2 Petrus 2:3

2:3 And in their greed they will exploit you with deceptive words. Their ¹  condemnation pronounced long ago ²  is not sitting idly by; ³  their ⁴  destruction is not asleep.

2 Petrus 2:12-13

2:12 But ⁵  these men, ⁶  like irrational animals – creatures of instinct, born to be caught and destroyed ⁷  – do not understand whom ⁸  they are insulting, and consequently ⁹  in their destruction they will be destroyed, ¹⁰  2:13 suffering harm as the wages for their harmful ways. ¹¹  By considering it a pleasure to carouse in broad daylight, ¹²  they are stains and blemishes, indulging ¹³  in their deceitful pleasures when they feast together with you.

2 Petrus 3:3

3:3 Above all, understand this: ¹⁴  In the last days blatant scoffers ¹⁵  will come, being propelled by their own evil urges ¹⁶ 

[2:3]  ¹ tn Grk “to whom,” introducing a subordinate relative clause.

[2:3]  ² tn Grk “the ancient judgment.”

[2:3]  ³ tn Grk “is not idle.”

[2:3]  ⁴ tn Greek has “and their.” As introducing a synonymous parallel, it is superfluous in English.

[2:12]  ⁵ tn 2 Pet 2:12 through 16 constitute one cumbersome sentence in Greek. It is difficult to tell whether a hard break belongs in the middle of v. 13, as the translation has it, or whether the compounding of participles is meant in a loosely descriptive sort of way, without strong grammatical connection. Either way, the sentence rambles in a way that often betrays a great “vehemence of spirit” (A. T. Robertson, Grammar, 435). The author is obviously agitated at these false teachers who are to come.

[2:12]  ⁶ tn The false teachers could conceivably be men or women, but in v. 14 they are said to have eyes “full of an adulteress.” This can only refer to men. Hence, both here and in v. 17 the false teachers are described as “men.”

[2:12]  ⁷ tn Grk “born for capture and destruction.”

[2:12]  ⁸ tn Grk “with [reference to] whom.”

[2:12]  ⁹ tn There is no conjunction joining this last clause of v. 12 to the preceding (i.e., no “and consequently”). The argument builds asyndetically (a powerful rhetorical device in Greek), but cannot be naturally expressed in English as such.

[2:12]  ¹⁰ tn This cryptic expression has been variously interpreted. (1) It could involve a simple cognate dative in which case the idea is “they will be utterly destroyed.” But the presence of αὐτῶν (autwn; their, of them) is problematic for this view. Other, more plausible views are: (2) the false teachers will be destroyed at the same time as the irrational beasts, or (3) in the same manner as these creatures (i.e., by being caught); or (4) the false teachers will be destroyed together with the evil angels whom they insult. Because of the difficulties of the text, it was thought best to leave it ambiguous, as the Greek has it.

[2:13]  ¹¹ tn There is a play on words in Greek, but this is difficult to express adequately in English. The verb ἀδικέω (adikew) as a passive means “to suffer harm,” or “to suffer an injustice.” The noun ἀδικία (adikia) means “unrighteousness.” Since the Greek verb has a wider field of meaning than the English, to translate it as suffer an injustice is unwarranted, for it implicitly attributes evil to God. As R. Bauckham notes, “in English it is impossible to translate ἀδικούμενοι as a morally neutral term and ἀδικίας with a morally pejorative term, while retaining the play on words” (Jude, 2 Peter [WBC], 265).

[2:13]  ¹² tn Grk “considering carousing in the daytime a pleasure.”

[2:13]  ¹³ tn Or “carousing,” “reveling.” The participle ἐντρυφῶντες (entrufwnte") is a cognate to the noun τρυφή (trufh, “carousing”) used earlier in the verse.

[3:3]  ¹⁴ tn Grk “knowing this [to be] foremost.” Τοῦτο πρῶτον (touto prwton) constitute the object and complement of γινώσκοντες (ginwskonte"). The participle is loosely dependent on the infinitive in v. 2 (“[I want you] to recall”), perhaps in a telic sense (thus, “[I want you] to recall…[and especially] to understand this as foremost”). The following statement then would constitute the main predictions with which the author was presently concerned. An alternative is to take it imperativally: “Above all, know this.” In this instance, however, there is little semantic difference (since a telic participle and imperatival participle end up urging an action). Cf. also 2 Pet 1:20.

[3:3]  ¹⁵ tn The Greek reads “scoffers in their scoffing” for “blatant scoffers.” The use of the cognate dative is a Semitism designed to intensify the word it is related to. The idiom is foreign to English. As a Semitism, it is further incidental evidence of the authenticity of the letter (see the note on “Simeon” in 1:1 for other evidence).

[3:3]  ¹⁶ tn Grk “going according to their own evil urges.”