The Judgment of the Ungodly and the Deliverance of the Righteous<\/strong><\/h2>\n\n\n\nFor if God did not spare angels when they sinned, but sent them to hell, putting them in chains of darkness to be held for judgment; if he did not spare the ancient world when he brought the flood on its ungodly people, but protected Noah, a preacher of righteousness, and seven others; if he condemned the cities of Sodom and Gomorrah by burning them to ashes, and made them an example of what is going to happen to the ungodly; and if he rescued Lot, a righteous man, who was distressed by the depraved conduct of the lawless (for that righteous man, living among them day after day, was tormented in his righteous soul by the lawless deeds he saw and heard)\u2014<\/p>
If this is so, then the Lord knows how to rescue the godly from trials and to hold the unrighteous for punishment on the day of judgment. This is especially true of those who follow the corrupt desire of the flesh and despise authority. <\/p>2 Peter 2:4\u201310a<\/cite><\/blockquote>\n\n\n\nBEHIND THE TEXT \u2013 Judgment and Deliverance<\/strong><\/h2>\n\n\n\nPeter provides three examples of God\u2019s judgment upon the ungodly (vv 4\u20136<\/a>). The warning of condemnation and destruction (v 3b<\/a>) segues perfectly into the three illustrations of God\u2019s judgment (vv 4\u20136<\/a>). Verse 3<\/a> is truly transitional: it concludes the description of the false teachers in vv 1\u20133<\/a> and it introduces the discussion of their fate (along with the fate of the righteous) in vv 4\u201310a<\/a>.<\/p>\n\n\n\nWe also find two examples of fallen angels and Sodom and Gomorrah (vv 4\u20136<\/a>) are in Jude 5\u20137<\/a>. However, Peter uses the example of the flood instead of Jude\u2019s example of the Exodus from Egypt. Also, unlike Jude\u2019s list, Peter places his examples in chronological order.<\/p>\n\n\n\nThere are undeniable similarities in the content of 2 Pet 2:4\u20136<\/a> and Jude 5\u20137<\/a>. But these similarities may indicate a shared common source rather than literary interdependence.<\/p>\n\n\n\nVerses 4\u201310a<\/a> seem to have the following organization:<\/p>\n\n\n\nIF:<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n- v 4<\/a>: God did not spare angels<\/strong> (negative example)<\/li>
- v. 5<\/a>: God did not spare the ancient world<\/strong> (negative example)<\/li>
- v 5<\/a>: God protected Noah<\/strong> (positive example)<\/li>
- v 6<\/a>: God condemned the cities of Sodom and Gomorrah<\/strong> (negative example)<\/li>
- vv 7\u20138<\/a>: God rescued Lot<\/strong> (positive example)<\/li><\/ul>\n\n\n\n
THEN:<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n- v 9a<\/a>: God knows how to rescue godly men<\/strong> (positive conclusion)<\/li>
- vv 9b\u201310a<\/a>: God knows how to hold the unrighteous for judgment<\/strong> (negative conclusion)<\/li><\/ul>\n\n\n\n
The lengthy examples in the first part of the sentence (vv 4\u20138<\/a>) make the certainty of judgment and deliverance in the second part of the sentence (v 9<\/a>) all the more forceful and emphatic.<\/p>\n\n\n\nIN THE TEXT \u2013 Judgment and Deliverance<\/strong><\/h2>\n\n\n\n1. Three Examples of Judgment and Deliverance (2:4\u20138<\/a>)<\/strong><\/h3>\n\n\n\nPeter bases his certainty of divine retribution and divine reward on God\u2019s consistent action in the past. Each example reinforces Peter\u2019s insistence in v 3b<\/a> that the Judge of sin is neither idle nor asleep.<\/p>\n\n\n\nVerse 4<\/strong><\/h4>\n\n\n\nThe first example of God\u2019s retribution on angels when they sinned<\/strong> does not immediately bring to mind any OT occurrence. Most interpreters presume that Peter takes for granted the interpretation of Gen 6:1\u20134<\/a> prevailing in his time. He alludes to the story in which the \u201csons of God\u201d (= \u201cangels\u201d) lusted after and married human women (Gen 6:1\u20134<\/a>). This sin precipitated the flood.<\/p>\n\n\n\nPeter proclaims that God punished the angels and sent them to hell, putting them into gloomy dungeons to be held for judgment. Hell<\/strong> here is Tartarus.<\/em> In classical mythology Tartarus<\/em> was \u201cthe subterranean abyss in which rebellious gods and other such beings, like the Titans, were punished.\u201d The word was appropriated by Hellenistic Judaism as a synonym for hell (see Job 40:20<\/a>; 41:24<\/a>; Prov 30:16<\/a>).<\/p>\n\n\n\nTo translate Tartarus<\/em> as hell<\/strong> in 2 Peter is misleading. Like 1 Enoch,<\/em> Peter uses Tartarus<\/em> to refer to a preliminary place of punishment, where angels are held for judgment.<\/strong> In contrast to the typical perception of hell<\/strong> as a place of final and endless punishment, Peter uses Tartarus<\/em> to mean a place of temporary punishment and confinement. He expected fallen angels to remain in this place of temporary punishment until their final destruction and punishment at the day of judgment.<\/p>\n\n\n\nInstead of gloomy dungeons,<\/strong> some versions, translating a different manuscript reading, describe God as confining the fallen angels to \u201cchains of darkness\u201d (KJV, NAB, NRSV). They read seirais<\/em> (\u201cchains\u201d) instead of sirois<\/em> (\u201ccaves or pits\u201d). The parallel in Jude 6<\/a> uses \u201cchains.\u201d<\/p>\n\n\n\nPeter\u2019s purpose was to remind his readers that God did not spare<\/strong> the angels when they sinned. If exalted angels were not spared from punishment for disobeying God, then the punishment and condemnation of rebellious humans was all the more certain and inescapable.<\/p>\n\n\n\nVerse 5<\/strong><\/h4>\n\n\n\nThe second example is the story of the flood in Noah\u2019s day (see also 1 Pet 3:20<\/a>; 2 Pet 3:5\u20136<\/a>). God did not spare the angels, and he also did not spare the ancient world when he brought the flood on its ungodly people.<\/strong> Peter does not describe their sins. But their designation as ungodly<\/strong> implies their rebellion and opposition to everything associated with God. In contrast to the ungodly who were not spared, God protected Noah, a preacher of righteousness, and seven others.<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\nNoah is depicted as a<\/strong> preacher of righteousness.<\/strong> The OT never mentions Noah preaching. The idea was probably derived from Jewish tradition, which mentions Noah preaching. It could also refer to Noah\u2019s righteous lifestyle as metaphorically condemning sin and proclaimed righteousness to his ungodly contemporaries (Gen 6:9<\/a>). Calvin embraced both possibilities by explaining that Noah could be called a preacher of righteousness<\/strong> \u201cbecause he labored to restore a degenerated world to a sound mind, and this not only by his teaching and godly exhortations, but also by his anxious toil in building the ark for the term of a hundred and twenty years\u201d.<\/p>\n\n\n\nRighteousness<\/strong> is used to describe Noah\u2019s preaching in order to heighten the contrast between Noah and the ungodly people<\/strong> among whom he lived. Unlike the ungodly people,<\/strong> who were not spared by the flood, God protected<\/strong> (ephylaxen:<\/em> watched, guarded, protected;<\/strong> BDAG) Noah.<\/p>\n\n\n\nThe numerical reference to Noah and seven others<\/strong> probably serves the same function as in 1 Pet 3:20<\/a>. It underscores the small number of righteous individuals who were protected by God. In this second example, then, Peter alludes to Noah and the flood to reinforce the certainty of God\u2019s judgment of those who live disobedient and ungodly lives while he rescues his righteous followers.<\/p>\n\n\n\nVerse 6<\/strong><\/h4>\n\n\n\nThe third example is the condemnation of the cities of Sodom and Gomorrah (Gen 19<\/a>). The examples move from destruction by water to destruction by fire (see 1 Pet 3:6\u20137<\/a>; Luke 17:26\u201329<\/a>). God condemned Sodom and Gomorrah by burning them to ashes.<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\nJude also refers to the destruction of Sodom and Gomorrah, but it goes on to specify the sins of the people (v 7<\/a>). Peter merely notes that the citizens of these cities were ungodly.<\/strong> Another difference between Jude and 2 Peter is the omission in Jude of the positive example of God\u2019s deliverance of Lot (2 Pet 2:7\u20138<\/a>). The similarities and differences between Jude and 2 Peter point to a common literary tradition behind the two letters rather than a direct dependence of one writing upon the other.<\/p>\n\n\n\nGod destroyed Sodom and Gomorrah by raining down burning sulfur on them (Gen 19:24<\/a>), by burning them to ashes<\/strong> (tephr\u014dsas<\/em>). The two accounts are not contradictory. Genesis describes the means of their destruction; Peter describes its result.<\/em> Peter uses the well-known Hellenistic Jewish image of burning ashes to describe the destructive result of God\u2019s condemnation of these two infamous cities.<\/p>\n\n\n\nGod made Sodom and Gomorrah an<\/strong> example<\/strong> (hypodeigma<\/em>) of what is going to happen to the ungodly.<\/strong> A hypodeigma<\/em> is an \u201cexample, model, or even pattern\u201d. \u201cThere is an inevitable pattern of events: sin, unconfessed and unforsaken, will lead to judgment and destruction\u201d. What happened to Sodom and Gomorrah is sure to happen to the ungodly false teachers of his time, despite their denial and scorn of coming judgment.<\/p>\n\n\n\nVerses 7\u20138<\/strong><\/h4>\n\n\n\nAlthough God destroyed these two wicked cities, he rescued Lot.<\/strong> The verb for rescued<\/strong> (ryomai<\/em>) originally meant to draw or to drag along the ground.<\/em><\/strong> Eventually, the word came to convey the idea of drawing or snatching from danger, so that it was used to mean to rescue or deliver. <\/em><\/strong>It was used \u201cmore with the meaning of drawing to oneself than merely rescuing from someone or something\u201d. God drew Lot to himself and rescued<\/strong> him.<\/p>\n\n\n\nLot is described three times in these verses as a righteous man<\/strong> (dikaios<\/em>). This is surprising. The OT never describes Lot as righteous. Its description of Lot is not very complimentary. \u201cHe appears simply as a man of the world (Gen 13:10\u201314<\/a>; 19:16<\/a>) who had strayed a long way from the God of his fathers. Though hospitable (19:1<\/a>), he was weak (19:6<\/a>), morally depraved (19:8<\/a>) and drunken (19:33, 35<\/a>)\u201d. According to Gen 19:16<\/a>, Lot was so reluctant to leave sinful Sodom that he had to be dragged out of the city. This may have influenced Peter\u2019s use of ryomai<\/em> (rescue by dragging from danger<\/em><\/strong>) to describe Lot\u2019s deliverance.<\/p>\n\n\n\nFar from perfect, Lot never lost his basic orientation to the Lord. Despite Lot\u2019s shortcomings, Peter described him as distressed by the filthy lives of lawless men<\/strong> (v 7<\/a>) and tormented in his righteous soul by the lawless deeds he saw and heard<\/strong> (v 8<\/a>). \u201cLot\u2019s moral sensitivity made his life among the Sodomites unbearable, just as the life of faithful Christians among the false teachers and those influenced by them will become unbearable\u201d. But God can be trusted to rescue the righteous, just as he rescued Lot.<\/p>\n\n\n\n2. The Conclusion: The Certainty of Deliverance and Judgment (2:9\u201310a<\/a>)<\/strong><\/h3>\n\n\n\nVerse 9<\/strong><\/h4>\n\n\n\nSince the OT repeatedly demonstrates that God can be trusted to save the righteous and to punish the wicked, then the Lord knows how to rescue godly men from trials and to hold the unrighteous for the day of judgment, while continuing their punishment.<\/strong> The verb rescue<\/strong> (ryesthai<\/em>) is the same one that described Lot\u2019s deliverance from the destruction of Sodom. Their destruction is the example and pattern of \u201cwhat is going to happen to the ungodly\u201d (v 6<\/a>). Likewise, the rescue<\/strong> of Lot is the pattern of what is going to happen to the righteous.<\/p>\n\n\n\nGod will rescue the righteous from trials<\/strong> (peirasmou:<\/em> temptations<\/em><\/strong>). \u201cThe idea here is primarily of those surroundings that try a man\u2019s fidelity and integrity, and not of the inward inducement to sin, arising from the desires\u201d. God knows how to rescue godly people from testing, affliction, and even temptations that arise from daily exposure to unbelievers. Just as God rescued Noah and Lot, he can be trusted to save other righteous people from the trials and constraints caused by their sinful surroundings.<\/p>\n\n\n\nThe examples also demonstrate that God knows how to hold the unrighteous for the day of judgment, while continuing their punishment.<\/strong> The participle continuing their punishment<\/strong> (kolazomenous<\/em>) has been interpreted in two ways. It can refer to preliminary punishment of the wicked before the final judgment (see 2:4<\/a>). Or it can refer to punishment at the day of judgment. It is more likely that Peter meant the day of judgment. His main point is the impending fate and doom of the false teachers. Their destruction and condemnation are certain, although they were not yet apparent.<\/p>\n\n\n\nVerse 10a<\/strong><\/h4>\n\n\n\nThe certainty of punishment and destruction is especially true of those who go after flesh in a passionate longing for defilement and despise authority.<\/em><\/strong> In the context of the references to Sodom and Gomorrah (vv 6\u20138<\/a>), go after flesh<\/em><\/strong> (sarkos<\/em>) in a passionate longing for defilement<\/em><\/strong> might be an allusion to the sin of the men of Sodom (Gen 19:1\u201311<\/a>). This phrase most likely refers to depraved sexual sin in general.<\/p>\n\n\n\nThey also despise authority<\/strong> (kyriot\u0113tos:<\/em> lordship<\/em><\/strong>). Authority<\/strong> may refer to: (1) some kind of angelic hierarchy (Eph 1:21<\/a>; Col 1:16<\/a>); (2) the authority of the church; (3) the lordship of Christ, whom the false teachers despise and deny (2:1<\/a>); or (4) all authority in general. The false teachers denied the Lord by their refusal to follow his moral instructions. This made them parade examples of the rejection of authority.<\/p>\n\n\n\nBut Peter referred to the \u201cslander [of] celestial beings\u201d (2:10b<\/a>) and implied that they mocked the teaching of the apostles (1:16<\/a>). This seems to indicate that their disdain for authority<\/strong> was more general in nature than simply a rejection of the Lord\u2019s authority. The false teachers\u2019 disdain for authority is probably best understood in a general sense. It refers to their universal disregard and contempt of all authority, except their own self-seeking desire.<\/p>\n\n\n\nFROM THE TEXT \u2013 Judgment and Deliverance<\/strong> <\/strong><\/h2>\n\n\n\nA Modern Predicament?<\/strong><\/h3>\n\n\n\n\u201cPeter faced a curiously modern predicament\u201d. There were people in the church who lived sexually immoral lives and tried to justify it. Mocking the teachings of the church and the example and authority of Christ, they rejected the idea that God would judge them for following their passionate desires (v 10<\/a>). What was worse, the infection of their immoral behavior was spreading. The situation Peter faced could have been taken from the front pages of today\u2019s newspapers.<\/p>\n\n\n\nAs in Peter\u2019s time, today\u2019s society flaunts sexual promiscuity, homosexual behavior, and blatantly disregards a virtuous and moral lifestyle. Many people scoff at the idea of personal accountability or a day of judgment for their conduct. Often their hollow excuse is that God (if he exists) would not deny the fulfillment of their pleasure or desires, regardless of how depraved or self-obsessed they might be. Peter reminded believers that people could not do this and get away with it in God\u2019s world. God\u2019s judgment of sin and sinners is certain.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
The Promise of Judgment and Deliverance<\/strong><\/h3>\n\n\n\nPeter reminded his readers of God\u2019s retribution on the fallen angels and the wicked people of Noah and Lot\u2019s days. The pattern of God\u2019s destructive judgment on wickedness and sin is firmly established in the pages of Scripture. The certainty of judgment there is like a dark cloud that hovers incessantly (although sometimes imperceptibly) above every human who ever lived. The justice of God may be delayed, but it cannot be avoided.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
But alongside this dark pattern of judgment is a bright and promising pattern of divine deliverance of the righteous. The silver lining of that dark cloud is the promise of God\u2019s grace. As with Noah and Lot, God will rescue those who seek and follow him.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
The Surprising Example of Lot<\/strong><\/h3>\n\n\n\nThe surprising description of Lot as a righteous man<\/strong> is a subtle comfort. The OT does not portray Lot as a sterling example of a righteous man. In fact, Genesis amply documents the shortcomings of Lot. But God rescued Lot! Although he was surrounded by moral decay and depravity, Lot never lost sight of the Lord. Peter presumes that Lot was distressed<\/strong> and tormented<\/strong> by the sinfulness around him. Despite the perverse attraction his sinful culture exerted on him (Gen 19:16<\/a>), Lot rejected Sodom, and God rescued<\/strong> him.<\/p>\n\n\n\nPeter might have used Abraham as his example of God\u2019s deliverance of a righteous man, spared while Sodom and Gomorrah were destroyed (Gen 18<\/a>). Instead, he uses the example of the weak and often-tempted Lot. Perhaps Peter selected Lot because his readers could identify with him. Believers seldom feel they measure up to the standard of faith and righteousness exemplified by Abraham. It is much easier to identify with Lot\u2014distressed, tormented, and tempted by the sin surrounding him. Lot\u2019s story is a story of God\u2019s indescribable grace. If God could rescue Lot, we can trust him to rescue us as well.<\/p>\n\n\n\nGet the New Beacon Bible Commentary Today!<\/strong><\/h2>\n\n\n\n![\"\"](\"https:\/\/blog.olivetree.com\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/03\/NewBeaconBibleCommentaryBookSetSocial-1024x580.jpg\")
<\/figure>\n\n\n\nThese were just some of the notes from the 1 Peter volume in the New Beacon Bible Commentary<\/a>. This is a solid commentary that explains the details of the text while interacting with modern scholarship. Make this your go-to commentary by purchasing this series from our store!<\/p>\n\n\n\n
For if God did not spare angels when they sinned, but sent them to hell, putting them in chains of darkness to be held for judgment; if he did not spare the ancient world when he brought the flood on its ungodly people, but protected Noah, a preacher of righteousness, and seven others; if he condemned the cities of Sodom and Gomorrah by burning them to ashes, and made them an example of what is going to happen to the ungodly; and if he rescued Lot, a righteous man, who was distressed by the depraved conduct of the lawless (for that righteous man, living among them day after day, was tormented in his righteous soul by the lawless deeds he saw and heard)\u2014<\/p>
If this is so, then the Lord knows how to rescue the godly from trials and to hold the unrighteous for punishment on the day of judgment. This is especially true of those who follow the corrupt desire of the flesh and despise authority. <\/p>2 Peter 2:4\u201310a<\/cite><\/blockquote>\n\n\n\n Peter provides three examples of God\u2019s judgment upon the ungodly (vv 4\u20136<\/a>). The warning of condemnation and destruction (v 3b<\/a>) segues perfectly into the three illustrations of God\u2019s judgment (vv 4\u20136<\/a>). Verse 3<\/a> is truly transitional: it concludes the description of the false teachers in vv 1\u20133<\/a> and it introduces the discussion of their fate (along with the fate of the righteous) in vv 4\u201310a<\/a>.<\/p>\n\n\n\n We also find two examples of fallen angels and Sodom and Gomorrah (vv 4\u20136<\/a>) are in Jude 5\u20137<\/a>. However, Peter uses the example of the flood instead of Jude\u2019s example of the Exodus from Egypt. Also, unlike Jude\u2019s list, Peter places his examples in chronological order.<\/p>\n\n\n\n There are undeniable similarities in the content of 2 Pet 2:4\u20136<\/a> and Jude 5\u20137<\/a>. But these similarities may indicate a shared common source rather than literary interdependence.<\/p>\n\n\n\n Verses 4\u201310a<\/a> seem to have the following organization:<\/p>\n\n\n\n IF:<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n THEN:<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n The lengthy examples in the first part of the sentence (vv 4\u20138<\/a>) make the certainty of judgment and deliverance in the second part of the sentence (v 9<\/a>) all the more forceful and emphatic.<\/p>\n\n\n\n Peter bases his certainty of divine retribution and divine reward on God\u2019s consistent action in the past. Each example reinforces Peter\u2019s insistence in v 3b<\/a> that the Judge of sin is neither idle nor asleep.<\/p>\n\n\n\n The first example of God\u2019s retribution on angels when they sinned<\/strong> does not immediately bring to mind any OT occurrence. Most interpreters presume that Peter takes for granted the interpretation of Gen 6:1\u20134<\/a> prevailing in his time. He alludes to the story in which the \u201csons of God\u201d (= \u201cangels\u201d) lusted after and married human women (Gen 6:1\u20134<\/a>). This sin precipitated the flood.<\/p>\n\n\n\n Peter proclaims that God punished the angels and sent them to hell, putting them into gloomy dungeons to be held for judgment. Hell<\/strong> here is Tartarus.<\/em> In classical mythology Tartarus<\/em> was \u201cthe subterranean abyss in which rebellious gods and other such beings, like the Titans, were punished.\u201d The word was appropriated by Hellenistic Judaism as a synonym for hell (see Job 40:20<\/a>; 41:24<\/a>; Prov 30:16<\/a>).<\/p>\n\n\n\n To translate Tartarus<\/em> as hell<\/strong> in 2 Peter is misleading. Like 1 Enoch,<\/em> Peter uses Tartarus<\/em> to refer to a preliminary place of punishment, where angels are held for judgment.<\/strong> In contrast to the typical perception of hell<\/strong> as a place of final and endless punishment, Peter uses Tartarus<\/em> to mean a place of temporary punishment and confinement. He expected fallen angels to remain in this place of temporary punishment until their final destruction and punishment at the day of judgment.<\/p>\n\n\n\n Instead of gloomy dungeons,<\/strong> some versions, translating a different manuscript reading, describe God as confining the fallen angels to \u201cchains of darkness\u201d (KJV, NAB, NRSV). They read seirais<\/em> (\u201cchains\u201d) instead of sirois<\/em> (\u201ccaves or pits\u201d). The parallel in Jude 6<\/a> uses \u201cchains.\u201d<\/p>\n\n\n\n Peter\u2019s purpose was to remind his readers that God did not spare<\/strong> the angels when they sinned. If exalted angels were not spared from punishment for disobeying God, then the punishment and condemnation of rebellious humans was all the more certain and inescapable.<\/p>\n\n\n\n The second example is the story of the flood in Noah\u2019s day (see also 1 Pet 3:20<\/a>; 2 Pet 3:5\u20136<\/a>). God did not spare the angels, and he also did not spare the ancient world when he brought the flood on its ungodly people.<\/strong> Peter does not describe their sins. But their designation as ungodly<\/strong> implies their rebellion and opposition to everything associated with God. In contrast to the ungodly who were not spared, God protected Noah, a preacher of righteousness, and seven others.<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n Noah is depicted as a<\/strong> preacher of righteousness.<\/strong> The OT never mentions Noah preaching. The idea was probably derived from Jewish tradition, which mentions Noah preaching. It could also refer to Noah\u2019s righteous lifestyle as metaphorically condemning sin and proclaimed righteousness to his ungodly contemporaries (Gen 6:9<\/a>). Calvin embraced both possibilities by explaining that Noah could be called a preacher of righteousness<\/strong> \u201cbecause he labored to restore a degenerated world to a sound mind, and this not only by his teaching and godly exhortations, but also by his anxious toil in building the ark for the term of a hundred and twenty years\u201d.<\/p>\n\n\n\n Righteousness<\/strong> is used to describe Noah\u2019s preaching in order to heighten the contrast between Noah and the ungodly people<\/strong> among whom he lived. Unlike the ungodly people,<\/strong> who were not spared by the flood, God protected<\/strong> (ephylaxen:<\/em> watched, guarded, protected;<\/strong> BDAG) Noah.<\/p>\n\n\n\n The numerical reference to Noah and seven others<\/strong> probably serves the same function as in 1 Pet 3:20<\/a>. It underscores the small number of righteous individuals who were protected by God. In this second example, then, Peter alludes to Noah and the flood to reinforce the certainty of God\u2019s judgment of those who live disobedient and ungodly lives while he rescues his righteous followers.<\/p>\n\n\n\n The third example is the condemnation of the cities of Sodom and Gomorrah (Gen 19<\/a>). The examples move from destruction by water to destruction by fire (see 1 Pet 3:6\u20137<\/a>; Luke 17:26\u201329<\/a>). God condemned Sodom and Gomorrah by burning them to ashes.<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n Jude also refers to the destruction of Sodom and Gomorrah, but it goes on to specify the sins of the people (v 7<\/a>). Peter merely notes that the citizens of these cities were ungodly.<\/strong> Another difference between Jude and 2 Peter is the omission in Jude of the positive example of God\u2019s deliverance of Lot (2 Pet 2:7\u20138<\/a>). The similarities and differences between Jude and 2 Peter point to a common literary tradition behind the two letters rather than a direct dependence of one writing upon the other.<\/p>\n\n\n\n God destroyed Sodom and Gomorrah by raining down burning sulfur on them (Gen 19:24<\/a>), by burning them to ashes<\/strong> (tephr\u014dsas<\/em>). The two accounts are not contradictory. Genesis describes the means of their destruction; Peter describes its result.<\/em> Peter uses the well-known Hellenistic Jewish image of burning ashes to describe the destructive result of God\u2019s condemnation of these two infamous cities.<\/p>\n\n\n\n God made Sodom and Gomorrah an<\/strong> example<\/strong> (hypodeigma<\/em>) of what is going to happen to the ungodly.<\/strong> A hypodeigma<\/em> is an \u201cexample, model, or even pattern\u201d. \u201cThere is an inevitable pattern of events: sin, unconfessed and unforsaken, will lead to judgment and destruction\u201d. What happened to Sodom and Gomorrah is sure to happen to the ungodly false teachers of his time, despite their denial and scorn of coming judgment.<\/p>\n\n\n\n Although God destroyed these two wicked cities, he rescued Lot.<\/strong> The verb for rescued<\/strong> (ryomai<\/em>) originally meant to draw or to drag along the ground.<\/em><\/strong> Eventually, the word came to convey the idea of drawing or snatching from danger, so that it was used to mean to rescue or deliver. <\/em><\/strong>It was used \u201cmore with the meaning of drawing to oneself than merely rescuing from someone or something\u201d. God drew Lot to himself and rescued<\/strong> him.<\/p>\n\n\n\n Lot is described three times in these verses as a righteous man<\/strong> (dikaios<\/em>). This is surprising. The OT never describes Lot as righteous. Its description of Lot is not very complimentary. \u201cHe appears simply as a man of the world (Gen 13:10\u201314<\/a>; 19:16<\/a>) who had strayed a long way from the God of his fathers. Though hospitable (19:1<\/a>), he was weak (19:6<\/a>), morally depraved (19:8<\/a>) and drunken (19:33, 35<\/a>)\u201d. According to Gen 19:16<\/a>, Lot was so reluctant to leave sinful Sodom that he had to be dragged out of the city. This may have influenced Peter\u2019s use of ryomai<\/em> (rescue by dragging from danger<\/em><\/strong>) to describe Lot\u2019s deliverance.<\/p>\n\n\n\n Far from perfect, Lot never lost his basic orientation to the Lord. Despite Lot\u2019s shortcomings, Peter described him as distressed by the filthy lives of lawless men<\/strong> (v 7<\/a>) and tormented in his righteous soul by the lawless deeds he saw and heard<\/strong> (v 8<\/a>). \u201cLot\u2019s moral sensitivity made his life among the Sodomites unbearable, just as the life of faithful Christians among the false teachers and those influenced by them will become unbearable\u201d. But God can be trusted to rescue the righteous, just as he rescued Lot.<\/p>\n\n\n\n Since the OT repeatedly demonstrates that God can be trusted to save the righteous and to punish the wicked, then the Lord knows how to rescue godly men from trials and to hold the unrighteous for the day of judgment, while continuing their punishment.<\/strong> The verb rescue<\/strong> (ryesthai<\/em>) is the same one that described Lot\u2019s deliverance from the destruction of Sodom. Their destruction is the example and pattern of \u201cwhat is going to happen to the ungodly\u201d (v 6<\/a>). Likewise, the rescue<\/strong> of Lot is the pattern of what is going to happen to the righteous.<\/p>\n\n\n\n God will rescue the righteous from trials<\/strong> (peirasmou:<\/em> temptations<\/em><\/strong>). \u201cThe idea here is primarily of those surroundings that try a man\u2019s fidelity and integrity, and not of the inward inducement to sin, arising from the desires\u201d. God knows how to rescue godly people from testing, affliction, and even temptations that arise from daily exposure to unbelievers. Just as God rescued Noah and Lot, he can be trusted to save other righteous people from the trials and constraints caused by their sinful surroundings.<\/p>\n\n\n\n The examples also demonstrate that God knows how to hold the unrighteous for the day of judgment, while continuing their punishment.<\/strong> The participle continuing their punishment<\/strong> (kolazomenous<\/em>) has been interpreted in two ways. It can refer to preliminary punishment of the wicked before the final judgment (see 2:4<\/a>). Or it can refer to punishment at the day of judgment. It is more likely that Peter meant the day of judgment. His main point is the impending fate and doom of the false teachers. Their destruction and condemnation are certain, although they were not yet apparent.<\/p>\n\n\n\n The certainty of punishment and destruction is especially true of those who go after flesh in a passionate longing for defilement and despise authority.<\/em><\/strong> In the context of the references to Sodom and Gomorrah (vv 6\u20138<\/a>), go after flesh<\/em><\/strong> (sarkos<\/em>) in a passionate longing for defilement<\/em><\/strong> might be an allusion to the sin of the men of Sodom (Gen 19:1\u201311<\/a>). This phrase most likely refers to depraved sexual sin in general.<\/p>\n\n\n\n They also despise authority<\/strong> (kyriot\u0113tos:<\/em> lordship<\/em><\/strong>). Authority<\/strong> may refer to: (1) some kind of angelic hierarchy (Eph 1:21<\/a>; Col 1:16<\/a>); (2) the authority of the church; (3) the lordship of Christ, whom the false teachers despise and deny (2:1<\/a>); or (4) all authority in general. The false teachers denied the Lord by their refusal to follow his moral instructions. This made them parade examples of the rejection of authority.<\/p>\n\n\n\n But Peter referred to the \u201cslander [of] celestial beings\u201d (2:10b<\/a>) and implied that they mocked the teaching of the apostles (1:16<\/a>). This seems to indicate that their disdain for authority<\/strong> was more general in nature than simply a rejection of the Lord\u2019s authority. The false teachers\u2019 disdain for authority is probably best understood in a general sense. It refers to their universal disregard and contempt of all authority, except their own self-seeking desire.<\/p>\n\n\n\n \u201cPeter faced a curiously modern predicament\u201d. There were people in the church who lived sexually immoral lives and tried to justify it. Mocking the teachings of the church and the example and authority of Christ, they rejected the idea that God would judge them for following their passionate desires (v 10<\/a>). What was worse, the infection of their immoral behavior was spreading. The situation Peter faced could have been taken from the front pages of today\u2019s newspapers.<\/p>\n\n\n\n As in Peter\u2019s time, today\u2019s society flaunts sexual promiscuity, homosexual behavior, and blatantly disregards a virtuous and moral lifestyle. Many people scoff at the idea of personal accountability or a day of judgment for their conduct. Often their hollow excuse is that God (if he exists) would not deny the fulfillment of their pleasure or desires, regardless of how depraved or self-obsessed they might be. Peter reminded believers that people could not do this and get away with it in God\u2019s world. God\u2019s judgment of sin and sinners is certain.<\/p>\n\n\n\n Peter reminded his readers of God\u2019s retribution on the fallen angels and the wicked people of Noah and Lot\u2019s days. The pattern of God\u2019s destructive judgment on wickedness and sin is firmly established in the pages of Scripture. The certainty of judgment there is like a dark cloud that hovers incessantly (although sometimes imperceptibly) above every human who ever lived. The justice of God may be delayed, but it cannot be avoided.<\/p>\n\n\n\n But alongside this dark pattern of judgment is a bright and promising pattern of divine deliverance of the righteous. The silver lining of that dark cloud is the promise of God\u2019s grace. As with Noah and Lot, God will rescue those who seek and follow him.<\/p>\n\n\n\n The surprising description of Lot as a righteous man<\/strong> is a subtle comfort. The OT does not portray Lot as a sterling example of a righteous man. In fact, Genesis amply documents the shortcomings of Lot. But God rescued Lot! Although he was surrounded by moral decay and depravity, Lot never lost sight of the Lord. Peter presumes that Lot was distressed<\/strong> and tormented<\/strong> by the sinfulness around him. Despite the perverse attraction his sinful culture exerted on him (Gen 19:16<\/a>), Lot rejected Sodom, and God rescued<\/strong> him.<\/p>\n\n\n\n Peter might have used Abraham as his example of God\u2019s deliverance of a righteous man, spared while Sodom and Gomorrah were destroyed (Gen 18<\/a>). Instead, he uses the example of the weak and often-tempted Lot. Perhaps Peter selected Lot because his readers could identify with him. Believers seldom feel they measure up to the standard of faith and righteousness exemplified by Abraham. It is much easier to identify with Lot\u2014distressed, tormented, and tempted by the sin surrounding him. Lot\u2019s story is a story of God\u2019s indescribable grace. If God could rescue Lot, we can trust him to rescue us as well.<\/p>\n\n\n\n These were just some of the notes from the 1 Peter volume in the New Beacon Bible Commentary<\/a>. This is a solid commentary that explains the details of the text while interacting with modern scholarship. Make this your go-to commentary by purchasing this series from our store!<\/p>\n\n\n\nBEHIND THE TEXT \u2013 Judgment and Deliverance<\/strong><\/h2>\n\n\n\n
IN THE TEXT \u2013 Judgment and Deliverance<\/strong><\/h2>\n\n\n\n
1. Three Examples of Judgment and Deliverance (2:4\u20138<\/a>)<\/strong><\/h3>\n\n\n\n
Verse 4<\/strong><\/h4>\n\n\n\n
Verse 5<\/strong><\/h4>\n\n\n\n
Verse 6<\/strong><\/h4>\n\n\n\n
Verses 7\u20138<\/strong><\/h4>\n\n\n\n
2. The Conclusion: The Certainty of Deliverance and Judgment (2:9\u201310a<\/a>)<\/strong><\/h3>\n\n\n\n
Verse 9<\/strong><\/h4>\n\n\n\n
Verse 10a<\/strong><\/h4>\n\n\n\n
FROM THE TEXT \u2013 Judgment and Deliverance<\/strong> <\/strong><\/h2>\n\n\n\n
A Modern Predicament?<\/strong><\/h3>\n\n\n\n
The Promise of Judgment and Deliverance<\/strong><\/h3>\n\n\n\n
The Surprising Example of Lot<\/strong><\/h3>\n\n\n\n
Get the New Beacon Bible Commentary Today!<\/strong><\/h2>\n\n\n\n
<\/figure>\n\n\n\n