This verse explains why verse 20 is true. The first assertion is that the interpretation of the prophetic message is not dependent on human power, because the prophetic message did not come about by the impulse of man. Another way of saying it is that no prophecy is of human origin, since it always originates from God. This first clause may also be rendered “Because no one from his own power (or, intelligence) ever announced God’s message,” or we can say “No prophecy ever originated in a human being.”

The second assertion, however, defines the place of people in the interpretation of prophecy: people are moved by the Holy Spirit. Men here does not refer just to males, but means people in general (human beings). It was God’s Spirit that carried them along and enabled them to say what God wanted them to say. Apart from the Spirit, the prophetic message does not exist and cannot be understood. It is of course clearly understood that the Spirit belongs to the church, which is created by the same Spirit and therefore plays an important role in the interpretation and preservation of the prophetic message. So people who are moved by the Holy Spirit are enabled to proclaim and interpret the prophetic message. The term for moved can also be translated “carried away,” “have their hearts stirred up,” or “The Holy Spirit stirred up their hearts” (note Good News Translation “under the control,” New English Bible “impelled,” Phillips “inspired,” New International Version “carried along”); and this somehow suggests a state of ecstasy in which the Holy Spirit takes full control of a person. At any rate, this expression belongs to the vocabulary of prophetic inspiration that was in use within the Greek-speaking section of Judaism. In certain languages translators will need to render this clause in the active rather than the passive; for example, “But the Holy Spirit stirred up people’s hearts (or, inspired them) as they spoke the message that came from God.”

The third assertion is that these people spoke from God. The vocabulary may have been their own, but the message that they proclaimed “came from God” (Good News Translation). This anticipates chapter 2, where false prophets are mentioned; in contrast to true prophets, these people proclaimed a message that did not come from God but was a product of their own mind.

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 .

It should be noted that Revised Standard Version and Good News Translation are different here, in that Good News Bible starts a new paragraph, whereas Revised Standard Version treats this verse as part of the paragraph that started in verse 8. In view of the fact that verses 8-15a seem to form a single unit dealing with the reasons for the delay of the Parousia and how Christians should live during the period of the delay, it seems best to follow the Revised Standard Version paragraphing at this point.

But connects this verse with the verse before it; it clears up any misunderstanding that may arise as a result of the assertion that the delay of the Parousia is due to God’s patience and his desire for everyone to be saved from judgment. Despite all of this, it is certain that the Lord will return, and the day of judgment will come. This is made clear by the word order in the Greek, in which will come is placed first and therefore is emphatic.

The day of the Lord is a popular biblical expression used for the end time. In the Old Testament the Day of the Lord refers to any event where God’s people (Israel) are victorious over God’s enemies (other nations). The defeat of God’s enemies is considered as God’s judgment on those people. It was only later that this act of judgment was understood to apply to Israel as well. In the present passage, as in the rest of the New Testament, this expression is used primarily for the Parousia, that is, when Jesus Christ returns in victory to judge all peoples, both living and dead. This can be made clear in translation; for example, “the day of the Lord’s coming,” “the day of the Lord’s return,” or “the day when the Lord returns.” The coming of the Lord is compared to the coming of a thief, which is unexpected or sudden, and this is brought out in many translations (for instance, Phillips “suddenly and unexpectedly as a thief,” New English Bible “unexpected as a thief”). Other possible translations are “The Lord will come as unexpectedly as a thief does in the night,” or even “The Lord will come when no one expects him, just as a thief comes when no one is expecting him.” It is also possible to remove the figure of thief and simply translate the basis or ground of the comparison: “the day of the Lord will come suddenly and unexpectedly” or “The Lord will come suddenly at a time when he is not expected.” It is also suggested that the use of the picture of the thief carries with it an element of threat, especially for those who continue in their unrepentant ways. The use of this picture as a figurative expression for the end that is coming is common in the teachings of Jesus (see, for example, Matt 24.43-44; Luke 12.39-40), and in other parts of the New Testament (1 Thes 5.2; Rev 3.3; 16.15). It is important here to indicate clearly the ground or basis of comparison with a thief (unexpectedly, suddenly), in order to avoid the interpretation that the Lord is himself a thief.

And then refers back to day, hence Good News Translation “On that Day.” For heavens see comments on 2 Peter 3.5 above. Pass away is “disappear” (Good News Translation) or “vanish.”

With a loud noise translates the Greek word hroizēdon, which is considered to be onomatopoeic, that is, a word that sounds like the thing it names. In this case hroizēdon is used of hissing, crackling, and rushing sounds, sounds that are made by a snake, a fire, or an arrow. Here the sound being described is that of fire, referring to the roaring and crackling sounds of the sky as it burns down. Some translations try to do justice to this feature: Good News Translation “a shrill noise,” New English Bible “a great rushing sound,” Phillips “a terrific tearing blast,” Translator’s New Testament “a roaring sound,” Moffatt “a crackling roar.” In languages that use ideophones, translators should consider using one here.

What are the elements that are going to be dissolved with fire? There are at least four possible interpretations:

1. They are the rudiments of knowledge. This is based on the historical origin of the Greek word stoicheia, which can be literally rendered “things arranged in a row,” as, for instance, the letters of the alphabet. This meaning is reflected in Heb 5.12, where stoicheia is translated “first principles,”Good News Translation “first lessons.” This meaning, however, does not fit the present context.

2. They are the physical elements, namely earth, air, fire, and water. This was a common meaning of elements (Greek stoicheia). A prevalent idea among the Stoics was that, in the final conflagration, these four elements will be dissolved into the primary element, namely fire. Considering the Greek background of 2 Peter, this interpretation has some validity; it is, however, rather inappropriate in the present context, since elements comes right after the mention of heaven and before the mention of earth.

3. They are angelic or spiritual beings. In Paul’s letters, stoicheia is used in a similar manner, referring to spiritual powers (see for example, Gal 4.3; Col 2.8, 20).

4. They are the heavenly bodies: the sun, the moon, the stars, the planets. In other biblical references, these are also referred to as “the powers of the heavens” (see, for example, Isa 34.4; Matt 24.29). The use of stoicheia in this sense is attested in the literature of that time, both from Greek and Christian writers.

This last meaning is what most commentaries prefer, and consequently it is reflected in many translations, such as Good News Translation “the heavenly bodies,” and Moffatt “the stars.” Taking this meaning relates this part of the verse with the first part, which talks of the sky, whereas this second part refers to things located in the sky. This also makes the first two parts parallel to the third part of the verse, which talks of the earth and everything in it. A literal translation of elements here allows for all four possibilities but sacrifices clarity in the process, and so should be avoided. As is often said, if it means everything, it does not mean anything.

Dissolved is literally “destroyed.” With fire translates a Greek medical term for body temperature, particularly in connection with a high fever. So the expression can be rendered literally as “destroyed in the heat.” The picture here is that the heat is so intense that the heavenly bodies begin to melt and eventually are reduced to nothing. Some translations try to reflect this meaning: Good News Translation “burn up and be destroyed,” Jerusalem Bible “catch fire and fall apart,” New English Bible “disintegrate in flames,” Moffatt “be set ablaze and melt.”

And the works that are upon it is literally “its works,” which can mean all the results of both human and divine activity on earth, or in a wider sense, everything that is in the earth; hence Good News Translation “with everything in it,” Jerusalem Bible “and all that it contains,” New English Bible “with all that is in it.”

As can be seen from the Good News Translation text and footnote, there is a textual problem related to will be burned up. The UBS Greek New Testament has in its text “will be found,” and this is reflected in the New Revised Standard Version text “will be disclosed” and also New English Bible “will be laid bare.” Translator’s New Testament follows the UBS Greek text but translates this part as a rhetorical question: “will the earth and everything in it remain?” with “No” as the unspoken answer. Another way of understanding “will be found” is to take it as a so-called “divine passive” and interpret it as meaning “will be found by God,” that is, ready for God to examine. The picture that we have in the whole verse of the UBS Greek text is that, when heaven and all that is in it are destroyed, the earth will be laid bare, and all peoples will face the judgment of God. Revised Standard Version and Jerusalem Bible follow a variant found in a number of manuscripts. Good News Translation translates another variant, namely “will vanish.” Yet another variant is represented by An American Translation, “will melt away.” Two things should be noted here: first, that in the UBS Greek New Testament the rating given is “D,” which means that there is a very high degree of uncertainty with regard to the reading selected for the text; and secondly, treating the statement as a rhetorical question (as in Translator’s New Testament above) will result in a translation similar to TEV, with “will vanish” representing the unspoken answer to the rhetorical question. Since there is no clearly favored text, the translator may choose to follow any of the variant readings, with perhaps New Revised Standard Version and Good News Bible a slightly better choice. Or it may be wise to follow the choice of a translation in a related language that is known and widely used. In any case, translators should provide a footnote similar to that of Good News Translation. In some languages we may translate TEV’s “will vanish” as “will no longer exist.”

Alternative translation models for this verse are:
• But the Lord will come when no one expects him, just as a thief does (or, comes when no one is expecting him). On that Day there will be a great roaring sound as the heavens (or, sky) disappear (or, vanish). The bodies in the sky will burn up and disintegrate, and the earth and everything that is in it will no longer exist (or, melt away).

Or for the final sentence:
• … and God will find the earth and all that is in it ready for him to judge …

Or:
• … When all this happens, will the earth and everything in it still remain?

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 .

This verse continues the thought of verse 10 and mentions in a positive way the reward that comes to believers as they make sure of their call and election. It begins with the word so (Good News Translation “In this way”), again referring back to the virtues mentioned earlier. In many languages this can be rendered as “By doing all these things….”

The idea of an entrance being richly provided stresses that people have the right to enter not because they deserve it but because the privilege is given to them as a free gift. This is captured in many modern translations such as Good News Translation “you will be given the full right to enter,” and New English Bible “you will be afforded full and free admission.” Some other translations interpret richly provided as indicating a warm welcome; hence “a rich welcome awakes you as you enter,” and New International Version “you will receive a rich welcome.” However, many languages cannot reproduce this passive form, so translators will need to state directly the agent (God) of the “providing” and say “God will give you the full right,” “God will open the door wide for you,” or “God will welcome you.” Phillips has “God will open wide to you the gates of the eternal kingdom.” Some languages will need to use a direct quotation here, such as “God will generously say to you, ‘Come….’ ”

The eternal kingdom of our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ focuses both on a place and a reign, that is, a place where Jesus Christ will reign eternally. The idea of Christ’s kingdom as eternal is also found in Luke 1.33 (and see Rev 11.15). Jesus in his ministry proclaimed the kingdom of God, but in The Second Letter from Peter, what is proclaimed is the kingdom and the glory of Christ himself. This kingdom will be fully revealed at the end of the age, and in particular at the second coming of Christ, at which time Christians will be united with their God through Christ. This kingdom is eternal in the sense that Jesus Christ will be king forever in this kingdom, and those who are in union with him will be citizens of this kingdom forever. In many languages it will be necessary to use a verbal expression for kingdom. In such a case we may say “to enter the place where our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ rules eternally (or, forever).”

Jesus Christ is here referred to as Lord and Savior. This exact combination is found in the New Testament only in this letter (see also 2.20; 3.2, 18). Lord translates a word that can mean “owner” or “master” but has the more precise meaning of one who rules and who is acknowledged as king and as worthy to be served and obeyed (see the comments on 1.2). For Savior see comments on 1.1. The pronoun our should be understood as inclusive, referring to all believers. In some languages it will be necessary to make it clear that Lord and Savior refer to the same person. We can render this as “of our Lord who is our Savior Jesus Christ.”

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 ends his indictment of the false teachers by applying to them two proverbs that were obviously popular during that time. These proverbs appropriately explain what really happened to the false teachers. While there are two proverbs mentioned, Peter simply describes these as the true proverb; it may be better in translation to talk of two proverbs rather than one.

A proverb is a popular saying drawn from the world of nature, or of animals, or of ordinary human relationships, and which is used to express a certain truth demonstrated in the life of people, both individually and in their relation with others. In Hebrew the proverb is usually a doublet; that is, it consists of two lines, with the second line reinforcing the first, either as a parallel or in contrast to it. The important thing for translators at this point is to recognize the literary form of the proverb in their own language, together with its function, and then to translate these proverbs according to the demands of their language. For example, if a proverb is usually poetic in form in a language, then these two sayings should, as far as possible, be translated according to that poetic form. If a proverb usually has two lines, then these proverbs should also consist of two lines in the translation.

The first proverb deals with a dog and his vomit. The quotation here is from Prov 26.11, although there are some variations. The point of the saying is that a dog may get rid of its filth (represented by the vomit) but cannot resist going back to it, to sniff at it or even to eat it. The second proverb is about a pig and mud. The message seems to be that no matter how clean a pig becomes, it always goes back to dirty itself in the mud, because part of the pig’s nature is to wallow in mud to keep cool. This second proverb is not found in the Bible, but there are similar proverbs that are common both in Greek and Rabbinic literature. Both proverbs use animals that were considered by Jews as dirty and ritually unclean. This reminds the readers of Peter’s description of the false teachers as “irrational animals” in verse 12 (and see also verse 16), which is now made worse by their being compared to unclean dirty animals. The message of both proverbs is clear: the false teachers had once become clean through the forgiveness of their sins, but they have now gone back to wallow in the immorality and wickedness that characterized their pagan past. See the similar statement in 1.9.

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 .