“there are those that genuinely viscerally hate Biblical truth”
Download discussion questions: 2 Peter 2:1-11
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.
As we began our discussion, one person commented that the passage “doesn’t seem straightforward.” Others noted that there are numerous contrasts and juxtapositions in Peter’s writing here. Those kinds of observations set the stage for exploring the passage. How does understanding those similarities and differences lead to accurate interpretation of the text?
False Teachers and Angels?
One of the seeming oddities is the abrupt switch in verse 4. Peter is describing the numerous offenses of the false teachers in verses 1-3:
-
- Destructive heresies
- Denying the Master
- Sensuality
- Truth is blasphemed
- Greed
- Exploitation
- False words
He could have expanded on any one of those topics to benefit his readers (like us!). Instead, he seems to change to a new topic. He begins talking about angels.
As mentioned in previous articles, the word “for” (γὰρ, gar) is almost always a helpful signpost indicating that an explanation follows. Rather than going down an unrelated “rabbit hole,” the writer actually is going deeper into his topic, clarifying what he just wrote.
A String of “Ifs”
The explanation that follows the “for” consists of a series of four “if” conditions, climaxed by a “then” conclusion. Consider this outline of the passage (vv. 4-9):
For
…..if God did not spare angels
……………when they sinned,
……….but cast them into hell and
……………committed them to chains of gloomy
……………darkness to be kept until the judgment;
…..5 if he did not spare the ancient world,
……….but preserved Noah,
……………a herald of righteousness,
……………with seven others,
……………when he brought a flood upon the world of the ungodly;
…..6 if by turning the cities of Sodom and Gomorrah to ashes
……….he condemned them to extinction,
……………making them an example of
……………what is going to happen to the ungodly;
…..7 and if he rescued righteous Lot,
……………greatly distressed by the sensual conduct
……………of the wicked
………………..8 (for as that righteous man lived
………………..among them day after day,
………………..he was tormenting his righteous soul
………………..over their lawless deeds that he saw and heard);
…..9 then the Lord knows how
……………to rescue the godly from trials, and
……………to keep the unrighteous under punishment
…..until the day of judgment,
Or simplified to focus on Peter’s logic:
For
…..if God did not spare angels
……….but cast them into hell and
…..5 if he did not spare the ancient world,
……….but preserved Noah,
…..6 if by turning the cities of Sodom and Gomorrah to ashes
……….he condemned them to extinction,
…..7 and if he rescued righteous Lot,
…..9 then the Lord knows how
……………to rescue the godly from trials, and
……………to keep the unrighteous under punishment
…..until the day of judgment,
One “if”[1] using a clear example from the Jewish Scriptures should be enough. Peter wants to make sure there is no mistaking his point, so he offers four powerful inspired illustrations, mixing (juxtaposing in our group’s early comment) judgment and rescue. He uses the form of “if” that can be translated “since” when the condition is clearly true.[2] The four examples confirm the certainty of the condition: Since God has done this…and this…and this…and this…then ….
Peter “draws the threads together”[3] to a clear conclusion in verse 9:
the Lord knows how to rescue the godly from trials, and to keep the unrighteous under punishment until the day of judgment,
History shows that God is serious about both rescue and judgment and that He knows what He is doing for both.
Rescue
His rescue is not always obvious, as several members of our group are currently experiencing. What does Peter mean about God’s rescue from trials?
As our past studies have shown consistently, Peter[4] in his first letter, James[5], and the writer to the Hebrews[6] all expected believers to face trials and different degrees of suffering. Is Peter now saying that God immediately rescues the godly from trial (or testing or temptation; πειρασμός, peirasmos, just as in Hebrews, James, and 1 Peter)?
Peter could be understood as saying that believers will not have to experience times of trial, in the sense that God will exempt them from facing any trials at all, but such a reading is clearly mistaken.[7]
Someone pointed out the word “until” in verse 9, “until the day of judgment” (ESV, NLT, etc.) or “for the day of judgment” (NASB, NIV, etc.). One suggestion was that Peter means that both the rescue and the judgment are accomplished at the Last Day. All of the dimensions of peirasmos (trial, testing, and temptation) will cease for the believer through God’s ultimate rescue.
Does God’s ultimate rescue have effects here and now? Expectations of “rescue” can be a problem if those expectations extend to relief from all pain or suffering or difficulties. What exactly does God promise to rescue us from?
There is probably is an allusion to the Lord’s Prayer, in which believers are urged to pray that the Lord would deliver them from temptation (Matt 6:13, cf. Luke 11:4; Matt 26.41). The danger in a time of trial is apostasy (Luke 8:13, 22:28). God is faithful and promises to keep his people in such circumstances (1 Cor 10:13; Rev 3:10; cf. Sir 33:1) … We should not separate the final test, however, from the tests oppressing Peter’s readers at the time the letter was written because any trial becomes an occasion in which one’s faithfulness to the Lord is tested.[8]
Peter is not promising immediate relief from suffering. He is giving assurance to genuine believers. Their growing character qualities, such as self-control and steadfastness now (2 Peter 1:6), are part of God’s ultimate rescue.
This merging of daily reality and future destiny is supported by the fact that “trial” (peirasmos) in verse 9 is singular. For example, consider the translation:
then the Lord knows how to rescue the godly from trial, and to keep the unrighteous under punishment for the day of judgment,[9] (Legacy Standard Bible, emphasis added)
This detail is obscured when a number of versions[10]
…take some liberty here, translating a Greek word that is singular with a plural English word.[11]
God’s rescue will lump all trials and testings and temptations into a single problem to be overcome, both now and in the day of judgment.
Sensuality and Blasphemy
At the beginning of this article there is a list of numerous offenses of the false teachers in verses 1-3. In this passage Peter comes back to two of those sins: sensuality (vv.2a, 7b; cf. “defiling passion” in v. 10) and blasphemy (vv. 2b, 10b, 11b; cf. v. 12). One natural interpretive question would be, “Why does Peter give special attention (“especially”, v. 10) to these two issues?”
Sensuality
Sensuality (or debauchery, or lewdness; ἀσέλγεια aselgeia)[12] may have been the primary problem brought in by the false teachers (one of the “destructive heresies” in verse 1). Peter and Jude seem to be dealing with similar issues. Jude provides extra detail about their sensuality (using the same word), describing them as
ungodly people, who pervert the grace of our God into sensuality [aselgeia – mw] and deny our only Master and Lord, Jesus Christ. (Jude 4b)
The sensuality they were promoting twists God’s grace, perhaps in the way Paul warns against in Romans 6:1:
Are we to continue in sin that grace may abound? By no means!
Or perhaps even more simply, they may have taught that grace covers sin, so now sin doesn’t matter. Later in the letter (v. 19) we learn that part of the attraction of the false teachers was the promise of “freedom.” Freedom to practice sensuality (because of grace) would certainly contribute to the result Peter predicts, “Many will follow their sensuality…” (v. 2).
Our own day provides ample evidence of this disastrous distortion. It seems almost daily we hear of false teachers, some claiming to be believers. They entice people to follow the culture’s lead in sensuality,
“exvangelicals” who go on to become some of Christianity’s most strenuous attackers, unapologetically playing “hardball” with shallow arguments that are rhetorically effective on the poorly catechized.[13]
(To further illustrate the point, the magazine article containing that quotation features a photo of two members of the same sex holding the sign “we all deserve the freedom to marry,” with a rainbow flag in the background.)
Jude also connects their perversion of grace to their denial of “our only Master and Lord Jesus Christ” (Jude 4b), a denial also condemned by Peter (v. 1). Perhaps the false teachers taught that because of the “freedom” they offered, now grace is not needed. Then they could deny that Jesus was even necessary. (Later in this chapter we will explore more about what “denying the Master” might mean.)
These motives and tactics of the false teachers are all speculation of course. In any case, we begin to see that the sensuality was a serious issue with effects that went deep into doctrine and wide across behavior. That far-reaching impact explains why Peter emphasizes sensuality as one of two of his highlighted topics.
Blasphemy
His second highlight (suggested by repetition in the passage) is blasphemy (vv. 2, 10, 11, 12).
Everybody knows what “blasphemy” means, right? It’s saying bad things about or to God.
Yet that definition doesn’t fit the three uses of the word in this passage – four if you look at the next verse (v. 12). None of Peter’s charges of blasphemy directly involve God.
-
- the truth will be blasphemed (v. 2)
- they blaspheme the glorious ones (v. 10)
- angels do not blaspheme them [the false teachers[14]] (v. 11)
- they blaspheme about matters of which they are ignorant (v. 12)
We need to explore a bit more about “blasphemy” (βλασφημέω blasphēmeō; insult, slander, curse, defame, revile).[15] Obviously any of those definitions directed toward God would be what we understand as blasphemy. Opponents of Jesus frequently used it as a serious charge against Him (Matthew 9:3, 26:65; Luke 5:21; John 10:33, etc.), accusing Him of making Himself equal to God or claiming an intimacy with God.
On the other hand, “blasphemy” is also used in a non-theological sense, as “derided” (Mark 15:29), or “railed” (Luke 23:39), or “slander” (Romans 3:8), or “malign” (1 Peter 4:4). (Compare different versions[16] for other ways the word is translated.)
Considering that range of meaning, Peter’s uses in this passage should become more clear. Blasphemy can be to trivialize, to not take seriously, to distort the value of. It’s easy to see how these expressions fit our usual understanding of blasphemy against God. We can also see how the word is used to describe other relational sin, sin against other persons. The different expressions fit Peter’s uses in this passage:
The false teachers
In contrast, greater, more powerful angels
-
- do not trivialize or underestimate the false teachers (v. 11), even when the false teachers show contempt for them (v. 10)
A fundamental flaw in the false teachers is that they “despise authority” (v. 10a), whether God Himself or the weight of truth or the power of angels. As a person in our group said, “They had no boundaries. They only cared about what today would be called ‘my truth’.” That attitude is the essence of all expressions of disrespect toward God or toward people. That’s why blasphemy is the second critical issue, along with sensuality, that receives Peter’s special attention.
The Lord Knows How
This passage begins and ends with serious warnings. “Many will follow” (v. 2a) the “bold and willful” (v. 10b) false teachers. Their superficially appealing message of “freedom” and their self-assured, assertive manner could potentially distract sincere efforts to follow Christ. The message that Peter urgently communicates is at least as relevant today. (Kevin DeYoung specifically mentions “young people” as well as “ourselves” because this interview was conducted two days after the assassination of Charlie Kirk.)
I think it is a moment to help young people and really ourselves remember that what we’ve had for a long time in this country is historically not the case for a lot of Christians around the world. That is, a relatively friendly, peaceable cultural climate, and to see that there are those that genuinely viscerally hate Biblical truth, hate what Jesus stood for, hate the message of the cross and of Christ is something our kids need to understand, not to be fearful, but to be prepared.[19]
That tragic, chilling reminder gives us an immediate sense of the climate that Peter knew and the challenges to the faith of his audience. In the middle of his warnings about those challenges, he offers his readers ample evidence (vv. 4-8) of the encouragement we also need today:
the Lord knows how to rescue the godly from trials, and to keep the unrighteous under punishment until the day of judgment, (v. 9)
The ultimate reality is not those who “viscerally hate Biblical truth.” The ultimate reality is the Sovereign Lord who is the Author of the story who will bring His story to His desired conclusion.
[1] Technically, there is only one “if” (εἰ, ei) in the passage, but it is clearly distributed among the four clauses in these verses. Repeating the “if” in most translations is an aid to the English reader that the original audience did not need.
[2] William D. Mounce, Basics of Biblical Greek (Grand Rapids, Michigan: Zondervan, 1993), 330, “First Class Conditional Sentences.”
[3] Thomas R. Schreiner, 1 & 2 Peter and Jude, Christian Standard Commentary (Nashville: Holman, 2020), 410.
[4] https://www.goodnotsafe.com/1-peter-a-brief-introduction/
[5] https://www.goodnotsafe.com/james-a-brief-introduction/
[6] https://www.goodnotsafe.com/why-study-and-blog-about-hebrews/
[7] Thomas R. Schreiner, 1 & 2 Peter and Jude, Christian Standard Commentary (Nashville: Holman, 2020), 411.
[8] Thomas R. Schreiner, 1 & 2 Peter and Jude, Christian Standard Commentary (Nashville: Holman, 2020), 411.
[9] https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=2%20Peter%202%3A9&version=LSB
[10] https://www.biblegateway.com/verse/en/2%20Peter%202%3A9
[11] Douglas J. Moo, 2 Peter, Jude: The NIV Application Commentary (Grand Rapids, Michigan: Zondervan Academic, 1996), 106.
[12] https://www.billmounce.com/greek-dictionary/aselgeia
[13] Bethel McGrew, “Playing Hardball,” World Magazine, June 2025.
https://wng.org/opinions/playing-hardball-1750996380
[14] Peter H. Davids, The Letters of 2 Peter and Jude, The Pillar New Testament Commentary (Grand Rapids, Michigan: William B. Eerdmans Publishing Company, 2006), 235;
Note that Schreiner (p. 416) argues that the object is evil angels; but “glorious ones,” δόξας, is feminine and “them,” αὐτῶν, is masculine.
[15] https://www.billmounce.com/greek-dictionary/blasphemeo
[16] https://www.biblegateway.com/verse/en/2%20Peter%202%3A12
[17] Douglas J. Moo, 2 Peter, Jude: The NIV Application Commentary (Grand Rapids, Michigan: Zondervan Academic, 1996), 121.
[18] Thomas R. Schreiner, 1 & 2 Peter and Jude, Christian Standard Commentary (Nashville: Holman, 2020), 416; Schreiner points out that “human beings will judge angels, not vice versa (1 Cor 6:3).
[19] Keven DeYoung, “A Shaken Moment,” World Magazine, 9/12/2025; [an interview after the assassination of Charlie Kirk].
https://wng.org/podcasts/a-shaken-moment-1757617981
https://www4.wng.org/A-shaken-moment.mp3