“cultivating character qualities”

Download discussion questions:  2 Peter 1:10-2:1
Jump to beginning of 2 Peter Discussion Group Blog
Jump to Introduction to 2 Peter

I encourage you to look at the passage in 2 Peter before you read this Blog entry.  What do you see in the text yourself?  What questions come to your mind?  How would you interpret what the writer says?  After even a few minutes examining and thinking about the text you will be much better prepared to evaluate the comments in the Blog.

Peter uses the word “therefore” twice at the beginning of this passage to connect with the opening.  Our first order of business was to review what Peter wrote there to see the double connection he is making.

Therefore…Therefore

When a writer uses “therefore,” a conclusion or a recommendation usually follows, as in, “I just explained A, therefore, you should understand or know or do B.”  We first need to clarify what has been explained (the “A”), and then we can ask how we should understand the expected result (the “B”).

The first part of Peter’s letter focused on a list of character qualities believers should diligently pursue (2 Peter 1:5-7).  Rather than requirements for “gaining God’s favor,” Peter offers those character qualities as evidence of the reality of our relationship with Christ.  The practice and increase of those qualities demonstrate the work of God in the believer and the assurance of his or her calling and election (v. 10).  “Therefore” is used twice to connect that assurance with what follows.

The first “therefore” (v. 10) confirms that assurance.  The genuine growth in character as evidence of God’s work in a believer’s life authenticates the calling into “the eternal kingdom of our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ” (v. 11).

The second “therefore” takes us to more detail about Peter’s reason for writing.  Peter desires to remind his audience of the crucial significance of the qualities (mentioned again in verse 12).  In addition, he begins to warn of potential threats of false teachers.  Their leading could undermine those qualities and dilute the assurance that Peter wants for his readers.

The Qualities

Our conversation included a brief review of the previous passage (discussed two weeks before). Someone suggested that while the qualities cannot be manufactured, they can be cultivated.  Another member (a gardener) picked up on the word “cultivated.” Like vegetables, character qualities are the work of God.

Peter opened his letter with affirmations of the lavish work God has already accomplished in believers.  He has granted us

• • all things that pertain to life and godliness. (v. 3, emphasis added)
  • precious and very great promises, so that through them you may become partakers of the divine nature (v. 4, emphasis added)

His desire is for his readers to continue in the growing experience of what God is doing.  The qualities provide evidence confirming their “calling and election” (v. 10) precisely because the qualities are God’s work.  We cannot manufacture the genuine results on our own.

However, like vegetables, we can cultivate conditions conducive to growth.  Removing weeds and picking off Japanese beetles were mentioned as illustrations of “removing the bad stuff,” eliminating obstacles to healthy increase.

Likewise with character qualities, we can cultivate that increase.   What internal struggles defeat our patience?  How does our self-protection prevent brotherly affection?  What can we identify that interferes with perseverance?  (Make your own list.  It won’t be hard.)

When we begin thinking of Peter’s remainders in the context of our own life, we start to understand his urgency.

Urgency

Peter communicates a clear sense of urgency.  Although he uses figurative language (“putting off my body” in verse 14, “my departure” in verse 15), he is plainly anticipating his own imminent death.  Instead of expressing fear or anxiety, he has a clear objective.  He wants to “stir up” (v. 13) with words and images to be remembered (vv. 12, 13, 15).  Peter comes back to the same theme later in his letter:

I am stirring up your sincere mind by way of reminder… (2 Peter 3:1, emphasis added)

Throughout his letter Peter wants to leave his readers with memorable teaching to support their Christian life.  As someone in our group mentioned, the fact that we are still reading and studying his letter might be more stirring than even Peter imagined.

As we continue in his letter, we will no doubt be seeing parallels with the problems in our culture.  An interesting question to consider:  What do we want people to remember from our lives when we are gone?  Do we have Peter’s urgency?

Myths and Eyewitnesses

What does he want to remind his readers about?  Before moving into the meat of his message, he offers a bit more explanation.

¹⁶ For we did not follow cleverly devised myths when we made known to you the power and coming of our Lord Jesus Christ, but we were eyewitnesses of his majesty. ¹⁷ For when he received honor and glory from God the Father, and the voice was borne to him by the Majestic Glory, “This is my beloved Son, with whom I am well pleased,” (2 Peter 1:16-17, emphasis added)

Like the word “therefore,” the word “for” (at the beginning of verses 16 and 17) is another helpful clue for interpretation.  If “therefore” introduces a conclusion, “for” often provides a reason or clarification. (Notice here again Peter “doubles up” on his logical language.  In verses 10 and 12 “therefore” is repeated.  He wants to make sure his readers follow the careful explanation he is laying out.)

Peter wants to assure his readers of his credibility.  The phrase comes to mind, “I’m not making this stuff up.”  Since he is about to challenge false teachers (2 Peter 2:1, ff), he establishes a contrast between the sources of teaching: his versus theirs.

Peter emphatically denies depending on “myths,” and someone asked about the meaning of the word.  Today, the English word has a range of meanings, including some legitimate literary descriptions (as any fan of C.S. Lewis knows).  The word in the New Testament (μῦθος, mythos) is always used in a negative sense (five times: 1 Timothy 1:4; 4:7; 2 Timothy 4:4; Titus 1:14; 2 Peter 1:16): myth, story, tale, a fable.[1]  One person in our discussion offered the description “modified truth.”

In the observation portion that began our study people connected “cleverly devised myths” (v. 16) with “someone’s own interpretation” (v. 20) and “produced by the will of man” (v. 21) We compared those descriptions with the currently popular idea of “my truth” and “your truth,” reality defined as the way I choose it to be.  Peter wants no association with that kind of “modified truth.”

Instead, Peter points to his eyewitness experience of the majesty and honor and glory (vv. 16-17) that Jesus received from God the Father.  He describes his experience (along with James and John) on the Mount of Transfigurations (Matthew 17:1-8; Mark 9:2-8; Luke 9:28-36).  He describes the result of the experience as having “the prophetic word more fully confirmed” (v. 19).  It is hard to imagine a wider contrast: made-up myths versus the Word of God.

However, the credentials that Peter provides raised some questions in our group.

• • Why point to the transfiguration? Why not the resurrection, or the ascension, or raising of Lazarus? Why did Peter choose that experience as his eyewitness qualification?
  • What is Peter indicating about experience and Scripture? Did he need the experience on the mountain to confirm the validity of the Scripture?

Why the Transfiguration?

One of the observations we made earlier in our study was the sudden change in pronouns from “I” (vv. 12-15) to “we” (vv. 16-19).  When our discussion got to the comments about the Transfiguration, the grammar made sense.  Peter simply switches from a very personal topic (his impending death) to the experience he shared with two other disciples.

The three with Jesus were the only mortal witnesses: the intimate band of Peter, James, and John.  Multitudes had witnessed Jesus’s teaching and healings.  Crowds had seen the risen Christ and witnessed His ascension.  But eyewitness testimony of the glorified Christ as He was affirmed by the Father could only come from three men.  Peter is appealing to that more exclusive authority.

Experience and Scripture?

Peter describes the impact that “mountain top experience” had on him (and James and John – “we”).

we were with him on the holy mountain.  And we have the prophetic word more fully confirmed (2 Peter 1:18b-19a).

Is Peter suggesting that the experience was required to confirm his confidence in Scripture?  Should we have experiences before we can fully trust the Bible?  Do we need tongues or miracles or healings or some other dramatic event to verify or prove the validity of the Bible?  Some Christians would claim such a need for a “second blessing” to augment confidence in God’s Word.

The two views are often juxtaposed as, “Do we interpret our experiences by the authority of God’s Word, or do we understand God’s Word in light of our experiences?”

But these may be the wrong questions.  It is likely that most (or all) members of our group would give priority to God’s revealed Word no matter what we may or may not experience.  But Peter may not be addressing that issue at all.

What if Peter is not describing a greater confidence in Scripture itself?  What if he points to the transfiguration to clarify the common Jewish interpretation of “the prophetic word”?  That phrase

was a current expression embracing the OT as a whole and not simply the prophets proper.  The writer probably has no particular passage in mind, but … assumes that the OT in all its parts confidently looked forward to the glorious coming of the Messiah and His subsequent establishment of His kingdom.[2]

“The prophetic word” was subject to a wide variety of interpretations in the first century.  Some (many?) Jews were anticipating a military leader to overthrow the Romans.  At the same time,

Some in the early church may have so spiritualized these prophecies that they eliminated any future reference.[3]

Peter enthusiastically affirms that the Transfiguration completely clarified (“more fully confirmed”) the future, factual fulfilment of the combined message of the Jewish Scriptures.  He is not ranking Scripture and experience.  He is clarifying the correct interpretation of all the prophecy.  Along with James and John, he saw Jesus, the glorified Messiah, the ultimate fulfillment of “the prophetic word.”  As one of our members described it, “He had a peek into eternity.”  For Peter there was no debate about how the prophetic word should be interpreted.

The word bebaioteron [“more fully confirmed” – mw] should be taken in context as signifying a comparison so that the transfiguration provides confirmation of the interpretation of the prophetic word.  The transfiguration, then is not conceived as more or less reliable than the prophetic word.  It provides a confirmatory interpretation of that word, and this interpretation was granted to Peter and the other apostles.  The transfiguration shows that the promise of the Lord’s coming should be taken to refer to a future historical event and cannot be dismissed as a “spiritual truth.”[4]

Or, as another writer expressed a bit more succinctly,

The transfiguration is God’s own exegesis of the prophetic word.[5]

A Lamp and A Star

In contrast to the myths of one’s own interpretation or the teaching of false prophets, Peter points his readers back to Scripture.  He offers two images of light (v. 19).

A lamp illustrates the centrality of Scripture, our guidance in the “dark place” (v. 19) of our world.  As someone mentioned, the closer you get to the lamp, the better you can see.  Peter emphasizes the work of God the Holy Spirit in Scripture.  The Spirit inspires (or “carries along,” v. 21) those who wrote it, and He illuminates us as we read and study it.

One person pointed out the word “until” in verse 19.  Our attention to the Word, the “lamp” is critical “until the morning star rises in your hearts.”

The “morning star” is almost certainly the returning Jesus Christ,[6] especially if Peter understood the transfiguration as a foretaste of His glorious coming.

When Jesus comes, we will not need the prophetic word to shine in a dark place – this sinful world.  Then our hearts will be enlightened by the Morning Star himself, and that to which prophecy points will have arrived.[7]

Thus, Peter gives us the touchstone or benchmark for today (Scripture), and he points to the infinitely brighter illumination we will enjoy when Jesus returns.  The illumination from that Morning Star will endure for eternity.

The Warning

He begins with encouraging and challenging assurance of God’s continual work.  Now Peter points to the purpose of his remainders.  False teachers are infiltrating the Christian community, potentially undermining that assurance.  False prophets distorted the prophetic word of the old covenant with myths and personal interpretations.  Likewise, false teachers are already distorting the gospel and the message of the new covenant.  Peter’s letter is primarily intended to make his readers aware of the distortions and to keep them on the right way (cf. 2:15).

The most discussion about the end of this passage grew from the phrase describing the false teachers: “denying the Master who bought them” (2:1b).  Were the false teachers genuine believers, redeemed (“bought”) by Christ?  Had they now repudiated the faith and renounced the gospel?  The larger question at stake:  Can the elect lose their salvation?

As one participant in our group pointed out, 2 Peter 2:1 is a favorite verse of Arminian theology. Those who would argue that Christians can lose their salivation use the verse as definitive proof of their beliefs.  Others (following “Reformed” theology) deny that possibility, but as one Reformed member acknowledged, that short phrase is a challenge to his belief.

To no one’s surprise, we did not resolve the question at the end of our time together.  A few points came up to set the stage for a future discussion.

• • Peter’s stated desire is that his audience would “make their calling and election certain.” Describing anyone (even false teachers) losing their salvation would seem to undermine Peter’s intent.
  • If Peter is trying to give his readers confident assurance, the interpretation that genuine believers could be lost would contradict that assurance.
  • As mentioned above, Peter begins his letter with unconditional assertions of God’s accomplished work and an anticipation of “partaking in the divine nature.” Would he now say that the false teachers once had those blessings and now had forfeited them?

Taking segments of any Biblical book has the advantage of detailed study.  The disadvantage is the fragmentary context.  This is the case regarding the question of “denying the Master who bought them.”

This is an issue we will face again in this chapter…[8]

We will be more equipped to discuss and understand the meaning of this phrase when Peter returns to the idea in verses 15-22.

Leaving that question and those verses for another discussion (soon!), remember Peter’s reminders.  Our faith is not the result of myths or any person’s imaginative interpretation.  We have God’s own Word in His on words as our immediate lamp.  That lamp is our sure light in all the dark places we face.  And we have the hope and assurance of a coming Morning Star.  May that anticipation enable our endurance.

---

[1] https://www.billmounce.com/greek-dictionary/mythos

[2] J. N. D. Kelly, The Epistles of Peter and Jude, Black’s New Testament Commentary (Peabody, Massachusetts:  Hendrickson Publishers, 1969), 321.

[3] Douglas J. Moo, 2 Peter, Jude: The NIV Application Commentary (Grand Rapids, Michigan: Zondervan Academic, 1996), 76.

[4] Thomas R. Schreiner, 1 & 2 Peter and Jude, Christian Standard Commentary (Nashville:  Holman, 2020), 382.

[5] D. Harink, quoted in Thomas R. Schreiner, 1 & 2 Peter and Jude, Christian Standard Commentary (Nashville:  Holman, 2020), 381; italics in the original.

[6] Thomas R. Schreiner, 1 & 2 Peter and Jude, Christian Standard Commentary (Nashville:  Holman, 2020), 383.

[7] Thomas R. Schreiner, 1 & 2 Peter and Jude, Christian Standard Commentary (Nashville:  Holman, 2020), 384.

[8] Thomas R. Schreiner, 1 & 2 Peter and Jude, Christian Standard Commentary (Nashville:  Holman, 2020), 396.