Remember Christ’s Coming

That’s exactly where the rub had come with Peter’s opponents. This cosmic testimony of Christ’s return flew in the face of the false teachers who derided “his ‘coming’ that he promised” (3:4). They held fast to the stability of the world, the impossibility of sudden interventions, and the constancy of the natural order (Schreiner, 1 and 2 Peter, 313). But in Peter’s mind there was no doubt that “one historical event calls for another” (Vaughn and Lea, 1, 2 Peter, 159). Consequently, he wanted his readers to know they could be confident of the gospel truth that one day Jesus would return with the same “honor and glory” (v. 17) that he had received from God the Father on that holy mountain.

To strengthen the faith of his readers, Peter uses the transfiguration as one example of the validity and credibility of the apostolic witness to the gospel as well as to one of its crucial components. While his reminder about the apostolic proclamation of Christ’s return is grammatically at the center of verse 16, Peter’s major point is the contrasting qualifications at play. He and the other apostles made known the return of Christ by being “eyewitnesses,” something the false teachers couldn’t put on their resumes (Moo, 2 Peter, 71). He denies the accusation of his critics that he and the other apostles were simply blind followers of “cleverly contrived myths” (v. 16), or fictitious stories, when it came to their gospel. Instead, he counters that they actually “heard this voice when it came from heaven while we were with him on the holy mountain” (v. 18). The apostles had been there; they had seen it with their own eyes and heard it with their own ears.

These verses are radiant with at least three magnificent descriptions of the awesome display of Christ’s greatness that the apostles saw and heard that day. First, Peter identifies the nature of the event—it was “the power and coming” of “his majesty” (v. 16). The terms “power” (dunamis) and “coming” (parousia) are best interpreted together (Bauckham, 2 Peter, 215). While parousia usually refers to the future return of Christ, here—combined with the divine dunamis that Jesus has as the resurrected Lord—it’s best translated and understood as the “powerful coming” exhibited on this occasion as well as the one to come. Peter saw Jesus’s powerful coming at the transfiguration as a precursor to the ultimate demonstration at his second coming. The word majesty (megaleiotes) is most often used in reference to God (e.g., Luke 9:43). But here—in the context of Christ’s “powerful coming”—it has to be understood as a reference to Jesus’s deity (Schreiner, 1 and 2 Peter, 314; cf. 1:1).

Second, Peter describes what happened at the transfiguration—Christ “received honor and glory” from “the Majestic Glory” (v. 17). The word “honor” denotes the exalted status being bestowed on Jesus, while “glory” indicates the heavenly radiance most often seen in the Bible as belonging to God (cf. John 1:14; 1 Pet 1:7; Jude 25). The title “the Majestic Glory” is likely a circumlocution used to refer to the Divine Being without mentioning him by name. But here it seems to be more than a roundabout way of showing reverence for God. In fact, the title seems to connect verses 16 and 17 together. While the word for “Majestic” in Greek is different from the one used for Christ in verse 16, the idea is the same. The “Majestic Glory”—the one to whom all majesty and glory belongs—is here bestowing “majesty” (v. 16) and “honor and glory” (v. 17) on Christ Jesus! Could there be any stronger statement of the deity of our Lord and its place in the gospel (cf. John 1:1,14; Col 1:15-20)?

Third, Peter reports what God said about Jesus—“This is my beloved Son, with whom I am well-pleased” (v. 17). The first part of this sentence is probably best understood as reading, “This is my Son, my Beloved.” It serves as a heavenly expression of the deep and abiding love the Father has for the Son. The latter part of the sentence indicates the good pleasure the Father has in the Son (Vaughn and Lea, 1, 2 Peter, 161). Together, the pronouncement attested to God’s affirmation and affection for Jesus Christ in both his person and his work.

This text is a reminder that our faith isn’t rooted in fairy tales and fiction. While the source of most world religions can’t be traced to historical facts, Christianity is lashed to the eyewitness testimony of those who had a complete knowledge of the historical Jesus (cf. John 15:26-27; Acts 1:21-22; 2:42). Peter and the other apostles didn’t have to fabricate stories about Jesus; they had actually seen him and done life with him. Having such a knowledge passed along by firsthand account ought to edify us as Christ’s disciples. And Peter’s reminder of Jesus’s glory and majesty should compel us to godly living and sustain us in the face of falsehood and worldliness until we see him face-to-face (Titus 2:11-14; 1 John 3:1-3).

True to his promise to “make every effort” (v. 15) to remind his readers about the validity of Christ’s return, Peter offers them two verifications of that claim. He’s already reminded them about his own eyewitness account of the transfiguration. Now he puts a second credible source of authority on the table—the Old Testament Scriptures. In these verses Peter refers to the Scriptures variously as “the prophetic word” (v. 19), “prophecy of Scripture” (v. 20), and “prophecy” (v. 21). When we come to 2 Peter 1:19-21, we find ourselves at one of the most potent places in all of the Bible regarding the inspiration of Scripture. Few passages magnify the supernatural origin and nature of God’s Word as clearly and succinctly as this one.

As we unpack what Peter says about the Old Testament Scriptures, let’s keep in mind that the truth found here is equally applicable to all of Scripture, both the Old and New Testaments. It’s true that Peter was referring in this letter to the Old Testament Scriptures, but God—at the same time Peter was writing—was sovereignly in the process of using him and other godly men to pen what eventually would become the New Testament Scriptures. Even in this letter Peter includes the writings of the apostle Paul in the category of the “Scriptures” (2 Pet 3:16). Regardless of whether Peter knew his own letters would one day be included in that same category, he evidently was conscious that God was in the process of expanding his written revelation. Truly the apostolic witness exemplified in verses 16-18 was used for this purpose (cf. John 15:27; Acts 1:21-22). That makes this an important text for contemporary Christians regarding our view of the entirety of Scripture contained in the Bible. So consider in this passage a reality, a reason, and a response for all followers of Christ concerning our approach to Scripture.

First, the reality is that Scripture is superior to our personal experience. In verse 19 Peter says the Scriptures are a more “strongly confirmed” (bebaioterion) source of authority than even the personal experience and eyewitness testimony he’s just finished recounting. That’s an amazing claim! For most people nothing is more authoritative than their personal experience. How often do we hear someone say something like, “I know that’s true because I’ve experienced it”? Peter indicates that such a contention is limited at best. Satan can create experiences and feelings, and he can manipulate circumstances in our lives. So the objective constant of Scripture must be seen to be on a higher plane of authority than personal experience.

Such a contention is consistent with the normal tendency of first-century Jews. They would believe prophecy before they would believe a voice from heaven! So Peter—a Jewish Christian and an apostle with deep regard for Old Testament prophecies—essentially says to his readers, “If you don’t believe me, go to the Scriptures.” He obviously had complete confidence that Scripture was a reliable source of authority (M. Green, 2 Peter, 108–9). Furthermore, Peter wasn’t comparing the Old Testament Scriptures to the transfiguration as a reliable source of authority. He was comparing the Old Testament Scriptures to his eyewitness experience. And so should we. Whenever Scripture contradicts our personal experience, we should always put our trust in Scripture. That’s part of walking by faith and not by sight!

Second, the reason Scripture is superior is because of its supernatural origin. I’m skipping ahead here and addressing verses 20-21 first simply because they provide the rationale for the counsel found in the second half of verse 19. In these verses Peter is calling attention to the divine source of Scripture. He’s continuing his case for the authentication of Christian teaching, namely the return of Christ. He’s already provided authentication through his eyewitness of the transfiguration (vv. 16-18). Here he authenticates Scripture by citing its divine origin and authority. Essentially he’s saying, “The same God whom the apostles heard speak in the transfiguration spoke also through the prophets” (M. Green, 2 Peter, 112). In verse 20 he tells us Scripture is authoritative, and in verse 21 he tells us why.

In a backdoor kind of way, Peter tells his readers they shouldn’t listen to anyone who tries to make Scripture say whatever they want it to say. Why? Because that not only changes its meaning, but it cancels out its authority. A proper understanding of the prophets’ words wasn’t derived “from the prophet’s own interpretation” (v. 20). This is the only time the word “interpretation” (epilyseos) is used as a noun in the New Testament, but the verb form shows up in Mark 4:34 and Acts 19:39. In both places it means to unravel a problem (Vaughn and Lea, 1, 2 Peter, 164). This was a clear prohibition against interpreting Scripture on a personal whim, which is exactly what the false teachers were doing by denying Christ’s coming. They were negating the authoritative word of the prophets by unraveling the words of Scripture to an end that was convenient for their own agendas. None of us has the right to make Scripture say whatever we want it to say!

verse 21 spells out for us the gravity of unraveling Scripture to this end. It has everything to do with Scripture’s origin. Peter continues by saying, “because no prophecy ever came by the will of man” (v. 21). To say it another way, Scripture didn’t originate with humans. Consequently, people have absolutely no right to twist it to say whatever they want. And the stakes keep getting higher in this verse as Peter reveals by whose will prophecy of Scripture actually was produced. It came “from God . . . by the Holy Spirit” (v. 21). Peter clearly identifies God as the origin and source of Scripture, making it a superior source of authority over everything else, including personal experience. Think about what this says about the false teachers’ tweaking the Old Testament prophecies about the coming kingdom. God spoke, but they unraveled his words to make them their own. In so doing, they put “new” words—their own words—in the mouth of the God of the universe!

This is exactly what drew such strong rebuke from God against false prophets in the Old Testament (e.g., Jer 23:16; Ezek 13:3). They spoke their own words instead of his. They twisted his words to fit their own agendas and justify their godless living. But before we rush to cast stones at false prophets in the Old Testament and false teachers in the New Testament, let’s take a look inward. What’s different about the Christian who reads God’s Word in her quiet time but then only draws meaning from a topical devotional book that merely addresses one small detail of the passage, and that out of context? What’s different about a small group leader who reads a Bible passage and then asks his members to share what it means to them without discriminating between their various interpretations? What’s different about a pastor who announces a text for his sermon and then launches off into a tirade on a personal pet peeve that has nothing to do with the passage he read? These are just a few examples of unraveling Scripture incorrectly and thereby undermining its authority and denying its Author. Doing so muffles the voice of God at best and puts words in his mouth at worst. Either way we miss hearing and obeying what God has for us.

How much clearer could Peter have been in authenticating the trustworthiness of Scripture? His readers could have complete confidence that what the Old Testament Scriptures said about the coming kingdom was true. Consequently, they should be compelled to live holy lives as they wait for Christ’s return. Subsequently, we can have confidence in what the Bible says about the second coming as well as what it says about every other subject found on its pages. And its truth should compel us to godly living. As the apostle John says, “And everyone who has this hope in him purifies himself just as he is pure” (1 John 3:3).

A final aspect of Peter’s authentication was to show that Scripture didn’t just fall out of the sky or appear under a rock. It actually was transmitted through human instruments. He said that “men spoke from God as they were carried along by the Holy Spirit” (v. 21). The idea of being “carried along” (pheromenoi ) was used to describe a ship being moved by the wind (cf. Acts 27:15,17). The language is describing the prophets as raising their sails and the Holy Spirit filling them and blowing their sails in the direction he wanted them to go (M. Green, 2 Peter, 113).

One of the most important phrases in this passage is “from God” (v. 21). God used human instruments, but the result was a message from him. This truth is foundational to what’s been called the doctrine of verbal plenary inspiration. It suggests that in the original manuscripts of Scripture—throughout all its pages—the Holy Spirit guided the human authors even in their choice of expressions without ignoring or negating their personalities (Hernando, Dictionary of Hermeneutics, 26). The result of this process was that every word of those original manuscripts was perfect and without error, recording the exact message God desired to give to man (Gaebelein, Meaning, 9).

God moved some men who uttered truths out of their own background and life situation without ever losing their consciousness or normal mental functions. This was not an act of mechanical dictation but active cooperation of men with God. The result was that these men spoke from God, not merely about God (Vaughn and Lea, 1, 2 Peter, 164–65). Two implications flow from this reality. First, we must approach the Bible as having a specific message from God for us, not as a book of random subjects intended to address every detail of life. Second, when we read the Bible with integrity today, and when we hear it taught and preached rightly, we can be confident that God is speaking.

Third, our response should be submission to Scripture in view of Christ’s return. Both the superiority of Scripture as well as its divine origin compel us to pay attention to it and obey what it says. That’s why Peter says that “you will do well to pay attention to it” (v. 19). Essentially, this is the main point of the passage. Everything he’s written up to this point leads to this command (Schreiner, 1 and 2 Peter, 321). To “pay attention” (v. 19) means to “pay close attention,” and it implies that one will act on the words by embracing and following them. In so doing the respondent will “do well” (v. 19), Peter says. This expression refers to doing what is right and correct. Obeying Scripture isn’t simply a good thing to do, but it’s the right thing to do (G. L. Green, Jude, 227). We don’t obey what the Bible says simply because it will benefit us; we obey it because obedience to God is what’s right.

But benefit us it does. The exhortation to obey what Scripture says is intensified by the use of a simile: “as to a lamp shining in a dark place” (v. 19). Green likens this to a torch that illuminates a dark room, revealing the dirt inside and making it easier to clean (M. Green, 2 Peter, 109). Peter may be using the phrase “dark place” to describe either the darkness of the world because of sin or the false teaching that his readers were encountering. The latter seems more likely in context. The heresies that Christ isn’t coming back (or has already come back), that there’s no impending judgment, and that people consequently have a license for godless living all serve to dim a person’s view of the realities of life and the gospel. We can find ourselves groping around in darkness without any spiritual awareness or direction.

The light that only Scripture provides will be necessary “until the day dawns and the morning star rises in your hearts” (v. 19). Both images here naturally refer to Christ’s return and the brilliance that will characterize it. In Greek literature the “morning star” was used to refer to royal and divine people. In the Old Testament the Messiah was symbolized by a star (Num 24:17) and the rising sun of righteousness (Mal 4:2). In the New Testament Jesus himself is called the “morning star” (Rev 2:28; 22:16). The phrase “in your hearts” likely refers to our re-creation in Christ Jesus, that inner transformation that’s already begun through the work of God’s Spirit as we learn and obey Scripture (2 Cor 3:18). When Jesus returns, this process will be completed. As the apostle John says, “When he appears, we will be like him because we will see him as he is” (1 John 3:2). As believers in Christ we look forward to the day our lives will be illuminated by the radiance of his presence in all of his glory. Until he returns, we’ve been given the divine flashlight of Scripture to transform us into his image and light our path as we walk with him (cf. Pss 19:8; 119:105; Prov 6:23).

I used several different homiletics textbooks in the seminary classroom for about five years before I coauthored the book I currently use. The first semester I required my new book I remember telling my students on the first day of class, “You’re liable to hear some of the same things in my lectures that you read in that textbook because everything I know is now in that book!” There was a lot of truth to that. I had incorporated into that book the combination of all the lessons learned in my educational journey, my decade of pastoral preaching experience, and my five years of teaching experience. Why did I feel I needed to give that disclaimer? Because I know some students get frustrated—or even insulted—when a professor says the same things in class that they read in their textbooks. Our tendency is to avoid repetition, or at least push back against it.

However, God knows we need to be reminded of gospel truth. For believers today the same two sources—the apostolic witness and the prophetic word—remain as the solid and enduring sources of what we believe. This dynamic duo has been supernaturally recorded to form the two testaments of our Bible. The dominant component comprising the Old Testament is the written record of the message of the prophets. And the New Testament is largely the witness of the apostles to the life, ministry, and teaching of the Lord Jesus Christ. Together they form the sixty-six books of our Bible and serve as the inspired, inerrant, infallible, sufficient, reliable, and resounding reminder of the glorious gospel of grace!

In these two testaments God has given us a textbook for “life and godliness” (1:3), which contains “very great and precious promises” (v. 4) intended gradually to make us “share in the divine nature” (v. 4) as we wait for “the power and coming of our Lord Jesus Christ” (v. 16). And he makes no apology that the Bible is a book of repetition, whether it be the prophets’ reminders about the Mosaic law in the Old Testament, the Gospel writers’ reverberation of Jesus’s acts and teachings in the New Testament, or the apostolic witness to the same. The Bible says the same thing over and over again from Genesis to Revelation. It gives testimony to the gospel, God’s redemption of his creation.

Within that witness is contained the weighty doctrine at hand in 2 Peter. The importance of remembering the certainty of the second coming of Jesus Christ can’t be overstated. This doctrine is a key component of the gospel and one of the primary motivations for godly living. Christ’s rule and return, including his final judgment of all people, truly is one of those “very great and precious promises” (v. 4) that’s foundational to the Christian calling. While we navigate the ups and downs of daily life in our journey through this world, let’s set our gaze toward the east and think often of Christ’s return. And may the reality that he may appear at any moment compel us to holy living and progressive spiritual maturity.