translation_id: net-engnet

label: NET translator note

text: B Ψ 69 81 614 623 630 1241 1243 2464 al vg co), read Σίμων ( Simwn , “Simon”) for Συμεών ( Sumewn , “Simeon”). However, this appears to be a motivated reading as it is the more common spelling. Συμεών occurs only here and in Acts 15:14 as a spelling for the apostle’s name. The reading Συμεών enjoys ample and widespread support among the mss , strongly suggesting its authenticity. Further, this Hebraic spelling is a subtle argument for the authenticity of this letter, since a forger would almost surely follow the normal spelling of the name (1 Peter begins only with “Peter” giving no help either way).


text: Grk “Simeon Peter.” The word “from” is not in the Greek text, but has been supplied to indicate the sender of the letter.


text: Though δοῦλος ( doulos ) is normally translated “servant,” the word does not bear the connotation of a free individual serving another. BDAG notes that “‘servant’ for ‘slave’ is largely confined to Biblical transl. and early American times…in normal usage at the present time the two words are carefully distinguished” (BDAG 260 s.v.). At the same time, perhaps “servant” is apt in that the δοῦλος of Jesus Christ took on that role voluntarily, unlike a slave. The most accurate translation is “bondservant” (sometimes found in the ASV for δοῦλος ), in that it often indicates one who sells himself into slavery to another. But as this is archaic, few today understand its force. sn Undoubtedly the background for the concept of being the Lord’s slave or servant is to be found in the Old Testament scriptures. For a Jew this concept did not connote drudgery, but honor and privilege. It was used of national Israel at times ( Isa 43:10 ), but was especially associated with famous OT personalities, including such great men as Moses ( Josh 14:7 ), David ( Ps 89:3 ; cf. 2 Sam 7:5, 8 ) and Elijah ( 2 Kgs 10:10 ); all these men were “servants (or slaves) of the Lord.”


text: sa) read κυρίου ( kuriou , “Lord”) for θεοῦ ( qeou , “God”) in v. 1 , perhaps due to confusion of letters (since both words were nomina sacra ), or perhaps because “our God and Savior, Jesus Christ” is an unusual expression (though hardly because of theological objections to θεοῦ ).


text: The terms “God and Savior” both refer to the same person, Jesus Christ. This is one of the clearest statements in the NT concerning the deity of Christ. The construction in Greek is known as the Granville Sharp rule, named after the English philanthropist-linguist who first clearly articulated the rule in 1798. Sharp pointed out that in the construction article-noun- καί -noun (where καί [ kai ] = “and”), when two nouns are singular, personal, and common (i.e., not proper names), they always had the same referent. Illustrations such as “the friend and brother,” “the God and Father,” etc. abound in the NT to prove Sharp’s point. In fact, the construction occurs elsewhere in 2 Peter, strongly suggesting that the author’s idiom was the same as the rest of the NT authors’ (cf., e.g., 1:11 [“the Lord and Savior”], 2:20 [“the Lord and Savior”]). The only issue is whether terms such as “God” and “Savior” could be considered common nouns as opposed to proper names. Sharp and others who followed (such as T. F. Middleton in his masterful The Doctrine of the Greek Article ) demonstrated that a proper name in Greek was one that could not be pluralized. Since both “God” ( θεός , qeos ) and “savior” ( σωτήρ , swthr ) were occasionally found in the plural, they did not constitute proper names, and hence, do fit Sharp’s rule. Although there have been 200 years of attempts to dislodge Sharp’s rule, all attempts have been futile. Sharp’s rule stands vindicated after all the dust has settled. For more information on the application of Sharp’s rule to 2 Pet 1:1 , see ExSyn 272, 276-77, 290. See also Titus 2:13 and Jude 4 .


text: The verb λαγχάνω ( lancanw ) means “obtain by lot,” “receive.” A literal translation would put it in the active, but some of the richness of the term would thereby be lost. It is used in collocation with κλῆρος ( klhros , “lot”) frequently enough in the LXX to suggest the connotation of reception of a gift, or in the least reception of something that one does not deserve. H. Hanse’s statement ( TDNT 4:1) that “Even where there is no casting of lots, the attainment is not by one’s own effort or as a result of one’s own exertions, but is like ripe fruit falling into one’s lap” is apt for this passage. The author’s opening line is a reminder that our position in Christ is not due to merit, but grace.


text: Grk “equal in value/honor.” sn A faith just as precious. The author’s point is that the Gentile audience has been blessed with a salvation that is in no way inferior to that of the Jews.


text: Grk “May grace and peace be multiplied to you.”


text: The words “as you grow” are not in the Greek text, but seem to be implied.


text: The word ἐπίγνωσις ( epignwsis ) could simply mean knowledge, but J. B. Mayor ( Jude and Second Peter , 171-74) has suggested that it is often a fuller knowledge, especially in reference to things pertaining to spiritual truth. R. Bauckham ( Jude, 2 Peter [WBC], 169-70) argues that it refers to the knowledge of God that is borne of conversion, but this is probably saying too much and is asking questions of the author that are foreign to his way of thinking. The term is used in 1:2, 3, 8; 2:20 (the verb form occurs twice, both in 2:21 ). In every instance it evidently involves being in the inner circle of those who connect to God, though it does not necessarily imply such a direct and relational knowledge of God for each individual within that circle. An analogy would be Judas Iscariot: Even though he was a disciple of the Lord, he was not converted.


text: A comma properly belongs at the end of v. 2 instead of a period, since v. 3 is a continuation of the same sentence. With the optative in v. 2 , the author has departed from Paul’s normal greeting (in which no verb is used), rendering the greeting a full-blown sentence. Nevertheless, this translation divides the verses up along thematic lines in spite of breaking up the sentence structure. For more explanation, see note on “power” in v. 3 .


text: The verse in Greek starts out with ὡς ( Jws ) followed by a genitive absolute construction, dependent on the main verb in v. 2 . Together, they form a subordinate causal clause. A more literal rendering would be “because his divine power…” The idea is that the basis or authority for the author’s prayer in v. 2 (that grace and peace would abound to the readers) was that God’s power was manifested in their midst. The author’s sentence structure is cumbersome even in Greek; hence, the translation has broken this up into two sentences.


text: The word “necessary” is not in the Greek, but is implied by the preposition πρός ( pros ).


text: See the note on “rich knowledge” in v. 2 .


text: ) argues for an instrumental meaning. The instrumental notion is also affirmed by the meaning of ἀρετῇ (“excellence”) in contexts that speak of God’s attributes (BDAG 130 s.v. ἀρετή 2 in fact defines it as “ manifestation of divine power ” in this verse).


text: Verse 4 is in Greek a continuation of v. 3 , “through which things.” sn The phrase these things refers to God’s glory and excellence.


text: Grk “through them.” The implication is that through inheriting and acting on these promises the believers will increasingly become partakers of the divine nature.


text: The aorist participle ἀποφυγόντες ( apofugonte" ) is often taken as attendant circumstance to the preceding verb γένησθε ( genhsqe ). As such, the sense is “that you might become partakers…and might escape…” However, it does not follow the contours of the vast majority of attendant circumstance participles (in which the participle precedes the main verb, among other things). Further, attendant circumstance participles are frequently confused with result participles (which do follow the verb). Many who take this as attendant circumstance are probably viewing it semantically as result (“that you might become partakers…and [thereby] escape…”). But this is next to impossible since the participle is aorist : Result participles are categorically present tense.


text: Grk “the corruption in the world (in/because of) lust.”


text: The Greek text begins with “and,” a typical Semitism. sn The reason given is all the provisions God has made for the believer, mentioned in vv. 3-4 .


text: The participle is either means (“by making every effort”) or attendant circumstance (“make every effort”). Although it fits the normal contours of attendant circumstance participles, the semantics are different. Normally, attendant circumstance is used of an action that is a necessary prelude to the action of the main verb. But “making every effort” is what energizes the main verb here. Hence it is best taken as means. However, for the sake of smoothness the translation has rendered it as a command with the main verb translated as an infinitive. This is in accord with English idiom.


text: Or “moral excellence,” “virtue”; this is the same word used in v. 3 (“the one who has called us by his own glory and excellence ”).


text: Perhaps “steadfastness,” though that is somewhat archaic. A contemporary colloquial rendering would be “stick-to-it-iveness.”


text: Each item in Greek begins with “and.” The conjunction is omitted for the sake of good English style, with no change in meaning. sn Add to your faith excellence…love. The list of virtues found in vv. 5-7 stands in tension to the promises given in vv. 2-4 . What appears to be a synergism of effort or even a contradiction (God supplies the basis, the promises, the grace, the power, etc., while believers must also provide the faith, excellence, etc.) in reality encapsulates the mystery of sanctification. Each believer is responsible before God for his conduct and spiritual growth, yet that growth could not take place without God’s prior work and constant enabling. We must not neglect our responsibility, yet the enabling and the credit is God’s. Paul says the same thing: “Continue working out your salvation with humility and dependence, for the one bringing forth in you both the desire and the effort…is God” ( Phil 2:12-13 ).


text: The participles are evidently conditional, as most translations render them.


text: The participle ὑπάρχοντα ( Juparconta ) is stronger than the verb εἰμί ( eimi ), usually implying a permanent state. Hence, the addition of “really” is implied.


text: Grk “cause [you] not to become.”


text: Grk “unto,” “toward”; although it is possible to translate the preposition εἰς ( eis ) as simply “in.”


text: Grk “the [rich] knowledge of our Lord Jesus Christ.” Verse 8 in Greek does not make a full stop (period), for v. 9 begins with a subordinate relative pronoun. Contemporary English convention requires a full stop in translation, however.


text: Grk “for.” The connection, though causal, is also adversative.


text: Grk “to the one for whom these things are not present.”


text: The words “that is to say, he is” are not in Greek. The word order is unusual. One might expect the author to have said “he is nearsighted and blind” (as the NIV has so construed it), but this is not the word order in Greek. Perhaps the author begins with a strong statement followed by a clarification, i.e., that being nearsighted in regard to these virtues is as good as being blind.


text: Grk “brothers,” but the Greek word may be used for “brothers and sisters” or “fellow Christians” as here (cf. BDAG 18 s.v. ἀδελφός 1., where considerable nonbiblical evidence for the plural ἀδελφοί [ adelfoi ] meaning “brothers and sisters” is cited).


text: Grk “make your calling and election sure.” sn Make sure of your calling and election. The author is not saying that virtue and holiness produce salvation, but that virtue and holiness are the evidence of salvation.


text: Grk “these things.”


text: In Greek οὐ μή ( ou mh ) followed by the subjunctive is normally the strongest way to negate an action. Coupled with πότε ( pote , “ever”), the statement is even more emphatic. The author is offering sage advice on how to grow in grace.


text: The words “into sin” are not in the Greek text, but the Greek word πταίω ( ptaiw ) is used in soteriological contexts for more than a mere hesitation or stumbling. BDAG 894 s.v. 2 suggests that here it means “ be ruined, be lost ,” referring to loss of salvation, while also acknowledging that the meaning “ to make a mistake, go astray, sin ” is plausible in this context. Alternatively, the idea of πταίω here could be that of “ suffer misfortune ” (so K. L. Schmidt, TDNT 6:884), as a result of sinning.


text: Grk “always.”


text: Or “tent.” The author uses this as a metaphor for his physical body. sn The use of the term tabernacle for the human body is reminiscent both of John’s statements about Jesus (“he tabernacled among us” in John 1:14 ; “the temple of his body” in John 2:21 ) and Paul’s statements about believers (e.g., “you are God’s building” in 1 Cor 3:9 ; “you are God’s temple” in 1 Cor 3:16 ; “your body is the temple of the Holy Spirit” in 1 Cor 6:19 ; “holy temple” in Eph 2:21 ). It is precisely because the Shekinah glory has been transferred from the OT temple to the person of Jesus Christ and, because he inhabits believers, to them, that the author can speak this way. His life on earth, his physical existence, is a walking tabernacle, a manifestation of the glory of God.


text: Grk “since I know that the removal of my tabernacle is [coming] soon.”


text: Grk “just as.”


text: Grk “coming.”


text: Grk “for we did not make known to you the power and coming of our Lord Jesus Christ by following cleverly concocted fables.”


text: Grk “but, instead.”


text: Grk “became.”


text: Grk “that one’s.” That is, “eyewitnesses of the grandeur of that one.” The remote demonstrative pronoun is used perhaps to indicate esteem for Jesus. Along these lines it is interesting to note that “the Pythagoreans called their master after his death simply ἐκεῖνος ” as a term of reverence and endearment (BDAG 302 s.v. ἐκεῖνος a. γ ).


text: Grk “such a.” The pronoun τοιᾶσδε ( toiasde ) most likely refers to what follows, connoting something of the uniqueness of the proclamation.


text: The verb εὐδόκησα ( eudokhsa ) in collocation with εἰς ὅν ( ei" Jon ) could either mean “in whom I am well-pleased, delighted” (in which case the preposition functions like ἐν [ en ]), or “on whom I have set my favor.” sn This is my beloved Son, in whom I am delighted alludes to the Transfiguration. However, the author’s version is markedly different from the synoptic accounts (in particular his introductory phrase, “when that voice was conveyed to him,” an unusual expression [perhaps used to avoid naming God directly as the one who spoke from heaven]). The most natural explanation for such differences is that he was unaware of the exact wording of the Gospels. This is, of course, easier to explain if 2 Peter is authentic than if it is a late document, written in the 2nd century.


text: The “we” in v. 18 is evidently exclusive, that is, it refers to Peter and the other apostles.


text: 2 Pet 1:17-18 comprise one sentence in Greek, with the main verb “heard” in v. 18 . All else is temporally subordinate to that statement. Hence, more literally these verses read as follows: “For when he received honor and glory from God the Father, when that voice was conveyed to him by the Majestic Glory: ‘This is my beloved Son, in whom I am delighted,’ we ourselves heard this voice when it was conveyed from heaven, when we were with him on the holy mountain.”


text: Grk “and.” The use of καί ( kai ) is of course quite elastic. Only the context can determine if it is adversative, continuative, transitional, etc.


text: The comparative adjective βεβαιότερον ( bebaioteron ) is the complement to the object τὸν προφητικὸν λόγον ( ton profhtikon logon ). As such, the construction almost surely has the force “The prophetic word is (more certain/altogether certain) – and this is something that we all have.” Many scholars prefer to read the construction as saying “we have the prophetic word made more sure,” but such a nuance is unparalleled in object-complement constructions (when the construction has this force, ποιέω [ poiew ] is present [as in 2 Pet 1:10 ]). The meaning, as construed in the translation, is that the Bible (in this case, the OT) that these believers had in their hands was a thoroughly reliable guide. Whether it was more certain than was even Peter’s experience on the Mount of Transfiguration depends on whether the adjective should be taken as a true comparative (“more certain”) or as an elative (“very certain, altogether certain”). Some would categorically object to any experience functioning as a confirmation of the scriptures and hence would tend to give the adjective a comparative force. Yet the author labors to show that his gospel is trustworthy precisely because he was an eyewitness of this great event. Further, to say that the OT scriptures (the most likely meaning of “the prophetic word”) were more trustworthy an authority than an apostle’s own experience of Christ is both to misconstrue how prophecy took place in the OT (did not the prophets have visions or other experiences ?) and to deny the final revelation of God in Christ (cf. Heb 1:2 ). In sum, since syntactically the meaning that “we have confirmed the prophetic word by our experience” is improbable, and since contextually the meaning that “we have something that is a more reliable authority than experience, namely, the Bible” is unlikely, we are left with the meaning “we have a very reliable authority, the Old Testament, as a witness to Christ’s return.” No comparison is thus explicitly made. This fits both the context and normal syntax quite well. The introductory καί ( kai ) suggests that the author is adding to his argument. He makes the statement that Christ will return, and backs it up with two points: (1) Peter himself (as well as the other apostles) was an eyewitness to the Transfiguration, which is a precursor to the Parousia; and (2) the Gentile believers, who were not on the Mount of Transfiguration, nevertheless have the Old Testament, a wholly reliable authority that also promises the return of Christ.


text: Grk “paying attention” (the adverbial participle is either conditional [“if you pay attention”] or instrumental [“by paying attention”]; though there is difference in translation, there is virtually no difference in application). On a lexical level, “pay attention to” ( προσέχω [ prosecw ]) does not, in a context such as this, mean merely observe or notice, but follow, give heed to, obey .


text: “To this” is a relative pronoun in Greek. The second half of v. 19 is thus a relative clause. Literally it reads “to which you do well if you pay attention.”


text: Grk “as”; ὡς ( Jws ) clauses after imperatives or implied commands (as here) make a comparison of what should be true (imperative) to what is true (indicative). This is the case even when the verb of the ὡς clause is only implied. Cf. Matt 6:10 (“may your will be done on earth as [it is] in heaven”); 10:16 (“be wise as serpents [are], and be as gentle as doves [are]”); 22:39 (“love your neighbor as [you already do] love yourself”).


text: Grk “knowing this [to be] foremost.” Τοῦτο πρῶτον ( touto prwton ) constitute the object and complement of γινώσκοντες ( ginwskonte" ). The participle is dependent on the main verb in v. 19 (“you do well [if you pay attention]”), probably in a conditional usage. An alternative is to take it imperativally: “Above all, know this.” In this rendering, πρῶτον is functioning adverbially. Only here and 2 Pet 3:3 is τοῦτο πρῶτον found in the NT, making a decision more difficult.


text: The ὅτι ( Joti ) clause is appositional (“know this, that”). English usage can use the colon with the same force.


text: Verse 20 is variously interpreted. There are three key terms here that help decide both the interpretation and the translation. As well, the relation to v. 21 informs the meaning of this verse. (1) The term “comes about” ( γίνεται [ ginetai ]) is often translated “is a matter” as in “is a matter of one’s own interpretation.” But the progressive force for this verb is far more common. (2) The adjective ἰδίας ( idias ) has been understood to mean (a) one’s own (i.e., the reader’s own), (b) its own (i.e., the particular prophecy’s own), or (c) the prophet’s own. Catholic scholarship has tended to see the reference to the reader (in the sense that no individual reader can understand scripture, but needs the interpretations handed down by the Church), while older Protestant scholarship has tended to see the reference to the individual passage being prophesied (and hence the Reformation doctrine of analogia fidei [analogy of faith], or scripture interpreting scripture). But neither of these views satisfactorily addresses the relationship of v. 20 to v. 21 , nor do they do full justice to the meaning of γίνεται . (3) The meaning of ἐπίλυσις ( epilusi" ) is difficult to determine, since it is a biblical hapax legomenon . Though it is sometimes used in the sense of interpretation in extra-biblical Greek, this is by no means a necessary sense. The basic idea of the word is unfolding , which can either indicate an explanation or a creation. It sometimes has the force of solution or even spell , both of which meanings could easily accommodate a prophetic utterance of some sort. Further, even the meaning explanation or interpretation easily fits a prophetic utterance, for prophets often, if not usually, explained visions and dreams. There is no instance of this word referring to the interpretation of scripture , however, suggesting that if interpretation is the meaning, it is the prophet’s interpretation of his own vision. (4) The γάρ ( gar ) at the beginning of v. 21 gives the basis for the truth of the proposition in v. 20 . The connection that makes the most satisfactory sense is that prophets did not invent their own prophecies (v. 20 ), for their impulse for prophesying came from God (v. 21 ). sn No prophecy of scripture ever comes about by the prophet’s own imagination. 2 Pet 1:20-21 , then, form an inclusio with v. 16 : The Christian’s faith and hope are not based on cleverly concocted fables but on the sure Word of God – one which the prophets, prompted by the Spirit of God, spoke. Peter’s point is the same as is found elsewhere in the NT, i.e., that human prophets did not originate the message, but they did convey it, using their own personalities in the process.


text: If, as seems probable, the “prophecy” mentioned here is to be identified with the “prophecy of scripture” mentioned in the previous verse, then the Greek term ἄνθρωποι ( anqrwpoi , “men”) would refer specifically to the human authors of scripture, who (as far as we know) were all men. Thus “men” has been used here in the translation. If, on the other hand, the “prophecy” mentioned in the present verse is not limited to scripture but refers to oral prophecy as well, then women would be included, since Joel 2:20 specifically mentions “sons and daughters” as having the ability to prophesy, and the NT clearly mentions prophetesses ( Luke 2:36 ; Acts 21:9 ).