The time go away and all people will walks toward to death

Once the realization that you are ‘in Christ’ start developing inside,you slowly start loosing your interest to the worldly life,which can also be referred to as dying to this world.

The issue of “things in them hard to understand” is of much wider resonance. For instance, we’ve had 100 generations of rabbis explicating Jewish doctrine, purportedly working always from God’s documented revelations. Few if any of them claimed prophetic or revelatory authority.

But, YAHWEH formed our intelligence, and he spoke to us. Why would he make himself “hard to understand?” “Hard to understand” is a very serious criticism in the realm of religious belief.

“…regard the patience of our lord as salvation.” Peter already finds it necessary to acknowledge the disappointment, pointed inevitably towards disbelief, of those who were persuaded by the promises of Heaven on Earth (an idea specific to Christianity!) and that “many now living will never die.” (You can’t fudge about what “die” means. Christ died and was resurrected, as they say.)

In 9: “The Lord is not slow about his promise, as some think of slowness.”

Later preachers had access to a better solution. Just stop talking about “the day of the Lord is at hand.” Don’t call attention to it. This hadn’t been a means of converting or holding later generations of Christians.

It is incredible how people still nowadays twisting and turning what The Bible says to their own favor.

Peter is giving Paul an endorsement and perhaps acknowledging the divine source of his wisdom in saying it was “given him.”

Peter acknowledges Paul by saying “as also our beloved brother Paul, according to the wisdom given to him, has written to you”. When Peter says that the letters are “hard to understand” he means that they are difficult to interpret. Moreover, because Peter said “which the ignorant and unstable twist to their own destruction”, it shows that Paul’s letters must be scripture, because the distortion of it leads to destruction.

Maybe this passage is simply Peter seeing the writing on the wall? He sees that Paul’s letters have gained a wide audience in the surrounding faith communities. And that his conflict with Paul was widely known. And at this point maybe Peter has decided to accept that more people within the larger faith community are siding with Paul’s view. So maybe a winking endorsement (Paul’s words are hard for him to accept also) is Peter’s play to maintain his status as a relevant leader to the audience. If he continued to be against Paul’s more widely accepted views, he might find himself more on the margins and on his way out.

I believe the author of this particular book was very wise and had influence in the early ekklesiai and that he believed Paul’s writing to be scripture just like the old testament. This was a difficult comcept to those who relied solely upon the words of the OT. This made Paul’s writing difficult to interpret with their background in Judaism. Of course, in any age there are always those who would twist the scripture to suit their own agendas. That is why it is so important for today’s believers to study the Bible diligently (as we do here) and ground owr faith into your very being so that we will not be deceived.

I think that this is also a small rebuke to Peter, because he makes his letters complicated and hard to understand and that gives the opportunity to twist the words in any way and explain them as it fits the person reading.

Paul had been learnt, Peter had been unlearnt. Peter would have to approach Paul’s writings reverently, and ask for revelation in order to understand its teachings. The ignorant and unstable would misinterpret to their detriment.

Peter also brings credibility to Paul by saying that Paul wrote the same way in all his letters … that his message and wisdom were consistent. Peter embraces Paul as a fellow teacher and apostle. What a great testimony to the unity of the body of Christ, even in light of occasional differences.

Peter was giving reference to Paul, bringing him to the circle of relaible brothers, indirectly certfying Paul as an apostle.
These verses confered to Paul´s writing (letters) as part of their believes (which can lead us to think abou a core body of thoughts fundamental to early christianity´s doctrines).

“Regard the patience of our Lord as salvation” – Peter is simply saying – Not that Christ’s patience is salvation, but it makes salvation possible. The scoffers were accounting the Lord’s delay as proof that His promises would never be fulfilled, but Peter shows that it is rather an evidence of the Saviour’s merciful patience. He waits that all who will may have the opportunity to accept salvation.

“Wisdom given him” – Peter here implies that Paul had no inherent supply of spiritual wisdom but was dependent upon the divine gift, even as were his brethren. Seems that Paul’s letters were in circulation, they were accepted as authoritative, and Peter could appeal to his reader in support of his own instruction.

“There are some things in them hard to understand,” – It is not certain to which topics Peter is referring, but if the reference is to the general subject of the second coming, that topic finds a place in all of Paul’s major letters, and there is no need for a more specific identification. Although these difficult matters are not identified, most commentators agree that they concern questions of moral laxity arising out of a misconstruction of Paul’s teaching on the second coming and on the Christian’s relation to law, subjects that occupy a prominent place in 1 Thessalonians and Galatians.

“the ignorant and unstable” – In regard to Paul’s writings, or perhaps, simply uninstructed, ignorant, on spiritual matters in general. The religion of Jesus Christ, when taken into the heart, refines and cultivates its possessor; but those who reject it precepts leave themselves a prey to temptations such as were presented by the scoffers and false teachers. The unlearned and unstable distort the Scriptures by twisting and straining their meaning as an inquisitor to their own destruction.

“Other Scriptures”- There has been much speculation as to which particular writings Peter has in mind. Some limit the reference to the OT, while others include what existed of the NT. A final conclusion may not be possible, but this much is clear, that Peter places Paul’s writings on a level with other inspired Scripture.

to ‘tleonidas 56’….the two Apostles take 2 APROACHES to the Gospel……..one can not speak Greek to Jews not the opposite
Since both are ‘of God’ so they are brothers, ‘under Christ’
…reproaching is part and parcel of true friendship–the alternative is glad handing, why so surprised conflict does not end in dissolution? because in Christ' the community learns from one another, as long as Peter gives the ok to whatever is stated or believed [and the other Apostles-its all about authority BECAUSE it is depend and on Revelation
not on thinking , per say. Paul says to the Greeks “i am glad I have my faith, not your reason..” etc etc]

The knowledge that Paul’s doctrine of grace as expressed in his letters has been perverted by untaught and unstable persons is apparently presupposed (see Rom. 3:5-8; 6:1,2). By the time 2 Pet. was written, Paul’s letters were viewed as comparable with the rest of the scriptures (meaning at least the OT) a clear evidence of an early rise of discernment in the early church on canonical and non canonical books.

2PETER 3:15-16
And account – that “the long-suffering of our Lord” is “salvation.” Regard his delay in coming to judge the world, not as evidence that he never will come, but as a proof of his desire that we should be saved. Many had drawn a different inference from the fact that the Saviour did not return, and had supposed that it was a proof that he would never come, and that his promises had failed. Peter says that that conclusion was not authorized, but that we should rather regard it as an evidence of his mercy, and of his desire that we should be saved.
Even as our beloved brother Paul also – From this reference to Paul the following things are clear:
(1) That Peter was acquainted with his writings;
(2) That Peter presumed that those to whom he wrote were also acquainted with them;
(3) That Peter regarded Paul as a “beloved brother,” notwithstanding the solemn rebuke which Paul had had occasion to administer to him;
(4) That Peter regarded Paul as an authority in inculcating the doctrines and duties of religion; and,
(5) That Peter regarded Paul as an inspired man, and his writings as a part of divine truth.
According to the wisdom given unto him – Peter evidently did not mean to disparage that wisdom, or to express a doubt that Paul was endowed with wisdom; he meant undoubtedly that, in regard to Paul, the same thing was true which he would have affirmed of himself or of any other man, that whatever wisdom he had was to be traced to a higher than human origin. This would at the same time tend to secure more respect for the opinion of Paul than if he had said it was his own, and would keep up in the minds of those to whom he wrote a sense of the truth that all wisdom is from above. In reference to ourselves, to our friends, to our teachers, and to all men, it is proper to bear in remembrance the fact that all true wisdom is from the “Father of lights.”
Hath written unto you – It is not necessary to suppose that Paul had written any epistles addressed specifically, and by name, to the persons to whom Peter wrote. It is rather to be supposed that the persons to whom Peter wrote 1Pe_1:1 lived in the regions to which some of Paul’s epistles were addressed, and that they might be regarded as addressed to them. The epistles to the Galatians, Ephesians, and Colossians were of this description, all addressed to churches in Asia Minor, and all, therefore, having reference to the same people to whom Peter addressed his epistles.

2 Peter 3:16

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.
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.
Which they that are unlearned – The evil here adverted to is that which arises in cases where those without competent knowledge undertake to become expounders of the word of God. It is not said that it is not proper for them to attempt to become instructed by the aid of the sacred writings; but the danger is, that without proper views of interpretation, of language, and of ancient customs, they might be in danger of perverting and abusing certain portions of the writings of Paul. Intelligence among the people is everywhere in the Bible presumed to be proper in understanding the sacred Scriptures; and ignorance may produce the same effects in interpreting the Bible which it will produce in interpreting other writings. Every good thing is liable to abuse; but the proper way to correct this evil, and to remove this danger, is not to keep the people in ignorance, or to appoint some one to be an infallible interpreter; it is to remove the ignorance itself by enlightening the people, and rendering them better qualified to understand the sacred oracles. The way to remove error is not to perpetuate ignorance it is to enlighten the mind, so that it may be qualified to appreciate the truth.
And unstable – Who have no settled principles and views. The evil here adverted to is that which arises where those undertake to interpret the Bible who have no established principles. They regard nothing as settled. They have no landmarks set up to guide their inquiries. They have no stability in their character, and of course nothing can be regarded as settled in their methods of interpreting the Bible. They are under the control of feeling and emotion, and are liable to embrace one opinion to-day, and another directly opposite to-morrow. But the way to prevent This evil is not by attempting to give to a community an authoritative interpretation of the Bible; it is to diffuse abroad just principles, that men may obtain from the Bible an intelligent view of what it means.
Wrest – The word here used occurs nowhere else in the New Testament. It is derived from a word meaning a windlass, winch, instrument of torture and means to roll or wind on a windlass; then to wrench, or turn away, as by the force of a windlass; and then to wrest or pervert.
As they do also the other scriptures – This is an unequivocal declaration of Peter that he regarded the writings of Paul as a part of the holy Scriptures, and of course that he considered him as inspired. The word “Scriptures,” as used by a Jew, had a technical signification – meaning the inspired writings, and was the common word which was applied to the sacred writings of the Old Testament. As Peter uses this language, it implies that he regarded the writings of Paul as on a level with the Old Testament; and as far as the testimony of one apostle can go to confirm the claim of another to inspiration, it proves that the writings of Paul are entitled to a place in the sacred canon. It should be remarked, also, that Peter evidently speaks here of the common estimate in which the writings of Paul were held. He addresses those to whom he wrote, not in such a way as to declare to them that the writings of Paul were to be regarded as a part of the inspired volume, but as if this were already known, and were an admitted point.
Unto their own destruction – By embracing false doctrines. Error destroys the soul; and it is very possible for a man so to read the Bible as only to confirm himself in error. He may find passages which, by a perverted interpretation, shall seem to sustain his own views; and, instead of embracing the truth, may live always under delusion, and perish at last. It is not to be inferred that every man who reads the Bible, or even every one who undertakes to be its public expounder, will certainly be saved.

Peter points to Paul’s letter. This implies that Paul’s letters were written earlier than Peter’s. He then says that these were authoritative letters not to be disregarded. In Peter they are called scriptures!

Here we see how the passage of time, mere decades, bent the arguments most effective in converting and retaining believers.

Christ promised that “Many now living shall never die.” Not that these people would be resurrected, but that they would never die because his “second coming” was in imminent prospect, as Paul taught. This was initially a millenarian sect. And in the early books of the New Testament we see this promise repeated, and relied upon.

No doubt it was easier to believe in a second coming in the immediate aftermath of Christ’s death, than to believe that one’s decomposed corpse could serve as a “seed” to be resurrected as a “spiritual body” at some more distant future date. Even in our day, many from time to time gather to await the end of time, but few seem to die “in the confident expectation of a glorious resurrection.”

To say that God is patient is to say that man is relatively impatient in awaiting “the day of his coming.” Why, then is it that “his patience is our salvation?” Because all those who are not saved before his coming are doomed to eternal darkness. The more this coming is delayed (within the span of a natural lifetime after Christ’s death, when the first forms of these texts were written), the more of these people, the more of “us” will be saved.

Peter acknowledges God’s wisdom on Paul but however expresses how difficult to understand his teachings were. This can be well understood considering, Paul was bringing in a new revelation of salvation through faith in Christ not by law. Peter spoke against men who twisted Pauls words for their selfish reasons.

Peter considers here that Paul’s letters are placed on the same level as the Old Testament. Peter must have been thoroughly aware of and impressed with Paul’s other letters to recommend them. This letter is unclear as to whom it is addressed. Could it be an ekklesia in Asia Minor like 1 Peter was addressed.

The authority with which Paul wrote came from God. This is clearly something he was completely sure about. The fact that they were considered scripture by some Christians so early in the life of the church is truly amazing, especially when there was so much opposition to what he taught. His complete faith in what God had revealed to allowed him to oppose those who had been set in authority over the church. He did this without being disrespectful to the other apostles. History has been kind to him as his letter are now officially part of scripture.

Peter notes that Paul’s letters can be hard to understand. this can be both a benefit and a problem. The benefit is that it will make readers really think about what Paul has said.

The problem in being hard to understand is that it will leave some without the intellectual capacity. none the wiser after reading them.

The potentially bigger problem is that it makes it easier for the unscrupulous to twist what is said to their own ends.

This letter demonstrates that both Paul and Peter are working towards a common goal. Their approaches may be different but we must never doubt the camaraderie in spite of the differences of opinion. Bear in mind that both parties promulgate the gospel and as such must be practicing what they preach. hence, I do not perceive any residual anger from the public disagreement.

I concur with the above suggestion posed above that, “If we take it that Peter wrote this of Paul then it is powerful confirmation of Paul by Peter.”

But I doubt that the writing actually came from Peter, who probably only spoke Aramaic and was not schooled in writing in any language.

Peter’s acknowledgement of Paul as his brother, indicates that Peter accepts Paul as a follower and an Apostle of Jesus Christ and believes also the calling of Paul, as an apostle to the gentiles.

I observe that Peter understood Paul’s letters but accepts also, that Paul’s letters are weighty and hard to understand and that the ignorant and the unstable twist Paul’s letters to their own destruction.

It’s hard to take things out of context and fully understand them. One letter, when there might have been a back and forth correspondence, means some things may not be as easy to understand for that reason. But as with email, letters, written words, we miss out on voice inflection and body language to help interpret that communication.

The fact that Peter calls Paul his beloved brother tells me that either Paul rebuked him publicly after this letter was written or that they really practiced what they preached. Forgiveness and humility. I love reading such texts. They really do encourage a believer as such words can be seen as Peter’s personal testimony of forgiveness and humility.

Verse 15 clearly is a message acknowledging that the longer the Lord waits to return, the more opportunity there is for unbelievers to learn the truth. While obscure, it is a great message.

Paul’s authority comes from the Spirit. And much like today, it is rather easy to discern whether a speaker has the power of the Spirit in their message. To answer an earlier question, yes, Paul would be much revered today as he would be a powerful evangelist for the Lord

This is a text whose origins and authorship are in dispute. This makes it a little difficult to be sure as to what is going on. Clearly, the writings of Paul were known and accepted at the time of composition. The Pauline message is endorsed by the writer who, as were so many, keen to unify the Church under one dogma. I am surprised that the message is described as hard to understand when the core is brilliant in its simplicity. For myself, I do not understand the reference to God’s patience, except that it may refer to the fact that God will wait for people to come to the truth.

Peter recognized that Paul is imparting wisdom about Christ to those he visits and to those he writes. However, Peter acknowledges that Paul’s letters are sometimes hard to understand, so Peter urges people to avoid twisting the letters of Paul to fit their own biases as they do with other scriptures.

15:And regard the patience of our Lord as Salvation.

Jon 3:10 And God saw their works, that they turned from their evil way; and God repented of the evil, that he had said that he would do unto them; and he did it not.

Psa 145:8 The LORD is gracious, and full of compassion; slow to anger, and of great mercy.
Psa 145:9 The LORD is good to all: and his tender mercies are over all his works.

It seems odd that impetuous fisherman Peter should be writing a letter; may be he leaned heavily on his scribe.

I very much hope that his reference to dear Paul can be taken at face value. An impetuous person is least likely to harbour grudges? This letter was written near the end of his life perhaps and long after the differences which Paul refers to in Galations chapter two.

Peter acknowledges the authority of Paul and the “wisdom given to him.” Through the epistles that Paul wrote (the authorship of many of the epistles attributed to Paul are debatable), verse 16 warns against those who would misuse the truth in them and pervert and corrupt them, leading inevitable to their (the corruptors’) destruction.

Peter acknowledge Paul as his fellow brother in Chris, and I believe now he accepts Paul ideas or doctrines. I am just curious of the timing between this letter and Paul’s letter that describes his opposition to Peter on the non-Jews. Could that be another Kefas and not Peter? …

Thank you, Prof. Nasrallah for the video clips. You found a lot in them that I didn’t.

I think that we have an issue here. We know from history that Peter and Paul has taken two different roads in Christianity. Paul to the Gentiles and Peter to the Jews. From Peter letters which has some kind ,similar line with James, we can see that are different from Paul theology. So I found a little difficult for Peter to say something like that. On the other hand, we have problem with Canon. The 2 Peter letter is acceptable only in Sinaiticus codex and further. Eusebious and Origenis doubt about this letter and in previous manuscripts are missing or is out. So I think that this letter didn’t written from Peter, but from someone other who wanted to unify all groups of Christianity from the fourth century and on.

Peter acknowledge Paul as his fellow brother in Christ and here we see that Peter admitted that Paul’s letters are quite difficult to understand to the people maybe who are yet ignorant of the gospel at that time and started twisting them and it creates its own destruction, without the help of the Holy Spirit who gives us wisdom, it is truly difficult to understand the things that are eternal and is of God. When I first read the bible, I found it very boring and ridiculous, so I stop reading it because I couldn’t understand it, but when I got saved and received the Holy Spirit, God’s been helping me understand His word, and my eyes are now opened. It is the power that comes from God alone we can attain wisdom.

He is giving a reminder that we should be ready for the coming of the Lord. Also he is cautioning us against those who would come to distract and cause us to take eyes off of faith.

What Peter was referring to in the previous verses was ling holy lives and being found without spot or blemish while waiting for the day of God. Peter then begins verse 15 with “and regard the patience of our Lord as salvation”. Does this mean that God is patient and you won’t get what you deserve as no one can be sinless? It seems like Peter is writing that Paul also has written to the recipients of this letter about being without spot or blemish.
Does Peter mean that Paul’s writings about Jew and Gentile, circumcised and uncircumcised are difficult to understand?

I agree that Peter is acknowledging Paul in these passages. He also seems to be making a similar warning about being careful of what you are listening from others that is in opposition to Paul and therefore should not be trusted.

We can see that at this writing, Peter has fully accepted ( beloved brother Paul) Paul as a disciple of Christ and an apostle. And he even considers Paul’s writings as “Scripture” in V16.

It seems to me in the passage that there is no space for a dialogue with people who are thinking differently. Is that thru?

Peter confirms the authority of Paul and his disagreement with those who misinterpret his letters. Peter indicates that misinterpreting the letters of Paul was dangerous and could lead to self-deception.

In answer to polarprisca, what set Paul apart so that others believed his message was the Spirit he carried.

This serves to give the authority and recognition of Paul’s letters as scripture. It speaks of recognition by fellow Christian writers and about the way in which divergent Christian thought was resisted and warned against by Paul and other writers such as the writer of Peter.

Interesting! I think one lecture you could do to this is that Peter is not confortable with all the things that Paul writes. Of course, he says that in a very polite way refering as to “others” not understanding and twisting the meaning.

I appreciated this small section as a reminder that very few people knew Paul and few knew what the religion that was only forming would become. So while Paul is at times “rough” it is important to remember how much we rely on sight in making impressions and without it we usually are far off the mark in our imaginings.

Using Paul as an example of even earlier warnings, Peter continues to warn against false teachings. The fact that Peter chose to reference Paul shows that Paul’s words had prestige.

`The ignorant and unstable twist to their own destruction…`` If Paul were preaching now, would we think he was ignorant and unstable, twisting to his own destruction? What set him apart that even those who had walked with Jesus believed his message was heaven sent?

Peter indicates that he belives that Paul has received wisdom to write, teach and that some people might twist his message to suit their egos, which is also common these days.

Peter supports Paul, but warns that ambiguities may tempt others to misinterpret and attack Paul.

What is being said here in regard to Paul is a commentary on Pauls writing. As suggested in 13 above this is a call for intelligent people to bear in mind the implications set out in the suggestions in 13.

What Peter is saying in effect is that if you are intelligent, and a leader and understand, its not only Paul who is mandated but all that can understand.

He is being diplomatic in light of some of the autocratic overtones of Paul.

Reminds me of when Jesus spoke, and said, “Unless you eat of my flesh, and drink of my blood, you have no life in you.”

his own hearsay this verse and next…surely external evidence [others writings in and outside the NT weightier]

This surely attested Paul´s authority showed in his letters. By exhorting his readers, somehow he could exceed and admonish or reproach the community.