Ed Urzi

“But they deliberately forget that long ago by God’s word the heavens came into being and the earth was formed out of water and by water. By these waters also the world of that time was deluged and destroyed” (2 Peter 3:5-6).

This description of the earth’s formation draws our attention to the creation account of Genesis chapter one…

“Now the earth was formless and empty, darkness was over the surface of the deep, and the Spirit of God was hovering over the waters” (Genesis 1:2 NIV).

Other translations of Genesis 1:2 tell us that the earth was “…without form and void…” (ESV) or “…a shapeless, chaotic mass…” (TLB) at this stage in its development. This lends support to the idea that God first established the components that later became the universe as we know it (Genesis 1:1). For instance, we might interpret this passage to mean that the constituent elements of creation were suspended in a formless, fluid state during this phase. Yet, Earth seems to have been separate and distinct almost from the moment of creation.

One source offers some insight into what likely occurred during that process…

“In the first stage of creation, after the second day, the earth material was surrounded by vast waters above the firmament and suspended in other waters under the firmament {Ge 1:7). The waters beneath the ‘firmament’ (the ‘expanse’ of the troposphere) later were either formed into seas or confined in a ‘great deep’ beneath the earth’s crust. This regime apparently continued until the time of the great flood when they all came together again. Until then the earth was ‘standing’ (Greek sunistemi- that is, being ‘sustained’) in and by the waters.” ₍₁₎

This also corresponds to what we read later in Genesis 7:10-12. That portion of Scripture tells us “…all the underground waters erupted from the earth” (NLT) at the time of Noah’s flood. The sudden emergence of those underground pockets of water would have led to the catastrophic results associated with the flood.

So it wasn’t just the falling rain that produced Noah’s flood. Instead, it was the torrential downpour from above, coupled with the corresponding surge from the water table below.

So while life on this planet cannot survive without the presence of water, it is a curious irony to note how God employed that same element as a catalyst for the destruction of the ancient world along with the wickedness of its inhabitants. Thus, “…it was by means of these the world that then existed was deluged with water and perished” (ESV).

Image Credit: James St. John, CC BY 2.0, via Wikimedia Commons

(1) Institute for Creation Research, New Defender’s Study Bible Notes [2 Peter 3:5] https://www.icr.org/bible/2Pet/3/5/ Accessed 02 September, 2024

“They purposely ignore the fact that long ago God gave a command, and the heavens and earth were created. The earth was formed out of water and by water, and it was also by water, the water of the flood, that the old world was destroyed” (2 Peter 3:5-6 GNB).

2 Peter 3:5 draws our attention to God’s sovereign act of creation in establishing the heavens and the earth. Unlike those who believe that the universe is a product of random chance, this passage tells us, “…God gave a command, and the heavens and earth were created.” Nevertheless, the “random chance” theory of origin is one that merits further investigation.

For instance, many believe that the universe came into existence through an arbitrary process. This idea suggests that the universe could have formed by chance if given a sufficient amount of time. But let’s consider this premise for a moment. In this context, the word “chance” conveys the statistical probability that something will occur. However, this explanation fails if we apply it to the notion that the universe came into existence through random chance.

The problem is that chance by itself is powerless. For example, let’s consider a scenario where two individuals are engaged in a card game. Person one shuffles the deck of cards and then deals a random selection of cards to person two. With this in mind, let’s ask a few relevant questions…

• Did random chance manipulate or control the cards person two received?
• Can “the power of chance” direct specific cards to player two?
• Does “chance” possess the ability to ensure that person two received a pre-determined sequence of cards?

The answer to these questions is obviously no. In this context, chance simply describes the statistical likelihood that one type of card will be dealt instead of another. This illustration helps explain why “random chance” cannot be responsible for the existence of the universe. Chance doesn’t make things happen; it only describes the probability that something will happen.

Here’s another way to demonstrate this idea. Let’s imagine that someone flips a coin in the air. If we flip a coin in the air, the chance that it will land on “heads” is 50%. ₍₁₎ However, “chance” doesn’t make a coin land that way. Instead, that outcome will depend on several variables. Those variables include the size, shape, and weight of the coin. Other contributing factors include the number of revolutions the coin makes, the environmental conditions, and the surface upon which the coin lands.

The point is that “chance” will not make a coin land on heads or tails- that will be determined by other factors. Chance only describes the statistical probability that a coin will land in a certain manner. In the same way, the idea that “random chance” brought the universe into existence is unsustainable because chance has no ability to “do” anything.

Image Credit: “Dice 04” by Thomas Dippel is licensed under CC BY 2.0.

(1) For the purpose of this illustration, we will discount the nominal possibility that a coin will land on its edge after it is flipped.

“For this they willfully forget: that by the word of God the heavens were of old, and the earth standing out of water and in the water, by which the world that then existed perished, being flooded with water” (2 Peter 3:5-6).

The prominent lyricist Paul Simon once observed that, “…a man hears what he wants to hear and disregards the rest.” ₍₁₎ That poetic observance aptly describes 2 Peter 3:5 and its reference to those who “willfully forget.” This serves to identify someone who makes a volitional choice to ignore God’s past intervention into the affairs of His creation.

Today, we might associate this approach with the 21st century concept of “plausible deniability.” This involves an attempt to disavow any knowledge or responsibility for the actions taken by others. While that strategy may succeed with limited human beings, we cannot hide behind the cloak of plausible deniability when facing an omniscient God who knows our every thought and deed.

One translation underscores this attitude of willful neglect in stating that God’s involvement in the affairs of human history “…escapes their notice” (NASB). This does not refer to a minor detail or an insignificant item that might be overlooked. Instead, several commentators highlight the deliberate and intentional nature of that mindset…

“A more precise translation would be, ‘They persistently (Greek progressive present) ignore one obvious fact.'” ₍₂₎

“It was a culpable ignorance.” ₍₃₎

“This term has the connotation of forgetting something or hiding something; therefore, an intent of purposefulness is contained in the term (cf. 2 Pet. 1:9; 3:5,8).” ₍₄₎

“‘Escapes their notice’ in the Greek means forgets purposely by disregarding information.” ₍₅₎

“[T]hey do not wish to know. Their ignorance is voluntary.” ₍₆₎

So those who adopt this mentality purposely forget that things are not the same as they ever were. God is not like the proverbial watchmaker who “wound up the universe” and then left it to run on its own. In fact, the reality is quite the reverse- God has intervened throughout the course of history, as seen most notably in the example of Noah’s flood.

Thus, the world as we know it has not always existed as it does today. There have been cataclysmic occurrences in the past, and such things will occur again in the future, as the Apostle Peter will remind us over the next few verses of this chapter. While such things may have escaped others’ notice, we should take care to ensure they do not escape our notice. ₍₇₎

(1) The Boxer. © 1968 Words and Music by Paul Simon

(2) Edward E. Hindson and Woodrow Michael Kroll, eds., KJV Bible Commentary (Nashville: Thomas Nelson, 1994), 2625.

(3) Kenneth S. Wuest, Word Studies in the Greek New Testament (note on 2 Peter 3:8) Copyright © 1942-55 by Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Co.

(4) Dr. Bob Utley. Free Bible Commentary, Copyright © 2014 Bible Lessons International 2 Peter 3. (n.d.). http://www.freebiblecommentary.org/new_testament_studies/VOL02/VOL02B_09.html

(5) Constable, Thomas. DD. “Commentary on 2 Peter 3”. “Dr. Constable’s Expository Notes”. https://www.studylight.org/commentaries/eng/dcc/2-peter-3.html. 2012.

(6) Jamieson-Fausset-Brown Commentary: Second Peter. (n.d.). https://www.ccel.org/j/jfb/jfb/JFB61.htm

(7) Ibid.

“This will be their line of argument: ‘So Jesus promised to come back, did he? Then where is he? He’ll never come! Why, as far back as anyone can remember, everything has remained exactly as it was since the first day of creation'” (2 Peter 3:4 NLT).

The assertion that “the world remains unchanged” here in 2 Peter 3:4 predates a contemporary theory regarding the processes that have helped shape our present world. That theory asserts that “the present is the key to the past.” The following commentators discuss its relevance to our text from this passage…

“This argument against the second coming of Christ is based on the theory of uniformitarianism, which says that all natural phenomena have operated uniformly since the beginning of the earth. The false teachers were also implying that God is absent from earth affairs.

In effect, they were teaching that, ‘There will not be a great cataclysmic judgmental event at the end of history, because that is not how the universe works. There never has been such a judgment, so why should we expect one in the future? Instead, everything in the universe is stable, closed, fixed, and governed by never varying patterns and principles of evolution. Nothing catastrophic has ever happened in the past, so nothing catastrophic ever will happen in the future. There will be no divine invasion, no supernatural judgment on mankind.'” ₍₁₎

“Their conclusion is based on the careless hypothesis that ‘since the fathers fell asleep, all things continue as they were from the beginning of creation.’ They say that nature invariably follows uniform laws, that there are no supernatural interventions, that there is a natural explanation for everything. They believe in the law of uniformitarianism. This law states that existing processes in nature have always acted in the same manner and with essentially the same intensity as at present, and that these processes are sufficient to account for all the changes that have taken place.” ₍₂₎

By studying the processes of the present, we can often gain valuable insight into the past. However, it is hazardous to presume that all such processes are solely the result of natural causes. The Scriptures tell us that God has previously intervened in world history in a significant manner and will do so again in the future. Our final source guides us toward a better understanding of this concept…

“A valid application of the principle that ‘the present is the key to the past’ is that ‘the kinds of causes known to produce certain kinds of effects in the present can be assumed to produce similar kinds of effects in the past.’ But… this principle does not rule out a credible belief in past miracles, even if no such miracles exist in the present. This use misapplies the principle.” ₍₃₎

Image Credit: Larry D. Moore, CC BY 4.0, via Wikimedia Commons

(1) John F. MacArthur Jr., The MacArthur Study Bible: New American Standard Bible. (Nashville, TN: Thomas Nelson Publishers, 2006), 2 Pe 3:4.

(2) William Macdonald, Believer’s Bible Commentary Edited by Arthur Farstad, Thomas Nelson Publishers [note on 2 Peter 3:4]

(3) Geisler, N. L. 1999. Baker Encyclopedia of Christian Apologetics. Baker reference library. Baker Books: Grand Rapids, Mich. See Troeltsch, Ernst

“They will say, ‘Where is the promise of his coming? For ever since the fathers fell asleep, all things are continuing as they were from the beginning of creation” (2 Peter 3:4 ESV).

2 Peter 3:4 and its reference to the “fathers [who] fell asleep” is an interesting and descriptive expression that deserves a closer look.

You see, the Scriptures occasionally employ the word “sleep” as a figurative reference to death. Mark 5:22-53 offers one such example in relating the account of a local religious leader whose daughter had fallen ill. Although Jesus graciously agreed to heal her, the young girl tragically succumbed to her illness prior to Jesus’ arrival at her home. Jesus thus arrived at a house that was populated by mourners and others who had gathered to express their condolences.

In response, Jesus answered by saying, “Why all this commotion and weeping? The child isn’t dead; she’s only asleep” (NLT). Those who heard this message reacted with laughter, scorn, and ridicule to that assessment. However, they stopped laughing after Jesus put them out of the house and returned the little girl alive to her parents.

The “fathers” mentioned here in 2 Peter 3:4 likely allude to the ancestral generations of many years ago. The idea is that the circle of life begins at conception and ends at death. While civilizations, technologies, and individual lives come and go, the treadmill of life goes on, according to this perspective.

However, that view has two fatal flaws. The first looks forward into the future and the second looks backward into the past. The first flawed assumption involves an indisputable truth: anything that can’t go on forever, won’t go on forever. ₍₁₎ In other words, the supposed absence of change in the past does not mean things can’t or won’t change in the future. The world in its present form cannot go on forever, and even if it does continue past our lifetimes, we are still left with the prospect of confronting an unknown eternity after a few brief decades of life (at best). So this approach is not only flawed, but depressing as well.

The other flawed assumption is that things have remained unchanged in the past. The Apostle Peter will address that view in the following verse, but for now, we should not permit the routine of daily life to lull us into the false assumption that tomorrow will be the same as yesterday, or the days that preceded it. Instead, we would do well to adapt Jesus’ cautionary message from Luke 12:40…

“Therefore you also be ready, for the Son of Man is coming at an hour you do not expect.”

Image Credit: Larry D. Moore, CC BY 4.0, via Wikimedia Commons

(1) Sometimes referred to as “Stein’s Law.” See Quoteresearch. (2018, April 28). If Something Cannot Go On Forever It Will Stop – Quote Investigator®. https://quoteinvestigator.com/2018/04/28/go-on/Accessed 3 September, 2024

“and saying, ‘Where is the promise of His coming? For since the fathers fell asleep, all things continue as they were from the beginning of creation'” (2 Peter 3:4).

It is often easy to associate false teachers or heretical doctrines with cultic organizations or strange religious sects. However, false teachings aren’t limited to such groups- they can come from a variety of other sources as well. You see, false teachers may also exist among the irreligious or the spiritually indifferent. For instance, 2 Peter 3:4 offers a Biblical example of a false teaching that came packaged as something else.

This passage gives us insight into the skepticism of those who dismissed the notion of Jesus’ return by pointing to the lengthy period that has elapsed since His crucifixion and resurrection. Unfortunately, that view is diametrically opposed to the Biblical teaching regarding Jesus’ second advent. We can thus associate this secular mindset with a false teaching, for such individuals operate under the mistaken belief that “…everything has remained the same since the world was first created” (NLT).

While the question posed in 2 Peter 3:4 may represent an honest question for some, it also represents an attitude of presumptuous skepticism for many others. Those who fall into that latter category comprise the mockers or “scoffers” mentioned earlier in verse three. Such questions aren’t based on a genuine desire to learn or understand. Instead, their intent is to ridicule.

This pretentious viewpoint assumes that nothing has changed in the past, and nothing is likely to change in the foreseeable future as well. That represents an opinion that the Apostle Peter will address over the next few verses. In the meantime, we can say that the more frequently we observe these types of behaviors, the closer we are to Christ’s return. As one source reminds us…

“Peter, like Paul (1Th 5:1f.; 2Th 2:1f. ), preached about the second coming (1:16; Ac 3:20f. ), as Jesus himself did repeatedly (Mt 24:34 ) and as the angels promised at the Ascension (Ac 1:11 ). Both Jesus and Paul (2Th 2:1f. ) were misunderstood on the subject of the time and the parables of Jesus urged readiness and forbade setting dates for his coming.” ₍₁₎

In contrast to those who choose to disregard the Biblical teachings related to Jesus’ second advent, it is important to live in anticipation of His return. Whether Christ returns for someone at the end of his or her life (whenever that occurs) or whether He returns to begin a new era of history, our responsibility is to be ready whenever He appears.

(1) 2 Peter 3 – Robertson’s Word Pictures in the New Testament – Bible Commentaries – StudyLight.org. (n.d.). StudyLight.org. https://www.studylight.org/commentaries/eng/rwp/2-peter-3.html

“Knowing this first, that there shall come in the last days scoffers, walking after their own lusts” (2 Peter 3:3 KJV).

Our author has repeatedly addressed the risks associated with an attitude of lust over the course of this epistle. For example, the word “lust” (in its various forms) appears four times in the three chapters of this letter. 2 Peter 3:3 serves as one such example in describing those who walk after their own lusts.

In a general sense, “lust” is a characteristic that is found among those who seek to exploit others in various ways. It may also involve a desire to possess or control someone (or something) that belongs to someone else. Whenever we engage is such behaviors, we effectively strip others of their humanity and objectify them for use in gratifying our needs or desires. One translation of this passage helps communicate this idea in speaking of those “…whose only guide in life is what they want for themselves” (Phillips).

Since lust is typically distinguished by selfishness (Colossians 3:5 and 1 Thessalonians 4:4-5), it is incompatible with the God who is love (1 John 4:8, 1 Corinthians 13:4-7). In the words of one source, “Those who give way to their own lusts will always mock at any incentive to noble living.” ₍₁₎ This behavior will signify a growing trend as we approach the end of days.

This characteristic is also associated with the act of “walking” in our text from 2 Peter 3:3. “Walking” is a Biblical idiom that refers to our conduct, disposition, and/or manner of life. 2 Corinthians 5:7 employs this idea in a positive sense when it tells us that God’s people are those who “…walk by faith, not by sight.” We find a similar example in Colossians 2:6: “As you therefore have received Christ Jesus the Lord, so walk in Him.”

However, the scoffers mentioned here in 2 Peter 3:3 are those who travel a different path. Thus, it is important to recognize that this type of conduct is not a mistake, an accident, a momentary indiscretion, or an isolated lapse in judgment. Instead, “lustfulness” represents an ingrained pattern of behavior, or a characteristic quality that serves to distinguish these individuals.

The following Biblical commentator shares several insights on this passage that are well worth our attention…

“False teachers who know not the truth and know not God have nothing to restrain their lusts. They particularly mock the second coming of Jesus Christ because they want to pursue impure sexual pleasure without consequence, or without having to face divine retribution. They want an eschatology that fits their conduct (cf. 1Jn 2:28, 29; 3:2, 3).” ₍₂₎

Image Credit: Cheapthrill, Public domain, via Wikimedia Commons

(1) Wheaton, David H. “2 Peter.” In The New Bible Commentary, Revised. Third edition. Edited by Donald Guthrie and J. A. Motyer. Downers Grove, Ill.: InterVarsity Press, 1970. p. 1257. Quoted in Notes on 2 Peter 2024 Edition, Dr. Thomas L. Constable https://www.planobiblechapel.org/tcon/notes/html/nt/2peter/2peter.htm

(2) John F. MacArthur Jr., The MacArthur Study Bible: New American Standard Bible. (Nashville, TN: Thomas Nelson Publishers, 2006), 2 Pe 3:3.

“knowing this first: that scoffers will come in the last days, walking according to their own lusts” (2 Peter 3:3).

The word “first” can be used to mark the beginning of a numerical sequence or denote something of primary importance. The Apostle Peter has that second definition in view regarding the things he will say over the next few verses. Those things relate to blatant scoffers (NET), or mockers (Phillips) who will “…laugh at the truth” (TLB).

A “scoffer” is defined as someone who expresses derision or scorn for another person or thing. ₍₁₎ The Biblical definition of this word serves to identify someone who derides another person. ₍₂₎ While many of us are probably acquainted with those who exhibit such traits, “scoffing” actually has a lengthy history that dates back to the Garden of Eden.

For instance, Genesis 3: 1 tells us that the devil (in the form of a serpent) approached Eve with a seemingly harmless question: “Did God really say you must not eat the fruit from any of the trees in the garden?” (Genesis 3:1 NLT).

When Eve stated that consuming the fruit from the Tree of the Knowledge of Good and Evil would bring certain death, the serpent responded with a scoffer’s retort: “’…You will not surely die. For God knows that in the day you eat of it your eyes will be opened, and you will be like God, knowing good and evil’” (Genesis 3:4-5). This episode illuminates an unfortunate reality: those who choose to scoff at God’s Word in the last days are not unlike the one who scoffed at God’s Word in the first days.

That brings us to the difference between the “end times” and the “last days” mentioned here in 2 Peter 3:3. Although these terms are sometimes used interchangeably, the term “end times” commonly refers to the events that will unfold shortly before this era of human history concludes. In contrast, the “last days” began with Jesus’ ascension and will expire upon His return.

For instance, the Biblical book of Hebrews tells us, “…in these last days [God] has spoken to us by his Son, whom he appointed the heir of all things, through whom also he created the world” (Hebrews 1:2 ESV). So this reference to the “last days” pertains to the current period of human history, an era where God has spoken to us through His Son.

So while scoffers have been present in every era, we can expect them to increase in number as we approach the end of this chapter in human history.

(1) scoffer. (n.d.) American Heritage® Dictionary of the English Language, Fifth Edition. (2011). Retrieved August 26 2024 from https://www.thefreedictionary.com/scoffer

(2) G1703 – empaiktes – Strong’s Greek Lexicon (kjv). (n.d.). Blue Letter Bible. https://www.blueletterbible.org/lexicon/g1703/kjv/tr/0-1/

This is now the second letter that I am writing to you, beloved. In both of them I am stirring up your sincere mind by way of reminder, that you should remember the predictions of the holy prophets and the commandment of the Lord and Savior through your apostles” (2 Peter 3:1-2 ESV).

In addition to expressing the Apostle Peter’s deep affection for his readers, our text from 2 Peter 3:1 also makes reference to a “sincere mind” or “wholesome thinking” (NIV). However, the passage quoted above defines sincerity in a way that transcends the ordinary definitions of honesty, earnestness, and candor.

Although sincerity is often associated with a lack of pretense, this word is rooted in the concept of “judging by sunlight” in the original language of 2 Peter 3:1. While it may be difficult to see the correlation between these ideas, some background information can help establish a connection between these seemingly unrelated themes. To do so, let’s return to the scene of a first century marketplace to witness a prospective transaction between a buyer and a seller.

In ancient times, an unethical merchant might seek to market a defective earthenware vessel to an unsuspecting customer. To accomplish this, a dishonest vendor would camouflage the damaged portion of a container by carefully applying a thin layer of wax. Once painted, the final product looked as if it was in perfect condition- until the purchaser attempted to fill it with water and subsequently discovered the truth.

To avoid that problem, a knowledgeable consumer would inspect a potential purchase by holding it up to the sun and looking within. The resulting sunlight would instantly illuminate any damage that had been repaired in such a manner. Armed with that information, a prospective buyer could negotiate a better price or discard the damaged item in favor of an unbroken piece.

So how does this apply to contemporary readers of this passage? Well, this portion of Scripture reminds us of the need to maintain sincerity and authenticity in our thinking. Unlike those who avoid being honest with themselves, the Biblical Scriptures encourage us to cultivate a God-honoring thought life that is truthful and ethical. Then, if we are “brought into the light” and examined by others, it will be evident that we are sincere individuals who genuinely represent God, rather than hypocritical “cracked pots.”

This brief aside also encourages us to avoid the path chosen by the false teachers that Peter identified for us in the previous chapter. A person who displays a “pure mind” (NET) thus serves as an appropriate contrast to others who prefer “…carousing in their own deceptions” (2 Peter 2:13).

Image Credit: “A very old crack” by Unhindered by Talent is licensed under CC BY-SA 2.0.

The final chapter of the book of 2 Peter reveals our author’s deep affection for his readers. In fact, the word “beloved” appears five times in the eighteen verses that comprise this portion of Scripture. Within this chapter, the Apostle will encourage his audience to reflect on the past, consider the future, and seek guidance for the present in order to “…grow in the grace and knowledge of our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ” (2 Peter 3:18).

The opening verses of chapter three mark the beginning of that journey…

“Beloved, I now write to you this second epistle (in both of which I stir up your pure minds by way of reminder), that you may be mindful of the words which were spoken before by the holy prophets, and of the commandment of us, the apostles of the Lord and Savior” (2 Peter 3:1-2).

This reference to “my second letter” (NIV) likely refers to the Biblical book of 1 Peter. If so, this highlights Peter’s commitment to reinforce the sound doctrinal teachings he shared earlier. Furthermore, the last chapter of this letter (and Peter’s determination to stir up their pure minds “by way of reminder”) parallels a trio of similar commitments from the first chapter…

• “I will not be negligent to remind you always of these things” (2 Peter 1:12).
• “Yes, I think it is right …to stir you up by reminding you” (2 Peter 1:13).
• “…I will be careful to ensure that you always have a reminder of these things…” (2 Peter 1:15).

So, Peter’s intent in authoring this letter was not merely instructional, but to serve as a reminder for his readers to apply what they had already learned. In light of this, Peter endeavored to stir his audience to action. Much as a homeowner might stir up the coals in a fireplace to bring warmth and light to a home, Peter sought to ignite their desire to grasp Jesus’ teachings and act on them. The same holds true for contemporary readers of this epistle as we reflect on the teachings of the Scriptures and seek to put them into practice.

Finally, we should note this reference to “…the words spoken in the past by the holy prophets and the command given by our Lord and Savior through your apostles” (NIV). This serves to establish an equal level of authority between the Old Testament prophets and New Testament apostles. Our author will revisit this topic again near the end of this chapter when he introduces us to a special guest.
Image Attribution: Rickyukon, CC BY-SA 4.0, via Wikimedia Commons