2 Peter 3:16

As also in all his epistles, speaking in them of these things; in which are some things hard to be understood, which they that are unlearned and unstable wrest, as they do also the other scriptures, unto their own destruction.

EXPOSITORY (ENGLISH BIBLE)

Ellicott's Commentary for English Readers

(16) As also in all his epistles.—All those known to the writer. The expression does not necessarily Imply that St. Paul was dead, and that his Epistles had been collected into one volume. That each church made a collection of them as they became known to it, and that in the great centres they became known soon after they were written, are conjectures of great probability.

Speaking in them of these things—viz., of the return of Christ and of the destruction of the world. Some, however, understand the words as meaning the exhortations to holiness here given.

Some things hard to be understood.—Certainly the difficulties with which 2 Thessalonians 2 bristles are well described by this expression, and they relate to the very point in question—the time of Christ’s coming. Moreover, scoffers could easily turn them to account by arguing that “the man of sin” had not yet appeared, and that therefore there was no likelihood of the end of the world coming just yet. But in admitting that 2 Thessalonians 2 is among the passages alluded to here, we are not committed to the theory that 1 and 2 Thess. are alluded to in 2Peter 3:15. Many refer these words to St. Paul’s doctrine of justification by faith as wrested to mean “faith without works.” So, again, Ephesians 2:5-6, and Colossians 2:12 might be wrested to mean that “the resurrection is past already” (2Timothy 2:18). (See Note on Romans 3:8 respecting perversion of his teaching.)

Unlearned and unstable.—The word for “unlearned” here is not the same as that translated “unlearned” in Acts 4:13. (See Note there.) That signifies “without special study;” this means “without ordinary instruction.” Ignorance naturally produces instability; those who have no clear principles of Christian doctrine easily fall victims to seductions of all kinds. (Comp. 2Peter 2:14.)

Wrest.—Literally, torture by means of the rack; and hence “strain,” “distort.” That St. Paul’s doctrine of Christian liberty, as opposed to the bondage of the Law, was seen by himself to be liable to great abuse, and had already begun to be abused, we learn from his own writings (1Corinthians 6:12-20; Galatians 5:13-26; where see Notes. Comp. Revelation 2:20.)

The other scriptures.—The Old Testament cannot well be meant. St. Peter would scarcely have placed the writings of a contemporary side by side with the Scriptures of the Old Testament (the canon of which had long since been closed) without some intimation of a grouping which at that time must have been novel, and probably was quite unknown. It is much more probable that Christian writings of some kind are intended, but we can only conjecture which, any of the canonical writings of the New Testament then in existence, and perhaps some that are not canonical. That an Apostle should speak of the writings of a brother-Apostle in the same terms as the books of the Old Testament—viz., as Scripture—need not surprise us, especially when we remember the large claims made by St. Paul for his own words (1Thessalonians 2:13; 2Thessalonians 2:15; Ephesians 3:3-5. Comp. Acts 15:28; Revelation 22:18-19). In 1Peter 1:12, Evangelists are almost made superior to the Old Testament Prophets—a statement indicating a view which harmonises well both with 2Peter 1:15-19 and with the view set forth here; for in 2Peter 1:15 he assigns to this Epistle much the same purpose as in 2Peter 1:19 he assigns to the Old Testament Prophets. Moreover, we have seen how Clement of Rome uses the term “Scripture” of a passage which comes from some uncanonical book (see above on 2Peter 3:4). See Introduction, I. c. δ. 4.

Unto their own destruction.—The Greek is very emphatic as to its being “their own.” (Comp. “Bring upon themselves swift destruction,” 2Peter 2:1.) It is their own doing—St. Paul and other writers of Scripture are not to blame; and it befits them—they will find the end they deserve. This passage gives no countenance to the Roman doctrine that all Scripture is hard to understand, and therefore not to be read by the people. All that is here said is that some Scripture is hard to understand, and that bad men make a bad use of the fact. The inference drawn from this by St. Peter is not, “Do not read Scripture,” nor even “Pass over what seems to be hard,” but “Be on your guard against being led astray by interpretations contrary to the spirit of the gospel.”

Benson Commentary

2 Peter 3:16. As also in all his epistles — From this it appears that Peter had read Paul’s epistles; and, as he speaks not of some but of all of them, it is probable that Paul was dead when St. Peter wrote this, namely, a little before his martyrdom, as appears from 2 Peter 1:14. And seeing that Paul, in his epistle to the Romans 2:4, and to the Hebrews 10:36; Hebrews 10:38, wrote that the long-suffering of God was intended for salvation, by mentioning that circumstance, Peter intimated that he knew Paul to be the author of the epistles to the Romans, and to the Hebrews. Speaking in them of these things — Paul, in all his epistles, hath spoken of the things written by Peter in this letter. For example: he hath spoken of Christ’s coming to judgment, 1 Thessalonians 3:13; 1 Thessalonians 4:14-18; 2 Thessalonians 1:7-10; Titus 2:13; and of the resurrection from the dead, 1 Corinthians 15:22; Php 3:20-21; and of the burning of the earth, 2 Thessalonians 1:8; and of the heavenly country, 2 Corinthians 5:1-10; and of the introduction of the righteous into that country, 1 Thessalonians 4:17; Hebrews 4:9; Hebrews 12:14-24; and of the judgment of all mankind by Christ. In which are some things hard to be understood — According to the greatest number of MSS. the apostle does not say, εν αις, in which epistles, but εν οις, in or among which things; namely, the things which Paul had written concerning Christ’s coming to judgment, the burning of the earth, the heavenly country, and the introduction of the righteous into that country. The Alexandrian, however, and six other MSS. read here, εν αις, in which epistles. This, Beza says, is the true reading, because he thinks it would have been improper in Peter to say that Paul had written obscure ly concerning subjects of which Peter himself had written more things hard to be understood than any Paul had written in any part of his epistles, Nevertheless “the common reading may be retained, because the antecedent to the neuter relative, οις, may be a word not expressed, but understood, namely, γραμμασι, which signifies letters or epistles, Acts 28:21. On this supposition Peter’s meaning will be, In which epistles there are some things hard to be understood.” Barclay, in his Apology, explains this of the 9th chapter of Paul’s epistle to the Romans, in which there are some things that seem to be contrary to God’s long-suffering to all, and which are very liable to be perniciously wrested; which they that are unlearned — Who are not taught of God, or are unteachable, as Estius translates the word αμαθεις, here used; namely, persons whose passions blind their understanding, and make them averse to the truth, or whose prejudices, indispose them to admit it: and the unstable — The wavering, unsettled, double-minded, or men of two minds, as St. James’s word, διψυχοι, signifies; who have no real, steady love of piety, but sometimes follow it, sometimes desert it, as good or bad inclinations happen to predominate in them. Whereas the stable are those who have a firm, unshaken, and warm attachment to the religion of Jesus: wrest — “The original word, στρεβλουσιν, signifies to put a person to the torture, to make him confess some crime laid to his charge, or reveal some secret which he knows. Applied to writings it signifies, by far-fetched criticisms and unsupported senses of words, to make a passage speak a meaning different from what the author intended. Hence in our language we have the expression, to torture words. Of this vice they are most commonly guilty who, from pride of understanding, will receive nothing but what they can explain. Whereas, the humble and teachable receive the declarations of revelation according to their plain, grammatical, unconstrained meaning, which it is their only care to attain, by reading the Scriptures frequently and with attention.” — Macknight. As they do also the other scriptures — In this clause Peter expressly acknowledges Paul’s epistles to be a part of the Scriptures, and therefore to have been written by divine inspiration. The affection with which Peter on this occasion speaks of Paul, and the honourable testimony which he bears to his writings, deserves great praise. He had been formerly rebuked by Paul before the brethren at Antioch for refusing to keep company with the Gentile converts; but if at that time he felt any displeasure at Paul for that rebuke, which we nowhere learn that he did, he had long ago laid it aside, and probably, instead of thinking ill of Paul on that account, had for many years admired him for his bold and steady testimony to the truth.

Matthew Henry's Concise Commentary

3:11-18 From the doctrine of Christ's second coming, we are exhorted to purity and godliness. This is the effect of real knowledge. Very exact and universal holiness is enjoined, not resting in any low measure or degree. True Christians look for new heavens and a new earth; freed from the vanity to which things present are subject, and the sin they are polluted with. Those only who are clothed with the righteousness of Christ, and sanctified by the Holy Ghost, shall be admitted to dwell in this holy place. He is faithful, who has promised. Those, whose sins are pardoned, and their peace made with God, are the only safe and happy people; therefore follow after peace, and that with all men; follow after holiness as well as peace. Never expect to be found at that day of God in peace, if you are lazy and idle in this your day, in which we must finish the work given us to do. Only the diligent Christian will be the happy Christian in the day of the Lord. Our Lord will suddenly come to us, or shortly call us to him; and shall he find us idle? Learn to make a right use of the patience of our Lord, who as yet delays his coming. Proud, carnal, and corrupt men, seek to wrest some things into a seeming agreement with their wicked doctrines. But this is no reason why St. Paul's epistles, or any other part of the Scriptures, should be laid aside; for men, left to themselves, pervert every gift of God. Then let us seek to have our minds prepared for receiving things hard to be understood, by putting in practice things which are more easy to be understood. But there must be self-denial and suspicion of ourselves, and submission to the authority of Christ Jesus, before we can heartily receive all the truths of the gospel, therefore we are in great danger of rejecting the truth. And whatever opinions and thoughts of men are not according to the law of God, and warranted by it, the believer disclaims and abhors. Those who are led away by error, fall from their own stedfastness. And that we may avoid being led away, we must seek to grow in all grace, in faith, and virtue, and knowledge. Labour to know Christ more clearly, and more fully; to know him so as to be more like him, and to love him better. This is the knowledge of Christ, which the apostle Paul reached after, and desired to attain; and those who taste this effect of the knowledge of the Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ, will, upon receiving such grace from him, give thanks and praise him, and join in ascribing glory to him now, in the full assurance of doing the same hereafter, for ever.

Barnes' Notes on the Bible

As also in all his epistles - Not only in those which he addressed to the churches in Asia Minor, but in his epistles generally. It is to be presumed that they might have had an acquaintance with some of the other epistles of Paul, as well as those sent to the churches in their immediate vicinity.

Speaking in them of these things - The things which Peter had dwelt upon in his two epistles. The great doctrines of the cross; of the depravity of man; of the divine purposes; of the new birth; of the consummation of all things; of the return of the Saviour to judge the world, and to receive his people to himself; the duty of a serious, devout and prayerful life, and of being prepared for the heavenly world. These things are constantly dwelt upon by Paul, and to his authority in these respects Peter might appeal with the utmost confidence.

In which - The common reading in this passage is ἐν οἷς en hois, and according to this the reference is to the "subjects" treated of - "in which things" - referring to what he had just spoken of - "speaking of these things." This reading is found in the common editions of the New Testament, and is supported by far the greater number of mss., and by most commentators and critics. It is found in Griesbach, Tittman, and Hahn, and has every evidence of being the genuine reading. Another reading, however, (ἐν αἷς en hais,) is found in some valuable mss., and is supported by the Syriac and Arabic versions, and adopted by Mill (Prolegomena 1484), and by Beza. According to this, the reference is to the "epistles" themselves - as would seem to be implied in our common version. The true construction, so far as the evidence goes, is to refer it not directly to the "epistles," but to the "things" of which Peter says Paul wrote; that is, not to the style and language of Paul, but to the great truths and doctrines which he taught. Those doctrines were indeed contained in his epistles, but still, according to the fair construction of the passage before us, Peter should not be understood as accusing Paul of obscurity of style. He refers not to the difficulty of understanding what Paul meant, but to the difficulty of comprehending the great truths which he taught. This is, generally, the greatest difficulty in regard to the statements of Paul. The difficulty is not that the meaning of the writer is not plain, but it is either:

(a) that the mind is overpowered by the grandeur of the thought, and the incomprehensible nature of the theme, or

(b) that the truth is so unpalatable, and the mind is so prejudiced against it, that we are unwilling to receive it.

Many a man knows well enough what Paul means, and would receive his doctrines without hesitation if the heart was not opposed to it; and in this state of mind Paul is charged with obscurity, when the real difficulty lies only in the heart of him who makes the complaint. If this be the true interpretation of this passage, then it should not be adduced to prove that Paul is an obscure writer, whatever may be true on that point. There are, undoubtedly, obscure things in his writings, as there are in all other ancient compositions, but this passage should not be adduced to prove that he had not the faculty of making himself understood. An honest heart, a willingness to receive the truth, is one of the best qualifications for understanding the writings of Paul; and when this exists, no one will fail to find truth that may be comprehended, and that will be eminently adapted to sanctify and save the soul.

Are some things hard to be understood - Things pertaining to high and difficult subjects, and which are not easy to be comprehended. Peter does not call in question the truth of what Paul had written; he does not intimate that he himself would differ from him His language is rather that which a man would use who regarded the writings to which he referred as true, and what he says here is an honorable testimony to the authority of Paul. It may be added,

(1) that Peter does not say that all the doctrines of the Bible, or even all the doctrines of Paul, are hard to be understood, or that nothing is plain.

(2) he says nothing about withholding the Bible, or even the writings of Paul, from the mass of Christians, on the ground of the difficulty of understanding the Scriptures; nor does he intimate that that was the design of the Author of the Bible.

(3) it is perfectly manifest, from this very passage, that the writings of Paul were in fact in the hands of the people, else how could they wrest and pervert them?

(4) Peter says nothing about an infallible interpreter of any kind, nor does he intimate that either he or his "successors" were authorized to interpret them for the church.

(5) with what propriety can the pretended successor of Peter - the pope - undertake to expound those difficult doctrines in the writings of Paul, when even Peter himself did not undertake it, and when he did not profess to be able to comprehend them? Is the Pope more skilled in the knowledge of divine things than the apostle Peter? Is he better qualified to interpret the sacred writings than an inspired apostle was?

(6) those portions of the writings of Paul, for anything that appears to the contrary, are just as "hard to be understood" now, as they were before the "infallible" church undertook to explain them. The world is Little indebted to any claims of infallibility in explaining the meaning of the oracles of God. It remains yet to be seen that any portion of the Bible has been made clearer by "any" mere authoritative explanation. And,

(7) it should be added, that without any such exposition, the humble inquirer after truth may find enough in the Bible to guide his feet in the paths of salvation. No one ever approached the sacred Scriptures with a teachable heart, who did not find them "able to make him wise unto salvation." Compare the notes at 2 Timothy 3:15.

continued...

Jamieson-Fausset-Brown Bible Commentary

16. also in all his epistles—Ro 2:4 is very similar to 2Pe 3:15, beginning. The Pauline Epistles were by this time become the common property of all the churches. The "all" seems to imply they were now completed. The subject of the Lord's coming is handled in 1Th 4:13; 5:11; compare 2Pe 3:10 with 1Th 5:2. Still Peter distinguishes Paul's Epistle, or Epistles, "TO YOU," from "all his (other) Epistles," showing that certain definite churches, or particular classes of believers, are meant by "you."

in which—Epistles. The oldest manuscripts read the feminine relative (hais); not as Received Text (hois), "in which things."

some things hard to be understood—namely, in reference to Christ's coming, for example, the statements as to the man of sin and the apostasy, before Christ's coming. "Paul seemed thereby to delay Christ's coming to a longer period than the other apostles, whence some doubted altogether His coming" [Bengel]. Though there be some things hard to be understood, there are enough besides, plain, easy, and sufficient for perfecting the man of God. "There is scarce anything drawn from the obscure places, but the same in other places may be found most plain" [Augustine]. It is our own prejudice, foolish expectations, and carnal fancies, that make Scripture difficult [Jeremy Taylor].

unlearned—Not those wanting human learning are meant, but those lacking the learning imparted by the Spirit. The humanly learned have been often most deficient in spiritual learning, and have originated many heresies. Compare 2Ti 2:23, a different Greek word, "unlearned," literally, "untutored." When religion is studied as a science, nothing is more abstruse; when studied in order to know our duty and practice it, nothing is easier.

unstable—not yet established in what they have learned; shaken by every seeming difficulty; who, in perplexing texts, instead of waiting until God by His Spirit makes them plain in comparing them with other Scriptures, hastily adopt distorted views.

wrest—strain and twist (properly with a hand screw) what is straight in itself (for example, 2Ti 2:18).

other scriptures—Paul's Epistles were, therefore, by this time, recognized in the Church, as "Scripture": a term never applied in any of the fifty places where it occurs, save to the Old and New Testament sacred writings. Men in each Church having miraculous discernment of spirits would have prevented any uninspired writing from being put on a par with the Old Testament word of God; the apostles' lives also were providentially prolonged, Paul's and Peter's at least to thirty-four years after Christ's resurrection, John's to thirty years later, so that fraud in the canon is out of question. The three first Gospels and Acts are included in "the other Scriptures," and perhaps all the New Testament books, save John and Revelation, written later.

unto their own destruction—not through Paul's fault (2Pe 2:1).

Matthew Poole's Commentary

As also in all his epistles; to make the sense complete, we must supply here from the former verse, he hath written.

Speaking in them of these things; viz. concerning the second coming of Christ, and end of the world, the patience that should be exercised in waiting for it; about avoiding scoffers that deny these truths, and the other instructions contained in these two Epistles, but especially in the two latter chapters of this Second Epistle.

In which are some things hard to be understood; in which Epistles, or rather, in which things contained in Paul’s Epistles, for the Greek relative is of a different gender, and cannot agree with Epistles: q.d. Some of the doctrines delivered by Paul in his Epistles are hard to be understood. And so this doth not prove Paul’s Epistles, much less the whole Scripture, to be obscure and dark: the style and expression may be as clear as the nature of the things will bear, and yet the things themselves so expressed may be hard to be understood, either by reason of their own obscurity, as prophecies, the excellency and sublimeness of them, as some mysterious doctrines, or the weakness of men’s minds, and their incapacity of apprehending spiritual things, 1 Corinthians 2:14, compared with 1 Corinthians 13:9,10.

Which they that are unlearned; they that are ignorant of the Scripture, unskilful in the word of righteouness, Hebrews 5:13; or indocible, that will not be instructed.

And unstable; such as are ill grounded, and therefore unstedfast, and easily deceived, 2 Peter 2:14: see Ephesians 4:14.

Wrest; pervert the Scripture, and offer violence to it, and, as it were, rack and torture it to make it confess what it never meant.

To their own destruction; eternal destruction, viz. while they use the Scriptures to countenance their errors; or stumble at some things in them, which are obscure, thereby taking occasion to deny the truth of God; and so make the Scripture the instrument of their perdition, which God appointed to be the means of salvation.

Gill's Exposition of the Entire Bible

As also in all his epistles,.... From whence it appears, that the Apostle Paul had, by this time, wrote several of his epistles, if not all of them; and they were all written according to the same wisdom, and under the influence of the same spirit, as his epistle to the Hebrews:

speaking in them of those things; of the same things, Peter had been speaking of, of the coming of Christ, as that he should appear a second time to them that look for him, and would come as a thief in the night, and that the fashion, scheme, and form of this world should pass away, and that saints should look and wait for his coming, and love it: something of this kind is said in all his epistles; see Hebrews 9:28; and also of mockers, scoffers, seducers, and wicked men that would arise in the last days; see 1 Timothy 4:1,

in which are some things hard to be understood. The phrase, "in which", refers either to the epistles, or the things spoken in them. The Alexandrian manuscript, and three of Robert Stephens's copies, read , "in which" epistles, but the generality of copies read , "in", or "among which things", spoken of in them, concerning the subject here treated of, the coming of Christ; as the time of Christ's coming, which is sometimes represented by the apostle, as if it would be while he was living; and the manner of his coming in person with all his saints, and his mighty angels, with a shout, the voice of the archangel, and trump of God, things not easily understood; and the destruction of antichrist at his coming, which will be with the breath of his mouth, and the brightness of his coming; as also the resurrection of the dead, of the saints that will rise first, and that with spiritual bodies; and likewise the change of the living saints, and the rapture both of living and raised saints together, in the, clouds, to meet the Lord in the air; and the standing of them before the judgment seat of Christ, and the account that everyone must give to him, 1 Thessalonians 4:15 1 Corinthians 15:44;

which they that are unlearned; untaught of God, who have never learned of the Father, nor have learned Christ, nor have that anointing which teacheth all things; who, though they may have been in the schools of men, were never in the school of Christ; and though they have been ever learning, yet will never come to the knowledge of the truth; for men may have a large share of human literature, and yet be unlearned men in the sense of the apostle; and very often it is, that such wrest and pervert the Scriptures to the ruin of themselves, and others:

and unstable; unsettled in their principles, who are like children tossed to and fro with every wind of doctrine; the root of the matter is not in them; nor are they rooted and built up in Christ, and so are not established in the faith; they are not upon the foundation Christ, nor do they build upon, and abide by the sure word of God, or form their notions according to it, but according to their own carnal reasonings, and fleshly lusts; and so

wrest the word of God, distort it from its true sense and meaning, and make it speak that which it never designed; dealing with it as innocent persons are sometimes used, put upon a rack, and tortured, and so forced to speak what is contrary to their knowledge and consciences; and so were the words of the Apostle Paul wrested by ill designing men, as about the doctrines of grace and works, so concerning the coming of Christ; see Romans 3:8;

as they do also the other Scriptures; the writings of Moses, and the prophets of the Old Testament, the Gospels, the Acts of the Apostles, and the other epistles of the apostles of the New Testament: and which is eventually

unto their own destruction; for by so doing they either add unto, or detract from the Scriptures, and so bring the curse of God upon them; and they give into doctrines of devils, and into heresies, which are damnable, and bring upon themselves swift destruction, which lingers not, and slumbers not. Now from hence it does not follow, that the Scriptures are not to be read by the common people; for not all the parts of Scripture, and all things in it, are hard to be understood, there are many things very plain and easy, even everything respecting eternal salvation; there is milk for babes, as well as meat for strong men: besides, not the Scriptures in general, but Paul's epistles only, are here spoken of, and not all of them, or anyone whole epistle among them, only some things in them, and these not impossible, only difficult to be understood; and which is no reason why they should be laid aside, but rather why they should be read with greater application and diligence, and be followed with fervent prayer, and frequent meditation; and though unlearned and unstable men may wrest them to their perdition, those that are taught of God, though otherwise illiterate, may read them to great profit and advantage.

Geneva Study Bible

As also in all his epistles, speaking in them of these things; {13} in which are some things hard to be understood, which they that are unlearned and unstable wrest, as they do also the other scriptures, unto their own destruction.

(13) There are some things that are obscure and dark which the ignorant use to overthrow men who are not established, wrestling the testimony of the scripture for their own destruction. But this is the remedy against such deceit, to labour that we may daily more and more grow up and increase in the knowledge of Christ.

EXEGETICAL (ORIGINAL LANGUAGES)

Meyer's NT Commentary

2 Peter 3:16. ὡς καὶ ἐν πάσαις [ταῖς] ἐπιστολαῖς] sc. ἔγραψεν. By this adjunct the epistle of Paul, referred to in ἔγραψεν ὑμῖν, is definitely distinguished from his other epistles; but what is true of the former is asserted also of the latter, i.e. that they contain the same exhortations, a statement, however, which is more precisely limited by λαλῶν ἐν αὐταῖς περὶ τούτων. The difference in the reading, that is, whether the article is to be put with πάσαις or not, is of trifling importance for the meaning, since it is unwarranted to suppose that πάσαις ταῖς marks the epistles of Paul as forming a formally completed collection (Wiesinger),—the article only showing that the epistles of Paul were already known as such.

λαλῶν ἐν αὐταῖς περὶ τούτων] λαλῶν is not for: ἐν αἷς λαλεῖ (Pott), but it means: “when in them (i.e. in his epistles) he speaks of these things.” περὶ τούτων can only have the same reference as καθώς, 2 Peter 3:15; that is, then, not strictly to the teaching as to the Parousia as such, but chiefly “to the exhortation given in 2 Peter 3:14 f.” (Wiesinger), and what is connected with it.

The remark in what follows alludes to that which occasioned the mention of Paul’s epistles.

ἐν οἷς or αἷς ἐστι δυσνόητά τινα] It can hardly be decided which is the true reading: οἷς or αἷς. Schott thinks that for the sense it is immaterial, since, if αἷς be read, the τινά must be limited to the passages where Paul happens to speak περὶ τούτων; and if ἐν οἷς, the reference can be to those things or questions not generally, but only in the way in which they are discussed by Paul. Reiche holds a different view; in his opinion, ἐν οἷς refers to those things in themselves, ἐν αἷς to the epistles generally; this can, however, hardly be correct, for it is scarcely conceivable that the author should let fall a remark closely conjoined with what had gone before, which departs so entirely from the connection of thought. Besides, ἐν αἷς deserves the preference not only on account of the external authorities, but because of the following: ὡς τὰς λοιπὰς γραφάς (Wiesinger, Brückner, Reiche, Hofmann; Schott otherwise.) τινά is generally regarded as the subject, and δυσνόητα as the predicate belonging to it; the position of the words, however, decides that δυσν. τινά must be taken together as subject (Schott, Hofmann). By δυσνόητα must not be understood, with Schott, “the things which in themselves are opposed to the human mind,” but the expressions in which Paul speaks of them; Steinfass correctly: “τινά are words, not objects;” for to the things the verb στρεβλοῦσιν is not suited. What the apostle meant can only be gathered from the connection; consequently the reference here cannot be to utterances of the Apostle Paul with respect to the Parousia itself (Schott), and therefore not to any statements of his, such as are to be found in 1 Thessalonians 4:13 ff.; 1 Corinthians 15:12-58. Still less does the connection appear to justify the assumption that “the Pauline doctrine of freedom” (Wiesinger) is meant. Since, however, Paul’s statements with regard to Christian freedom stand in close relation to the final completion of salvation, and the idea of it forms such a characteristic feature of Paul’s teaching, which could only too easily be distorted by misunderstanding, it is certainly possible, indeed it is probable, that the author had it chiefly in mind in using this somewhat indefinite expression[105].

ἃ οἱ ἀμαθεῖς καὶ ἀστήρικτοι στρεβλοῦσιν] ἀμαθής, ἅπ. λεγ., according to de Wette, equivalent to “unteachable, with the implied idea of stubbornness and of unbelief.” This is incorrect, ἀμαθής means only “ignorant;” no doubt the secondary idea given by de Wette may be connected with this (as in the passages quoted, Joseph. Antiq. i. 4. 1, and iii. 14. 4), but here it is not to be presupposed, since the idea ἀστήρικτος connected with ἀμαθής, although denying strength of faith, does not deny faith itself; with ἀστήρικτοι, cf. chap. 2 Peter 2:14. Most interpreters assume that the reference here is to the seducers, the Libertines and deniers of the Parousia formerly mentioned; but as a designation of them the expressions are too weak; chap. 2 Peter 2:14, too, is opposed to this (Schott).

στρεβλοῦν, ἅπ. λεγ., strictly: “to turn with the στρέβλη.” Here it means: “to distort the words,” i.e. to give them a sense other than they actually have; equivalent to διαστρέφειν (cf. Chrysostom on 2 Corinthians 10:8 : οὗτοι πρὸς τὰς οἰκείας διέστρεψαν τὰ ῥήματα ἐννοίας); the word is to be found in another figurative sense in 2 Samuel 22:27, LXX.

ὡς καὶ τὰς λοιπὰς γραφάς] This addition is somewhat surprising, not only because all more precise statement of the γραφαί referred to is wanting, but because by it στρεβλοῦν, which formerly had reference only to the δυσνόητά τινα in the epistles of Paul, is here extended to entire writings; for to interpret γραφαί by “passages of Scripture” (de Wette), is arbitrary.

It is very improbable that the reference is to the O. T. Scriptures (Wiesinger, Schott, Steinfass), since the author would certainly have defined them more nearly as such[106] (Brückner); probably, then, other writings are meant, which, at the time of the composition of this epistle, served, like the epistles of Paul, for the instruction and edification of the Christian churches; it is possible, therefore, that these included other writings of the N. T.; but that they were only such, cannot be proved. That the words presuppose a collection of N. T. writings properly so called, is without any reason asserted by de Wette (Brückner).

ΠΡῸς ΤῊΝ ἸΔΊΑΝ ΑὐΤῶΝ ἈΠΏΛΕΙΑΝ] ἸΔΊΑΝ serves to intensify ΑὐΤῶΝ: “to their own destruction” (cf. chap. 2 Peter 2:1); the wresting of Scripture has this consequence, inasmuch as they make use of the distorted expressions, in order to harden themselves in their fleshly lust.

[105] According to Hofmann, it is passages such as Ephesians 2:5 f., Colossians 2:1, that are meant, “for with these and similar statements the teaching of a Hymenaeus and a Philetus could be combined,—that the resurrection was already past, and that no other resurrection than that which takes place in regeneration is to be looked for.—This doctrine, combined with the other, that the world of sense has nothing related to God, would produce that justification of immorality predicted in chap. 2.”

[106] Although in other parts of the N. T. αἱ γραφαί always means the O. T. Scriptures, still the addition of λοιπαί proves that other Scriptures are here referred to; it would be different were λοιπάς not added.

Expositor's Greek Testament

2 Peter 3:16. ὡς καὶ ἐν πάσαις ταῖς ἐπιστολαῖς. This statement implies neither the inclusion of all the epistles that have come down to us, nor the formation of a canon. It is much more natural to take it as referring to a collection of letters made not long after Paul’s death, and read in the churches. The term ὁ ἀγαπητὸς ἡμῶν ἀδελφὸς in 2 Peter 3:15 would seem to refer to one whose memory is still quite fresh in the hearts of the readers. λαλῶν ἐν αὐταῖς περὶ τούτων: “where he touches on these subjects” (Mayor), περὶ τούτων indicates a widening of the reference to include Paul’s treatment of the whole question of the Second Coming. The mention of Paul’s name here implies a desire on the part of the writer to show that on this point the Pauline and Petrine teaching are at one. The false teachers founded their Antinomian doctrine on Paul’s teaching about the Grace of God. ἐν αἷς, κ.τ.λ. This clearly involves that a collection of letters is meant. δυσνόητά τινα. “What are the δυσνόητά referred to? “Probably St. Paul’s doctrine of God’s free grace (Romans 3:5-8), with his apparent disparagement of the law in Romans 3:20-28; Romans 4:15; Romans 5:20; Romans 6:4; Romans 7:4-11; his teaching with regard to the πνευματικοὶ, 1 Corinthians 1:15; with regard to the strong, whom he seems to justify in their neglect of the rule made at the Apostolic Council, as to εἰδωλόθυτα (Acts 15:29; Romans 14; 1 Corinthians 8; 1 Corinthians 10:25); as regards the Resurrection in baptism (Romans 6:3-11; Colossians 3:1; 1 Corinthians 15:12); perhaps as regards predestination (Romans 9:11-21), and the Parousia (2 Thessalonians 2.)” (Mayor). οἱ ἀμαθεῖς καὶ ἀστήρικτοι. ἀμαθής is not used elsewhere in the N.T. It signifies not so much “unlearned” as “uneducated”; a mind untrained and undisciplined in habits of thought, lacking in the moral qualities of a balanced judgment. ἀστήρικτοι refers more to conduct, those whose habits are not fully trained and established. The reference of ἀμ. καὶ ἀστηρ. is of course not to the Libertines, but to a class among the readers. In 2 Peter 3:17 στηριγμός is used of the readers, in distinction to the False Teachers, who are called ἀθέσμων. στρεβλοῦσιν: of persons, “to torture,” of things, “to wrest” or “twist”.

ὡς καὶ τὰς λοιπὰς γραφάς. (1) There has been much discussion among commentators as to the meaning of γραφάς. Spitta takes γραφάς in sense of “writings,” and concludes that these were by companions of the Apostle Paul; but this is a very unusual sense of γραφή unless the name of an author is given. Mayor and others interpret as the O.T. Scriptures; while some who are prepared to assign a late date in the second century to the epistle, think that both Old and New Testament Scriptures are meant. On every ground the hypothesis of γραφάς = O.T. Scriptures is to be preferred. (2) The difficulty in connexion with the meaning of γραφάς is largely occasioned by the phrase τὰς λοιπὰς γρ. Does this mean that the Epistles of St. Paul are regarded as Scripture? Attempts have been made (e.g., by Dr. Bigg) to cite classical and other parallels that would justify the sense for τὰς λοιπὰς, “the Scriptures as well”. In these, certain idiomatic uses of ἄλλος and other words are referred to, but no real parallel to this sense of λοιπός can be found, and the connexion implied in λοιπός is closer than ἄλλος. The result of the whole discussion is practically to compel us to take τὰς λοιπὰς γραφάς in the obvious sense “the rest of the Scriptures,” and we cannot escape the conclusion that the Epistles of Paul are classed with these. The intention of the author of 2 Peter seems to be to regard the Pauline Epistles, or those of them that he knew, as γραφαὶ because they were read in the churches along with the lessons from the O.T.

Cambridge Bible for Schools and Colleges

16. as also in all his epistles] The English represents the Greek accurately enough, but the absence of the article in the original should be noted as shewing that there was not yet any complete collection of St Paul’s Epistles. All that can be legitimately inferred from the expression is that St Peter knew of other Epistles (probably 1 and 2 Thessalonians , 1 and 2 Cor., and Romans) besides those—or that—to which he had referred in the preceding verse.

speaking in them of these things] i.e. of the coming of the Lord and of the end of the world. Here, on the assumption made in the previous verse, we may find a reference, as to 1 Thessalonians 4:5 and 2 Thessalonians 2; so also to Romans 8:19-21; Romans 13:11-12; 1 Corinthians 3:13; 1 Corinthians 4:5; 1 Corinthians 15:51-54.

in which are some things hard to be understood] We are left to conjecture what these were. We might think of the mysterious predictions of “the man of sin” in 2 Thessalonians 2, or the doctrine of the “spiritual body” in 1 Corinthians 15:44, 2 Corinthians 5:1-4, but it is not easy to see how these elements of St Paul’s teaching could have been perverted to the destruction of men’s spiritual life. On the whole, therefore, it seems more likely that the Apostle finds in the “unlearned and unstable” the party of license in the Apostolic Church, who claimed to be following St Paul’s assertion of his freedom, by eating things sacrificed to idols and indulging in sins of impurity (see note on chap. 2 Peter 2:19), or who quoted his words “that a man is justified by faith without the deeds of the law” (Romans 3:28) as sanctioning a profligate Antinomianism.

which they that are unlearned and unstable wrest …] Both words are peculiar to this Epistle in the New Testament. The latter had been used in chap. 2 Peter 2:14. The word for “wrest” expresses the action of a windlass that twists what is submitted to its action.

as they do also the other scriptures] Few passages are more important than this in its bearing on the growth of the Canon of the New Testament. It shews (1) that the distinctive term of honour used of the books of the Old Testament was applied without reserve to St Paul’s writings; (2) that probably other books now found in the Canon were also so recognised. The last inference, though it might be said that the “other Scriptures”did not necessarily mean other writings than those of the Old Testament Canon, is confirmed (1) by the use of the term “Scripture” as connected with a quotation from Luke 10:7 in 1 Timothy 5:18; (2) by St Paul’s reference to “prophetic writings” or “Scriptures” as unfolding the mystery which had been hid from ages and generations in Romans 16:26, and probably by the tests which he gives in 2 Timothy 3:16 as the notes by which “every inspired Scripture, or writing,” might be distinguished from its counterfeit. See notes bearing on this subject on 1 Peter 1:10-12; 1 Peter 4:11; 2 Peter 1:20-21.

Bengel's Gnomen

2 Peter 3:16. Ἐν πάσαις, in all) Peter wrote this epistle very shortly before his own martyrdom and that of Paul. Therefore Paul had written nearly all his epistles long before, even the epistles to those to whom Peter writes. Peter therefore read all the epistles of Paul, which were perhaps sent to him by Paul himself: nor did he take it ill, that Paul had written respecting Peter in such terms as he had to the Galatians, ch. 2. Who can doubt, that the epistles of Paul were, at an early period, collected into one body?—περὶ τούτων, concerning these things) Concerning the coming of the Lord, which is delayed through His long-suffering, but yet is near and sudden, and the things which will happen at His coming and before it. When Paul appeared to delay the day of the Lord to a longer period than the other apostles, there were some who either doubted or denied His coming altogether.—ἐν οἷς, in which things)—δυσνοήτα, hard to be understood. It is one thing to be hard to be understood, and another thing to be beyond the reach of the understanding.—τινὰ) some things, not all.—ἃ) which things, which subjects, and so even the writings of Paul. With this corresponds the expression which follows, “they wrest the Scriptures,” and so even the subjects mentioned in them. The one is to be understood as included with the other.—οἱ ἀμαθεῖς, the unlearned) who are without heavenly learning.—στρεβλοῦσιν) twist, whereas they are straight in themselves. There is an instance, 2 Timothy 2:18.—τὰς λοιπὰς γραφὰς; the other Scriptures) It follows from this that the epistles of Paul already formed part of the Scriptures. Comp. has written, 2 Peter 3:15.—προς, to) so that they seem to agree with the abandoned perception of the wicked.—ἰδίαν, their own) without any injury to St Paul.—ἀπώλειαν, destruction) ch. 2 Peter 2:1.

Pulpit Commentary

Verse 16. - As also in all his Epistles. The true reading is probably ἐν πάσαις ἐπιστολαῖς without the article. The words, therefore, do not imply the existence of a complete collection of St. Paul's Epistles, but mean only "in all Epistles which he writes." Speaking in them of these things; that is, of the day of God, the end of the world, etc. St. Peter was acquainted with other Epistles of St. Paul besides those addressed to the Asiatic Churches. There are evident indications of his knowledge of the Epistles to the Thessalonians and Corinthians, as well as of that to the Romans. In which are some things hard to be understood. The manuscripts vary between ἐν οῖς and ἐν αῖς. The first reading would refer to the words immediately preceding - "these things;" "among the subjects on which St. Paul wrote there are some things," etc. The second would refer to "all his Epistles," and would mean that there are certain difficulties in St. Paul's Epistles generally. St. Peter does not tell us what difficulties were in his thoughts - whether St. Paul's teaching about "the man of sin," and "the day of the Lord," or his doctrine of justification by faith, and his assertion of Christian liberty, which might be perverted into anti-nomianism by such men as the false teachers censured in chapter 2. The word δυσνόητος, "hard to be understood," occurs nowhere else in the New Testament. Which they that are unlearned and unstable wrest; rather, the ignorant and unsteadfast. Both words are peculiar to this Epistle; the last occurs also in 2 Peter 2:14, the first here only in the New Testament. The verb also translated "wrest" (στρεβλοῦσιν) is found only here; it means "to twist with a windlass," and so "to strain, to torture, to distort." As they do also the other Scriptures. This passage is of the greatest interest, as showing that some of St. Paul's Epistles had by this time taken their place in the estimate of Christians by the side of the sacred books of the Old Testament, and were regarded as Holy Scripture. By "the other Scriptures" St. Peter means the Old Testament, and also, perhaps, some of the earlier writings of the New, as the first three Gospels and the Epistle of St. James. St. Paul, in 1 Timothy 5:18, quotes a passage which seems to come from Luke 10:7 as Scripture (comp. 1 Peter 1:12). Unto their own destruction; literally, their own destruction of themselves. The use of both adjective and pronoun intensifies the meaning (comp. chapter 2 Peter 2:1, 12). 2 Peter 3:16

Vincent's Word Studies

Hard to be understood (δυσνόητα)

Only here in New Testament.

They that are unlearned and unstable (οἱ ἀμαθεῖς καὶ ἀστήρικτοι)

Both words are peculiar to Peter. On the latter, see on 2 Peter 2:14.

Wrest (στρεβλοῦσιν)

Only here in New Testament. Meaning, originally, to hoist with a windlass or screw; to twist or dislocate the limbs on a rack. It is a singularly graphic word applied to the perversion of scripture.

The other scriptures (τὰς λοιπὰς γραφὰς)

Showing that Paul's epistles were ranked as scripture. See on Mark 12:10.