kosmos, the world of order and harmony, as contrasted with the pre-creation state of chaos and disorder. The world that then existed (Good News Translation “the old world”) is taken by many commentaries as referring to the whole universe, which includes both heaven and earth; this stresses the cosmic scope of the great flood, affecting not only earth but heaven as well. It is more likely, however, that in the present context world refers only to the inhabited earth and human beings in particular. Since the earth is formed by means of water, it can also be destroyed in the same way. In certain languages the Revised Standard Version rendering world that then existed (New Revised Standard Version “world of that time”) will be preferable to that of Good News Translation “the old world.” However, we may also translate “that world long ago.”

Deluged is literally “flooded”; the whole expression refers to the great flood recorded in Genesis 6-8. Perished is more naturally “was destroyed” (Good News Translation), since the whole physical universe together with its inhabitants can be destroyed, whereas only living beings, and more especially human beings, can be described as perishing. The destruction here is primarily viewed in terms of being submerged in water, that is, the ordered universe (the kosmos) goes back to its original chaotic state (see Gen 1.1-2).

It should be noted that in the Genesis account of the flood (chapters 6-8) it is not the earth that was destroyed but human beings and other living things. Here the focus is on the whole earth and not simply human beings and other living things. It is true, of course, that the destruction of living things has the effect of putting the earth into a very chaotic state. However, translators should translate the picture here rather than going back to the Genesis account.

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 .

In this verse and the next, Lot is singled out to show that God does make a distinction between righteous and wicked people, and that he does rescue the righteous from danger. The story of Lot is found in Gen 19.1-29.

Rescued can also mean “delivered,” “saved,” “preserved a person from someone or something,” “set free.” It is not the same word as “preserved” in verse 5.

Lot is here described as righteous, a word with many meanings but which in this context means “good” (Good News Translation), “upright,” or perhaps “doing God’s will.” Lot himself is not described as a good man in the Genesis account; in fact the actions recounted there show Lot not as righteous but as a person of questionable character. There are, however, references in some literature, both Jewish and Christian, that refer to Lot as righteous. The best-known passage is Wisdom of Solomon 10.6: “Wisdom rescued a righteous man when the ungodly were perishing; he escaped the fire that descended on the Five Cities.” The phrase righteous Lot (Good News Translation “Lot, a good man”) may be rendered in certain languages as “the good man Lot.”

Lot’s attitude toward the conditions of his environment is now described: he was greatly distressed by the licentiousness of the wicked. This can be treated simply as a description of Lot or as a reason for Lot being regarded as righteous: he deserves to be called righteous because of his attitude toward evil; this latter possibility relates this verse to verse 8, which has further descriptions of Lot as a righteous man.

The expression greatly distressed is the passive form of a verb that means “subdue,” “torment,” “wear out,” “oppress,” “wear down.” In some languages this idea can be expressed idiomatically. Examples are “had a tormented heart or liver,” “his heart or liver was very heavy,” or “press hard upon his heart or liver.”

Licentiousness is the same word found in 2 Peter 2.2. See comments there for discussion.

The wicked translates a term that can mean “unprincipled,” “lawless” (Good News Translation), “morally corrupt,” and is used of people who disregarded divine and human laws and ordinances. This term is only used here and in 3.17 (“lawless”), and nowhere else in the New Testament.

Alternative translation models for this verse are:
• And if God rescued the good man Lot, whose heart (or, liver) was tormented by the indecent conduct of lawless men….

Or:
• God rescued the good man Lot, whose heart (or, liver) was every heavy when he saw the indecent actions of morally corrupt men.

Or:
• God rescued Lot, who, because he was good, had a very heavy heart (or, liver) when he saw …

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 .

Here again Peter addresses his readers directly, spelling out for them the consequences of what he has just said regarding the distortion and misinterpretation of scripture. Once again he addresses his readers with the intimate term beloved. Revised Standard Version retains the Greek form here and begins the verse with You therefore. It is clear from the context, however, that Peter is contrasting the attitude of the people he mentions in verse 16 with that of his own readers; therefore beginning the verse as Good News Translation does (“But you”) is much more appropriate.

Knowing this beforehand may also be expressed as “know in advance,” hence Good News Translation “you … already know this.” It is possible that what is meant by this is the content of the present letter; it is more likely, however, this this refers to what has been mentioned in the last part of verse 16, namely, that people destroy themselves by misinterpreting scripture.

Beware is literally “to guard” and is a term that has its origin in the military. It includes a sense of being on guard, watching out, being very careful, taking extra precaution. Carried away is literally “led away” in a negative sense; in this context it can be rendered as “to be overwhelmed,” “to be seduced,” “to succumb,” “to be lured.” Lest is no longer used very much in contemporary English; it is an expression that introduces a negative purpose. So lest you is equivalent to “so that you will not” (Good News Translation). Lest you be carried away may also be expressed as “so that lawless people do not lead you astray.”

Error recalls the previous verse, particularly the misinterpretation of the meaning of Paul’s ideas and the consequences of such distortions. Lawless was used to describe the people of Sodom in 2.7; here it gives a picture of the false teachers and their followers going beyond the restraints and limits of Christian moral and ethical teaching, hence “unprincipled” (Phillips).

Lose is literally “fall” (Good News Translation) with the idea of losing or being separated from something. Stability is the opposite of the term “unstable” in the previous verse. The Greek word describes not an abstract state or quality (“steadfastness”) but a firm, stable position, as that of a mountain or a large rock, for example. So Jerusalem Bible has “the firm ground that you are standing on,” and Phillips “your proper foothold.”

An alternative translation model for this verse is:
• But you, friends, are already aware of this. Be very careful then, that lawless people will not lead you astray with their false teachings and you fall from your present stable condition.

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 .

Brotherly affection is used many times in the New Testament. In secular usage this word was used to describe affection between brothers and sisters and other family members. Later on it was used to describe a person’s concern for his or her own nation (for example, Jeremiah in relation to the Israelites, 2 Maccabees 15.14). In the New Testament, and among Christians, the word came to mean affection between fellow believers, including sympathetic concern for others and the care of those in need. Other ways to translate this term are “love and affection for your fellow Christians” or “concern for one another as brothers and sisters ought to have for each other.” Some languages will have a special word for love and affection of brothers and sisters for each other. That is the term to use here.

The last thing on the list is love, which appears also in other New Testament lists (2 Cor 6.6; Gal 5.22; Eph 4.2; 1 Tim 4.12; 6.11; 2 Tim 2.22; 3.10; Titus 2.2; Rev 2.19; and so on). As contrasted with brotherly affection, love is first of all not limited to family members or to fellow believers but is universal in scope and has as its object all people. Secondly, love is unmotivated, that is, it doesn’t expect anything in return, whereas brotherly affection has the element of a mutual love, which will be returned by the other person. Love in this context, then, is not referring to “love for God” but “love for others” and should be translated in this way. In certain languages love will be expressed using bodily parts such as the heart or liver; for example, “heart is warm towards,” “hold other people in one’s heart,” or “stomach moves for others.”

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, together with verse 19, describes the teaching of the false teachers and the effect of such teaching both on themselves and others, especially new converts to the Christian faith.

What they say is characterized as “bombastic nonsense” (New Revised Standard Version), literally, uttering loud boasts of folly. The expression loud boasts is also found in Jude 16 and translates a Greek word that means “boastful,” “haughty,” “bombastic,” “high sounding,” in other words, something that sounds much more impressive than it really is. Folly on the other hand translates a word that means “worthlessness,” “emptiness,” “futility,” or “purposelessness.” What it means, then, is that the false teachers make impressive, high sounding, and boastful speeches that are in fact worthless and devoid of any value whatsoever.

The effect of such teaching is that they entice with licentious passions of the flesh new converts to the faith. For entice see comments on verse 14; for licentious see comments on 2 Peter 2.2; and for passions see comments on verse 10, where the word is translated “lust.” The whole expression licentious passions of the flesh refers to sexual desires that are characterized by lust and that lead people to indulge in excessive and uncontrolled immorality. How do the false teachers use this to entice people? It seems that through their teaching they have justified indulgence in immoral acts by presenting these sexual acts as legitimate expressions of Christian freedom. And since this kind of life characterizes those who belong to pagan religions, those who are most easily affected by this attitude are the new converts. These new converts are described as people who have barely escaped from those who live in error. The word barely may mean “to a small extent,” which indicates that these people are not yet completely free of pagan influences. In favor of this view is the fact that escaped is a present participle, which can be rendered “in the process of escaping.” These people, then, were in the process of making a complete break with pagan society as a whole. More probably, however, barely means “for a short time” or “newly,” which indicates that these people are new converts who are not yet firmly established in the Christian faith and are therefore easily swayed by non-Christian influences.

Those who live in error are most probably non-Christians or pagans (as in Jerusalem Bible “who have only just escaped from paganism”). This use of error for pagan living is in accordance with New Testament usage (see, for instance, Rom 1.27; Titus 3.3 “led astray”). Live translates a verb that means “act,” “behave,” or “conduct oneself.” Error is literally “wandering,” but it is used figuratively for straying from truth, hence “deceit,” “deception,” when the wandering is caused by others. This final clause who have barely escaped from those who live in error should not be understood to mean that these people are literally running away from other people (pagans) who stray from the truth. What it means is that they have just begun to stop believing like those people who live their lives according to wrong ideas.

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 .