“Therefore, dear friends, since you are waiting for these things, strive to be found at peace, without spot or blemish, when you come into his presence.  And regard the patience of our Lord as salvation, just as also our dear brother Paul wrote to you, according to the wisdom given to him, speaking of these things in all his letters. Some things in these letters are hard to understand, things the ignorant and unstable twist to their own destruction, as they also do to the rest of the scriptures. Therefore, dear friends, since you have been forewarned, be on your guard that you do not get led astray by the error of these unprincipled men and fall from your firm grasp on the truth. But grow in the grace and knowledge of our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ. To him be the honor both now and on that eternal day.” 2 Peter 3:14-18

There was a time when liberal schools of theology insisted that Paul and Peter were rivals and that the New Testament must be understood in light of their polarizing conflict. Our subject text might seem to lay that to rest, though there are some scholars who insist this is proof that the “real Peter” didn’t write this letter. They see it as evidence that someone else, claiming to be Peter, wrote it.

I’ve already said that I’m not interested in that controversy. I think there is just as much evidence to believe Peter wrote this letter as there is evidence to believe that he didn’t. What’s more, the theory that Peter was not just asserting his apostolic authority, but also supporting Paul’s, encourages me to believe that the real apostle Peter wrote this letter.

Some scholars like to make a great deal of the supposed schism between Peter, the apostle to the Jews, and Paul, the apostle to the Gentiles. In some ways, this is understandable. Saul persecuted Christians before he became one and he remained a radical after his conversion. The Jewish Christians distrusted him. That didn’t go away when he stepped into a position of leadership in the church at Antioch. In fact, he seemed to be battering down some comfortably held social and religious barricades, which made the Jerusalem elders and apostles nervous.

When I studied Acts, I noted that there was a great deal of racism at work in the Jerusalem Christians. In some ways they seem to have preferred the doctrines of the false brethren over those of Paul and Barnabas. We all bring our prejudices with us into our relationship with Jesus Christ and the apostles and Jerusalem leaders were no different. Thank God that God isn’t finished with us yet and that we can learn as we move forward. Paul had been used by God to rebuke Peter for racism and that had likely been used by false teachers to show that Paul didn’t know his place. Yet Peter was writing to Paul’s churches to encourage them in the wake of Paul’s death. In doing so, he wanted to show unity and continuation of the faith. He sought to avoid politicization between the Jewish Christians and the Gentile Christians.

Thus, he used Silvanus, Paul’s traveling companion (2 Corinthians 1:19; 1 Thessalonians 1:1; 2 Thessalonians 1:1; Acts 15:22, 40), as his amanuensis (1 Peter 5:12) and made use of some of Paul’s themes and phrases. Now he confronts the issue directly. His words may infer that Paul’s writings were already being collected and that Peter was familiar with Paul’s writings. His mention of Paul and his epistles seems far from casual. Peter indicated that Paul was not to be included among the false teachers that he was warning of for Paul was an apostle every bit as much as Peter. As an apostle, his epistles are the inspired Word of God, Scripture on part with the Old Testament. If Paul’s epistles were distorted by false teachers, it was not his fault; false teachers twisted all Scripture (verse 16).

Significantly, Peter assured his readers that Paul’s teachings did not disagree with those of Peter or the other apostles. There is harmony and consistency between Paul’s epistles and the rest of Scripture. Paul’s writings are inspired and authoritative in matters where he went beyond that revealed by the other apostles, through whom God also revealed Scripture. While each author of a book in the Bible must be consistent with previous revelation, each one also makes a unique contribution to the Bible as a whole. Because we believe in progressive revelation, we expect later inspired writings to go beyond that revealed by earlier writers. There is a world of difference between going against previous Scripture and going beyond it. Paul’s writings are completely consistent with the Old Testament Scriptures and with the New Testament Scriptures, but Paul was also privileged to reveal things which were not clear until this point in time.

There are some scholars who think that Peter was vexed by some of Paul’s more obscure teachings, but I would note that Peter had a few obscure texts as well. It is true that cultists attempt to build doctrines on their interpretation of such texts. I think Peter was more disturbed that false teachers distort the texts they do not like, ones they do not want to understand at face value so they can avoid changing their thinking and their lifestyle. We often find it impossible to understand what we do not like or do not want to acknowledge as true. Much of the communication gap between opposing viewpoints, between mates, between generations, is simply a refusal to hear the other side for fear we might have to admit it is true or we might have to change.

Some say, “I cannot understand how a God of love would condemn anyone to hell.” What they really mean is: “I don’t want to believe in a literal hell. Its existence would take much of the pleasure out of my sin, because I would know that someday I will have to pay the price. Therefore I refuse to believe in hell, and any passage in Scripture which says there is a hell is too vague, too obscure, or inconsistent with too many other texts.”

What might one find “hard to understand,” or rather, “hard to accept” in Paul’s writings? The answer is simple: the mystery of the union of Jew and Greek, in Christ, without distinction. Here is the truth which God revealed through Paul to the church, including the sometimes reluctant apostles.

Here we find Peter admitting that he’d been wrong and that Paul had been right. He asserted that he and Paul were not enemies, despite their past disagreements. Peter viewed Paul as a beloved brother. His ministry was different from Peter’s for the most part, but they complemented one another.  Here at the end of his live, Peter was able to admit that he had been fallible, racially biased and far too tolerant of the errors (even heresies) of the Jewish legalists. God did not establish just one man to bring the gospel to the world – He chose several. That plurality was part of the strength of the early church. All crucial decisions in Acts were made collectively, by a group, thus insuring consistency and accountability. No one possessed all the gifts. No one was given all the power. The church was not and is not a mere collection of individuals. It is the body of Christ. There is “wholeness” only as all of the individual members of the body of Christ are a functional part of the church (Ephesians 2:14-15; Ephesians 4:11-13).

The principle of plurality applies not only within a local church but also outside the local church. No one local church is likely to have all the spiritual gifts necessary for the continuation of its ministry or the spread of the gospel. God may well intend to edify our church through the ministry of someone from outside our flock. We need to be on guard against isolationism and unnecessary fear of those outside our local congregation.

Closely related to plurality is accountability. As we see in 1 Corinthians 1, the single ruler system does not seem to have worked well even in the early days of the church. Even Peter was not above rebuke. Occasionally, a Christian leader loses sight of the principles of plurality and accountability and may say, “I get my orders from God.” This very pious sounding statement flies in the face of Scripture. Ultimately, we are accountable to God, and there are times when we must obey God rather than men, yet God has structured His church that He also speaks to a saint through other saints. Those who claim to get direct orders only from God may find the source of their “guidance” other than divine.

Just as plurality means no one individual’s authority is absolute, no one’s submission is absolute either. When the Scriptures instruct us to correct a brother or sister overtaken by a fault (Matthew 18:15-20; Romans 15:14; Galatians 6:1-2; 1 Thessalonians 5:14), this does not mean only our peers. It means anyone. Our final authority is the Word of God. We dare not ignore sin in the name of submission to our spouses or our church leaders. Paul sought to submit himself to the church leaders in Jerusalem, but he did not hesitate to rebuke Peter when his actions were a denial of the gospel.

Some differences among Christians, especially in regard to their understanding of the Scriptures, are not matters of great eternal importance. Where the gospel or fundamental doctrines are not compromised and Christian morality is not adversely affected, differences over minor areas of truth should not be allowed to divide or undermine Christian unity (Romans 14; Philippians 3:15; Titus 3:9). May God give us a repentant heart when we are corrected and a gracious spirit toward those He uses to point out our sin, just as He gave Peter toward Paul.

(This is the third and last installment of the article on the Second Coming of Christ)

Peter challenged us to view the length of time our Lord has tarried in terms of just Who God is rather than in terms of who we are. When viewed from the standpoint of Who God is—His attributes—the time He has apparently delayed is inconsequential. Only from a human perspective can it be deemed “too long.”

The patience of God is toward His elect. In Peter’s words, He is “patient toward you”. God’s judgment will fall upon the wicked, but His grace is toward those hearts He opens, who therefore turn to Him in faith (Acts 13:48; 16:14). The sovereignty of God in salvation may be difficult to accept for some, but it is certainly true, and it involves His longsuffering toward those who are doomed as well as toward the elect (Romans 9:19-24; Romans 3:25).

Our response toward the patience of God should be to regard the delay in terms of salvation. The delay of God in judging sinners has made our salvation possible and provided the opportunity for others to be saved and for us to be instruments in their salvation by proclaiming the gospel. That’s a beautiful “delay” of God’s kingdom if it results in the salvation of lost sinners, like me.

Peter’s words in verse 9 are sometimes misinterpreted. “… not wishing for any to perish but for all to come to repentance (2 Peter 3:9b).  This does not mean that God “wishes” for things that don’t come true. It does not mean that God wants all men to be saved, but is unable to bring that desire about. God has the power to do whatever He wants to do. Sometimes He chooses not to use His power for reasons we are not meant to understand – perhaps because He respects the dignity of human beings to reject Him. Not all will come to repentance and God knew that at the foundations of the universe. It is not that He can’t bring these people to repentance, it is that He has opted not to. That He delays, even knowing this, should motivate us to praise. His delay on the behalf of those who may never repent is not a reason to accuse Him of being too slow, but to adore Him for providing the opportunity.

“But the day of the Lord will come like a thief, in which the heavens will pass away with a roar and the elements will be destroyed with intense heat, and the earth and its works will be burned up. Since all these things are to be destroyed in this way, what sort of people ought you to be in holy conduct and godliness, looking for and hastening the coming of the day of God, on account of which the heavens will be destroyed by burning, and the elements will melt with intense heat!” 2 Peter 3:10-12

I think Peter missed his calling as a poet or painter with such vivid imagery. The heavens will be consumed in a dramatic destruction involving great heat so immense it will literally melt the earth. We have no way of comparing this fiery destruction to any previous “fire” of judgment. It is beyond human comprehension. We have only one reason to believe it will happen, and that is because God has said it would. Our belief in the coming Day of the Lord is based solely upon our confidence in God and His Word. It is interesting that those who mock the possibility of a day of divine judgment also do not trust God’s word.

Peter’s words about the nature of the Day of the Lord are written to us, the saints. Apart from divine enlightenment, his words fall on deaf ears as far as the unsaved are concerned. What do these words say to us? How can we apply them to our lives?

Peter’s theme in both his epistles was that Christians should strive for holiness (1 Peter 1:14-16; 1 Peter 2:9-12; 1 Peter 3:8-12; 1 Peter 4:1-2; 2 Peter 1:5-7).

There is sharp contrast between the believer’s holiness and the fleshly indulgence of the false teachers. The one without hope beyond this life gives full indulgence to the flesh (1 Corinthians 15:32); one who lives in hope denies fleshly lusts, in light of the blessings God has promised in the life to come (1 Peter 2:11-12).  In verses 11 and 12, however, Peter wrote not about the blessings of the coming kingdom of God but the outpouring of God’s wrath upon sinners as they reap the devastating consequences of sin and its corruption. Even though the Christian will not experience this judgment, we should learn from it. We should be reminded of the holiness of God and His hatred of sin. If God deals with sin in His creation this way, how does God feel about sin in our lives? We must learn to hate what God hates. We must seek to be holy, as He is holy. We must flee from sin and its corruption and live godly and holy lives.

The horror of that day for sinners, and the finality of their judgment should also greatly motivate us to bear witness to our faith and seek to turn men from God’s wrath to His salvation. We believe that Day is coming because God’s Word tells us so. We need no “signs and wonders” to prove its imminence; we know because God’s description of the “last days” indicates the day is near. Let’s not be caught by surprise when that great day arrives; we know it is coming and the time is near. We should be watching for that great day, as our Lord and His apostles instructed us (Matthew 24:42-43; 25:13; 1 Thessalonians 5:6; 1 Peter 4:7; Revelation 3:2; 16:15).

“But according to His promise we are looking for new heavens and a new earth, in which righteousness dwells.” 2 Peter 2:13

Peter didn’t focus on just the downside of the Lord’s Day, but recognized that it was a blessed hope for the Christian. Our hope is not just for God’s judgment but for the kingdom He will bring in which righteousness dwells. And since that kingdom is one characterized by righteousness, we should live in a manner consistent with our destiny (1 Peter 3:8-12). We should live righteously because we have a great hope in the future.

On the off-chance that a non-believer is reading this, I must ask if you have considered your eternal future. Do you look forward in hope to the new heaven and earth or is your destiny eternal destruction? Like the road divided in a yellow wood, the one you choose will make all the difference. You choose it through your response to Jesus Christ. He came to earth and died on the Cross for sinners, to bear the penalty of God’s eternal wrath. Those who trust in Him for the forgiveness of their sins need not fear the coming “Day of the Lord,” but look forward to it and even seek to hasten its coming. Those who have not received Jesus Christ as their Savior will face Him as their Judge when He comes to the earth again. Have you trusted in Jesus Christ for the forgiveness of your sins and as God’s provision for eternal life? I pray that you have. And if you have not, I pray that you will.

Mr. Obama said -

“You see, you see, the flow of credit is the lifeblood of our economy. The ability to get a loan is how you finance the purchase of everything from a home to a car to a college education, how stores stock their shelves, farms buy equipment, and businesses make payroll.”

The flow of credit is the lifeblood of our economy? We need it for buying stuff, for making payroll, for buying business inventory?

Climbing up on my roof, taking a very deep breath and shouting into a megaphone –

CREDIT IS WHAT GOT US INTO THIS MESS! WE NEED TO STOP USING CREDIT!!!!!!!

Sorry, got a little exercised there, but it’s true.  During the halcyon years of the 1950s and 60s, people didn’t have access to a lot of credit. You needed to put down 20% minimum to purchase a home or car and many people, mostly in lower economic classes, had to put down more. Credit cards were very hard to get, unless you made a great deal of money, and most people didn’t use them much and paid them off as soon as they could. I remember a VISA card my dad had in the early 1970s that allowed you to pay off a balance in six monthly payments. Since he knew that, he didn’t charge anything on his card that he didn’t think he could pay off in five months. My parents – a cook and a waitress – bought TWO houses in the late 1960s. They did it by saving and then finally getting a loan for a very small house, paying double payments to show they could afford another mortgage and then buying a somewhat larger house and using the first house as a rental which essentially paid for ¾ of the mortgage on the house we lived in. They paid off the mortgage on the first house in five years (10 year mortgage) and on the second house in 10 years (20 year mortgage). This was the rule in those days and it worked very well.

I asked my friend RV, who has been in business for 40 years, if he ever took out a loan to meet payroll. He laughed. I asked him if he would ever vote to allow his sons to take out a loan to meet payroll in the family corporation. He laughed. His son John, a businessman with an economics degree from Dartmouth, points out that this practice of businesses taking out a loan to meet payroll is a fairly new practice. When he was in school 15 years ago, it was just being considered by some business models and most of his business professors were saying it sounded like a recipe for bankruptcy.  Now it’s the lifeblood of our economy? Oh, my! Ditto, stocking inventory through credit. John says “That’s what cash reserves are for.” It makes little sense to him to sell inventory that he doesn’t own and to pay 20% more for it through interest. That cuts into his long-term profits, he explains.

Government has always run deficits and it’s rarely been a good thing. The deficit spending of the 1970s led to the Carter years. We became so enamored as a nation with having both a strong military and highways, etc., that we dug ourselves into a national “credit” hole that led to hyper-inflation, high unemployment, and double-digit interest rates.

Thus, history shows us that credit on the individual, business and government level must be used sparingly. Yet, here we have a President who believes that it is the lifeblood of our economy.

The lifeblood of any economy is production. This is why America is in trouble. We have exported most of our production capacity to the Far East. Our environmental regulations and high payroll costs have made producing anything in the US prohibitively expensive. Credit might help fix that problem if we had a President who was willing to invest in factories and ease environmental regulations, insist upon a renegotiation of union contracts in the production sector – but we have a President who stands for the exact opposite of that.

So, we will have credit loosened so we can go back to borrowing on the future – until the next economic crisis, which we may not survive as a nation.

Mr. Obama said -

In order to save our children from a future of debt, we will also end the tax breaks for the wealthiest 2 percent of Americans. Now, let me be clear -- let me be absolutely clear, because I know you'll end up hearing some of the same claims that rolling back these tax breaks means a massive tax increase on the American people: If your family earns less than $250,000 a year — a quarter million dollars a year — you will not see your taxes increased a single dime. I repeat: Not one single dime. Not a dime. In fact, the recovery plan provides a tax cut — that's right, a tax cut — for 95 percent of working families. And by the way, these checks are on the way.

What is not spoken here is that businesses will be taxed at these new rates. My friend John’s business makes a little more than $250,000 a year in profit. That profit is reinvested back into the company, but it also provides for his parents’ modest retirement income and bonuses for him and his brother to make it worthwhile to continue working in the family business. Their actually salaries put them below poverty level. Both of their wives work at well-paying jobs and the profit bonuses bring what they actually make to middle-class levels. In anticipation of the higher taxation, John’s already closed a division of their small business, resulting in the loss of six jobs.  When the tax rate hikes actually come, he plans another contraction of 20%. He and his brother will work harder and longer hours and they will have fewer employees in order to try and keep the company going. According to John, every small business he knows that actually produces something is looking at these sorts of cut-backs. If they don’t make a profit because taxes take the profit, then there’s no reason to stay in business.

As for the 95% of us who will receive a “tax cut” – I can live without $50 extra per month, expecially since it means I’m going to be paying $75 per month more in taxes within five years. That’s another contribution from John, who I think is probably a better trained economist than Mr. Obama or the nut jobs who are giving him advice. What we take out in credit today, we must pay back tomorrow. That means higher taxes for all of us somewhere down the road.

Mr. Obama said -

To relieve the strain on our forces, my budget increases the number of our soldiers and Marines. And to keep our sacred trust with those who serve, we will raise their pay, and give our veterans the expanded health care and benefits that they have earned.

Classic guns versus butter and the Dems always think we can have both. Our armed forces already get paid A LOT. I live in a military town, so I see what they make and what they spend. They control the real estate market here. If the military isn’t buying, house values slump. If they are, regular people can’t afford to buy. They all drive very expensive cars. These days they get a $40,000 resign bonus. College is paid for. They can buy at a discount from the BX or get discounts from local vendors. I’m not saying that those in combat zones shouldn’t get a fair wage, but they don’t need their wages raised at this time and perhaps we should be discussing whether men and women who have never put their lives on the line should be getting paid that much. My husband and I have a good friend who was a warrant officer. His last year in he made more money sitting at a computer inventorying stuff for the Stryker brigade than my husband made as an electrician (considered one of the most dangerous domestic jobs) working 60-hour weeks. PJ has never been in a combat zone – ever!

What it comes down to is that this country has been nuts for a decade or more, spending money we didn’t have and now our President wants us to continue to spend money we don’t have in order to fix a crisis caused by spending money we didn’t have.

Oh, my! Will we never learn?

Insanity is doing the same thing over and over again and expecting the different results – Albert Einstein

(The subject remains Christ’s return and why it has not happened yet)

Peter wanted us to view the Scriptures as sufficient, reliable, accurate, true, and authoritative. These words are the only absolute truth God has revealed. They are not truths submitted to the bar of human judgment or divine suggestions; they are divine “commands.” In the “Great Commission” (Matthew 28:18-20) of our Lord, He instructed His disciples to teach “all that I have commanded you” (Matthew 28:20). God spoke not just to inform us but to instruct us about what we are to believe, and thus how we are to behave. To disregard God’s word is to disobey Him.

“Know this first of all, that in the last days mockers will come with their mocking, following after their own lusts, and saying, “Where is the promise of His coming? For ever since the fathers fell asleep, all continues just as it was from the beginning of creation.”  2 Peter 3:3-4

It should come as no surprise that men would arise who deny the second coming of our Lord. One of the most common falsehoods referred to in the New Testament (1 Corinthians 15:32; 2 Thessalonians 2:1-2), this false teaching had an adverse affect on some of the saints (2 Timothy 2:18). Denial of the second coming not only rejects the Christian’s future hope but also to rejects the judgment of sinners at the return of Christ. No wonder these “mockers” denied the second coming! How much more comfortable it was to practice sin with the false assurance that they would not give account to God!

How ironic are Peter’s words. Mockers will come in the last days, denying the second coming, and fulfilling Scripture about the second coming by their very existence. We know we live in the end times that they scoff at because they are scoffing. These mockers point to the nearness of the day of judgment by mocking it. Peter believed he was living in the end times because he had encountered scoffers, those who would deny the second coming of Christ not because the evidence dictated their denial, but because of the guilt and deceit produced by their sin. Logic was not their mistress; impure lust was.

Of course, their argument would be well-couched, just like that of so many other heretics. They would claim to rely on logic.  Their argument would go something like this: Jesus said the “day of the Lord” would entail a cataclysmic change, but there’s not really been such a change since the days of Genesis and there’s no indication that something like it is on the horizon. It’s been a few decades since Jesus said He’d return and He hasn’t, so since there’s no indication that He will, we must conclude that He’s not coming. Since Jesus promised to come to establish His kingdom on earth and He has not, we must conclude His promises are not reliable, and His word cannot be trusted. Nothing new about that logic, by the way. Check out Psalm 73:3-12.

Notice the apparent piety of the language of denial in our text. These mockers use all the right theological buzz words. They deny the faith with stained glass words, speaking of the “fathers,” the “promise,” the creation of the world, and even of death as “sleep.” They use orthodox terminology to create a heretical theology. They are “wolves in sheep’s clothing” (Matthew 7:15), who appear orthodox, yet “secretly introduce destructive heresies” (2 Peter 2:1).

We might want to notice that the “first coming” of Jesus doesn’t even get honorable mention among these scoffers. They look at the history of man and conclude that nothing significant has happened, but they ignore Christ’s life, death and resurrection. What an amazing oversight!

“For when they maintain this, it escapes their notice that by the word of God the heavens existed long ago and the earth was formed out of water and by water, through which the world at that time was destroyed, being flooded with water. But the present heavens and earth by His word are being reserved for fire, kept for the day of judgment and destruction of ungodly men….” 2 Peter 3:5-7 (emphasis mine)

Similarly to those who blindly embrace the scientific method as the answer to the entire field of existence today, these scoffers miss the point the Word of God makes so clear. They point to the constancy of life on this planet as evidence of God’s lack of involvement and proof that His Word is not true. Peter pointed to this same continuity as proof of the sustaining power of God’s Word. He is the living Word, Who not only created this world but Who also sustains (Colossians 1:16-17).

What we “see” should not cast doubt on our trust in the promises of God and our hope of His coming. What we see, when interpreted in the light of God’s Word, is further evidence of the power of God’s Word. By His Word, the world as we know it was created. By His Word, the world was destroyed by the Flood. By His Word, the present heavens and earth are being preserved for the day of judgment which God promised. The “promise of His coming” is the promise of Scripture, the word of God. From the scoffers’ perspective, history provides ample evidence the Word of God is impotent. From the perspective of the Scriptures, history provides ample evidence the Word of God is certain, because God is omnipotent.

“But do not let this one fact escape your notice, beloved, that with the Lord one day is as a thousand years, and a thousand years as one day. The Lord is not slow about His promise, as some count slowness, but is patient toward you, not wishing for any to perish but for all to come to repentance.” 2 Peter 3:8-9

The scoffers have rejected and ridiculed the Word of God, the very Word which could deliver them from the wrath to come by pointing them to faith in the Lord Jesus Christ. Since they have rejected the Word, there is nothing more that can be said to them or of them. Peter thus turned to the saints and the Scriptures to explain biblically why the Lord’s return has taken so long and has not yet occurred.

The Lord’s “delay” speaks to the character of God. Viewed from the divine perspective, what the scoffers see as a deficiency in God’s character is actually a display of His infinite wisdom, power, and grace. The scoffers want to define God to our very limited human perspective, to our linear time concept. God isn’t human, nor does He exist in linear time. God is eternal! Why does He need to hurry? That’s a human problem! Our days are numbered; His are not! Time does not limit God in any way. A long period of time in the eyes of men is nothing in the eyes of God. Conversely, a very short period of time in our sight is not short in God’s sight.

God also has unlimited resources. He is omnipotent! He can do in a very short time that which would take us forever. For example, God was able to “compress” an eternity of judgment into those few hours our Lord suffered on the cross of Calvary.

The nature of God is often incomprehensible to mankind, because we are linear, finite creatures who cannot possibly understand a being that lives outside of time and space and has power well beyond anything we possess.

(This is a Part of a 3-part series, because the topic of Christ’s return is a large one)

Alaskans fly a lot because we’re so far from the rest of the United States. This means that almost any time there is a problem with the airline industry, I will know someone who was stuck in the middle of it. Most of my friends are patient travelers owing to the time it takes us to get anywhere. What’s another hour if you’ve already planned to log 17 hours in the air? From this rather jaded airline perspective, I’ve come to the conclusion that Americans do not handle delays very well. During my most recent airline delay saga, numerous flights were canceled and many others were delayed. I can’t say I enjoyed them. Delays are not pleasant! However, I think the primary problem was that our culture simply does not like to wait.  It’s pretty ironic, really, because we wait less than at any time in the past. We travel at high speed, waiting less to arrive at a distant place. Communications which formerly took months now are completed in seconds. Meals which used to take hours to cook are now done in minutes in microwave ovens. People used to have to wait until they had cash to purchase a new car or home. Now these things are bought on credit. We do not have to wait. Fewer and fewer people are willing to wait until marriage to enjoy the pleasures of sex. We Americans are not accustomed to waiting.

“Dear friends, this is already the second letter I have written you, in which  I am trying to stir up  your pure mind by way of reminder: I want you to recall both the predictions foretold by the holy prophets and the commandment of the Lord and Savior through your apostles.” 2 Peter 3:1-2

I don’t think human beings have ever enjoyed waiting for anything, or anyone, including God, though truthfully, men have been waiting on God all through history. Noah waited at least a century for the flood to come upon the earth (Genesis 5:32; 6:10; 7:6). Abraham and Sarah waited 25 years for the birth of the son God had promised them (Genesis 12:4; 21:5). Abraham did not even possess the promised land in his lifetime, and it was more than 400 years until his descendants took possession of it (Genesis 12:1-3; 15:12-16). I’m thinking God doesn’t operate on our time table. Maybe we should get used to it and be sanguine like Alaskans are about air travel.

God is never “late;” He is always “on time.” Mockers seek to convince themselves and others that the promise of Jesus’ second coming is false based upon the passage of much time and compounded by no visible evidences that He will come at all. Mockers believe they have given God plenty of time to fulfill His promise to return and thus have now concluded that His time is up. “If He hasn’t come by now,” they say, “He simply isn’t coming.”

In chapter 3 of his second epistle, Peter exposed these mockers and the folly of their denials by reiterating his commitment to remind his readers of the truths of the Scriptures as revealed through the Old Testament prophets, Jesus, and His apostles (3:1-2). Peter then described the mockers of whom he warns his readers, detailing their lifestyle and their creed (3:3-4). Verses 5-7 he exposed the folly of their thinking, especially as it relates to the role of the Word of God in Old Testament history and in prophecy.

Peter then turned his attention to the saints. While mockers deny the Scriptures, true saints base their hope and their conduct on the promises of the Word of God. Peter gave a divine perspective of time and presented a very different explanation for the apparent delay of the Lord’s return. He focused on God’s attributes of eternality, omnipotence and mercy. He then explained why unbelievers can’t see the nearness of the “day of the Lord” and the impact that hope has on the saints.

The natural man is always more interested in something “new” than in being reminded of that which is “old” (Acts 17:19-21). Our technological age sees “old” as inferior and “new” as better. Buy a new computer today and it will already be inadequate in six months. This is not the case with truth, however. Here, “old” is better and new is the first to be forgotten. Peter had little “new” for his readers. Like the rest of the apostles, he continually turned his readers to the truths of the Scriptures. He was continuing the ministry of Paul, not presenting a new gospel. There is a continuity and a climax to Scripture because God has progressively revealed His truth to men in the course of history. This revelation culminated in Christ, God’s “final word,” which was communicated to us by the apostles (Hebrews 1:1-3; 2:1-4). The truth of God is therefore found in the writings of the “holy” Old Testament prophets, whose teachings are affirmed, clarified, and further explained by Jesus, Whose teachings were recorded by the apostles. There is no need for any additional revelation (Revelation 22:18-19). Peter was merely reminding of what had already been taught.

This coming section of 2 Peter is a series of really hyperbolic statements that at first, I wasn’t sure I agreed with. Some of the falsest teachers I’ve met seemed like really nice people. After a while, though, I realized that Peter was presenting an extreme picture of false teachers. Consider it the converse of the ideal woman in Proverbs 31. None of us can live up to that ideal, but we can hope to aspire to at least some of that woman’s characteristics. Similarly, few false teachers will show all of these characteristics, but people showing them should be suspect within the church.

“Brazen and insolent, they are not afraid to insult the glorious ones, yet even angels, who are much more powerful, do not bring a slanderous judgment against them before the Lord. But these men, like irrational animals – creatures of instinct, born to be caught and destroyed – do not understand whom they are insulting, and consequently in their destruction they will be destroyed, suffering harm as the wages for their harmful ways. By considering it a pleasure to carouse in broad daylight, they are stains and blemishes, indulging in their deceitful pleasures when they feast together with you. Their eyes, full of adultery, never stop sinning; they entice unstable people. They have trained their hearts for greed, these cursed children! By forsaking the right path they have gone astray, because they followed the way of Balaam son of Bosor, who loved the wages of unrighteousness, yet was rebuked for his own transgression (a dumb donkey, speaking with a human voice, restrained the prophet’s madness).

“These men are waterless springs and mists driven by a storm, for whom the utter depths of darkness have been reserved. For by speaking high-sounding but empty words they are able to entice, with fleshly desires and with debauchery, people who have just escaped from those who reside in error. Although these false teachers promise such people freedom, they themselves are enslaved to immorality. For whatever a person succumbs to, to that he is enslaved. For if after they have escaped the filthy things of the world through the rich knowledge of our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ, they again get entangled in them and succumb to them, their last state has become worse for them than their first. For it would have been better for them never to have known the way of righteousness than, having known it, to turn back from the holy commandment that had been delivered to them. They are illustrations of this true proverb: “A dog returns to its own vomit,” and “A sow, after washing herself, wallows in the mire.”  2 Peter 2:10b-22

Peter placed the problem he addressed in this letter squarely on our doorstep. Wake up, 21^st Century! False teachers are among us! They are not just a hypothetical possibility; they are a present certainty. There had always been false teachers throughout Israel’s history, there were false teachers in Peter’s day, and we have false teachers in our own time. They aren’t just outside the church; they come from inside solid evangelical circles. They aren’t particularly secretive about their sin; some of them publicly flaunt it. In spite of their openly fleshly lifestyle, often seen in church gatherings, Christians seem obviously to their sin, failing to recognize these people as false teachers. This leaves them free to continue in sin without any fear of rebuke or correction. Rather than expose and expel heretics, Christians seem content to embrace them as fellow-believers, providing them with prestige and a platform from which to subvert the faith of others, especially the weak and vulnerable.

Peter had previously written to the Christians of Asia Minor about suffering as a normative experience for the Christian that can be endured with grace to the glory of God. The false teachers, however, did not face up to the certainty or glory of suffering. In their appeal to fleshly lusts, they spoke of avoiding pain and enjoying pleasure. This prompted Peter, probably in desperate straits by this time and nearing his own execution, to write a second letter dealing, primarily with false teachers and their denial that suffering is a part of God’s will for Christians.

Having assured his reader of the two-fold certainty of deliverance and destruction, Peter provided a description of these false teachers, focusing on their character and conduct, likening them to Balaam, an Old Testament prototype and explaining their destructive impact on those who follow them.

Several New Testament churches could have harbored these false teachers in plain sight – Corinth, for example. Corinth was not alone in showing these symptoms of spiritual sickness. Paul’s letters to Timothy indicate these symptoms characterized many churches (1 Timothy 6:3-5; 2 Timothy 2:14-26; 3:1-13; 4:1-4) and John’s letter to the seven churches in Asia, recorded in Revelation 2 and 3, are addressed to some of the same churches Peter addressed in his epistles (compare 1 Peter 1:1 with Revelation 2 and 3).

We’re, of course, not free of this taint in the 21^st Century. Recent scandals involving prominent television preachers bear painfully parallel the description of false teachers given by Peter and Paul. The descriptions of the church at Corinth and in Asia are uncomfortably close to conditions in many of our evangelical churches today. Peter’s words to these saints of old are not mere history; they are prophetic words both of encouragement and admonition for those who will hear and heed them. Let us listen well to what God has spoken through this inspired apostle.

Unfortunately, false teachers do not wear name tags identifying them as false teachers. We can only know them from their fruits. They will present certain characteristics. They will be bold and forward and not afraid of established authority. They do not recognize they are sowing the seeds of their own destruction by the harm caused by their false doctrines. They consider it a pleasure to sin, even in public, perhaps even in the church services. They indulge their lusts at the Lord’s Supper and in fellowship with believers. They commit sexual immorality and will not stop. They entice the weak and unstable among Christian. They actually plan for greed and entice believers into sexual immorality and unrighteousness. They are hypocrites and deceivers who have crept in without notice, identifying themselves as true believers and followers of Jesus Christ. They may even seem to operate in His power and do impressive works, up to and including opposing Satan, in His name.

Owing to reference to Old Testament prophets, I think we can assume that these Christians were a mix of Jewish and Gentile Christians and that all were equally guilty of these sins. If we think the asceticism of some Jewish false teachers was an antidote to fleshly indulgence, we are wrong. Often such self-empowered self-denial served to inflame fleshly passions rather than subdue them (Colossians 2:20-23; 1 Corinthians 7:5).  The Jews of Old Testament times were often guilty of the very sins Peter condemned. The Judaizers of the New Testament were often promoters of fleshly indulgence. The error of which Peter wrote is neither “Gentile” nor “Jewish.” This error is “common to man,” regardless of race or culture. Fleshly indulgence may take various forms, but it knows no racial boundaries. It is for this reason that Paul could seemingly condemn the sins of Gentile heathen (Romans 1:18-32), only to turn to the Jews and blame them for the same offenses (Romans 2:1-29).

So much is said about the moral life of the false teachers that we may be surprised at how little is said about their doctrine. In brief, these false teachers promote false teaching or what Peter called “destructive heresies” (2:1). They “even deny the Master who bought them” (2:1). The false teachers forsake the right way of truth. They reject the commandment of the Lord (2:21; 3:2), which would seem to be the gospel as revealed through the apostles (1 Timothy 6:14; Jude 3). It seems they perverted the gospel both as to its origin (the atoning work of Jesus Christ, appropriated by faith alone) and as to its outworkings (the work of Christ in the believer, through the Spirit). These false teachers distorted the grace of God through the gospel so that, rather than seeing the gospel as God’s provision for man’s freedom from sin, it is viewed as God’s provision for man’s freedom to sin (Jude 4).

Elsewhere in Scripture, we are given more specific examples as to how the gospel may be perverted by false teachers (Galatians 1:6-10; 2 Timothy 2:18). Peter was very general in his description of the doctrinal errors of the false teachers, while he focused more specifically in his description of their moral failures. Why? Cults and perversions of Christianity have great diversity in their doctrinal views, but the moral and practical manifestations are very similar. Peter therefore suggested that it might take considerable time for the false doctrines of the false teachers to become evident, while the moral failures of these folk are much more readily and quickly seen. Their moral collapse is evident to all, but not taken seriously enough (1 Corinthians 5).

There is an inseparable union between one’s doctrine and one’s conduct. While our doctrine should determine our conduct, it is most often true that sinful conduct is the first step to a perverted theology. False teachers don’t introduce their “destructive heresies” in the adult Sunday School class or even the pulpit, but in the everyday social ministries of the church. Once Christians have become enslaved to their passions, they will quickly rearrange their doctrine to square with their conduct. Solomon’s heart was turned to his foreign wives before his doctrine became corrupt. Balaam knew that the way to turn the Israelites against the Lord was to first entice them to commit sexual immorality (Numbers 25:1-2). The young man in Proverbs 7:21-23 suddenly went in to the seductress, and, not so suddenly, changed his theology. Our morality often determines our theology rather than our theology dictating our morality.

We should expect false teachers not only in other churches and outside the church, but in our own church, claiming to be Christians, seeming to serve Jesus and even accomplishing impressive tasks. We should expect them to oppose Satan. This should serve as a warning not to be too accepting of spiritual leaders within the church; Christian character must be observed over time and it is all of our jobs to assure that false teachers are not allowed to subvert the churches. We should not give false teachers status and sanctuary in the church, but put them out, protecting the flock from them and their devastating teachings and works.

“There, but for the grace of God, go I.” The sensual lifestyle and distorted thinking of the false teachers was once ours, until God in His grace sought us out, saved us, and rescued us from the “corruption that is in the world by lust” (2 Peter 1:4). False teachers find many followers (2 Peter 2:2) simply because they tell a lost world what they want to hear (2 Timothy 3:1-7; 4:3-4). We still struggle with the pull of fleshly lusts (Romans 7), but we must abstain from them (1 Peter 2:11) and commit ourselves to guarding the church. False doctrines are “secretly introduced”, not immediately apparent, but only seen in time. Fleshly indulgence is dramatically apparent when men and women live in adultery and sexual perversion as in Sodom and Gomorrah. I fear that fleshly indulgence is all too common in evangelical churches. Not open immorality (though that is becoming all too common), but sensuality and self-indulgence that is more subtle, even spiritual in appearance.

Perhaps we should wince when we hear missionary organizations describe their ministry as “fulfilling” or when a radio preacher speaks to the lost about “finding what they have been looking for” in Jesus. When we raise funds, we often appeal for motives which are fleshly (“free” gift in return, name on a plaque for all to see). Jesus constantly spoke of His cross and how His followers must take up their cross daily. Why do we talk little of the cross we must bear and so much about the fulfillment and satisfaction we can find as Christians? While our fleshly indulgence may not have reached the dramatic proportions we see in the world, or in places like Sodom and Gomorrah, it is “alive and well” in the saints and the church of the 21^st Century. It is up to every Christian to combat it and put it outside of the church, well away from the way of the gospel.

I am a Star Trek fan and I especially like the story line of the Borg. A mechanized inclusive collective of human beings all working with one mind to conquer the universe. Resistance is futile, they proclaim, you will be assimilated.

Some would like us to skip the “hard” texts in the Bible and focus instead on the “happy texts”. They encourage us to focus on how we will resist assimilation rather than on the warnings of what will happen to the Borg. Many of the hard texts are just what people need to hear and to heed. Our 2 Peter 2 text is such a one for it speaks both of the destruction of the wicked and of the deliverance of the righteous. Peter drew examples from the Old Testament to prove his point.  Please remember that this follows right on the heels of Peter’s warnings about false teachers. I believe that is significant.

“For if God did not spare angels when they sinned, but cast them into hell and committed them to pits of darkness, reserved for judgment; and did not spare the ancient world, but preserved Noah, a preacher of righteousness, with seven others, when He brought a flood upon the world of the ungodly.” 2 Peter 2:4-5

We could spend a good deal of time discussing whether these beings were angels or the “godly line of Seth” or …. I’m not going there. That’s my friend Don’s bailiwick and I’m avoiding it. It would seem that these “angels” sinned at the time of the Flood, and God punished them severely. Even spiritual creatures are subject to the law of God and face His judgment. Like the angels, the people of Noah’s day were not spared from the consequences of their sin. Noah wasn’t perfect, but he preached righteousness, so he and his family were saved while the ungodly died. Noah lived in a sinful and corrupt society. Yet God did not immediately wipe out that civilization. He gave the earth’s population nearly a generation to repent as the ark was being constructed. Finally, the wickedness of that generation reached full bloom, and the time for judgment arrived. With the flood, God wiped out every living soul. Only Noah and his family were spared by finding refuge in the ark which brought them safely through the flood. In the flood we see both divine destruction and divine deliverance.

“And if He condemned the cities of Sodom and Gomorrah to destruction by reducing them to ashes, having made them an example to those who would live ungodly thereafter; and if He rescued righteous Lot, oppressed by the sensual conduct of unprincipled men (for by what he saw and heard that righteous man, while living among them, felt his righteous soul tormented day after day with their lawless deeds).…” 2 Peter 2:6-8

Peter plainly asserted that the destruction of Sodom and Gomorrah and the deliverance of Lot and his daughters is an example, a prototype of future deliverance and destruction (verse 6). What happened “long ago” (verse 3) is not just an ancient story; it is written as a warning to the wicked of the days yet to come (verse 6) and as an encouragement to the righteous who will read of these events in future years (Romans 15:4; Hebrews 11). Peter’s words recall the familiar account found in Genesis 18 and 19 concerning Lot and his daughters and their rescue from the destruction of Sodom and Gomorrah. What is new and surprising to us is that Lot is identified by Peter as a righteous man. Three times Peter referred to Lot as righteous. Lot was the one who took the better (watered) land, leaving Abram with the less desirable land (Genesis 13:1-13). Lot offered his virgin daughters to the wicked men of Sodom and Gomorrah to use as they pleased, if they would not molest his guests (Genesis 19:8). Lot was made drunk by his daughters and then while in a drunken stupor, he became the father of their sons (Genesis 19:30-38).

How can Peter call Lot a righteous man? Abraham appealed to God to spare the righteous; only Lot and his daughters were spared. Therefore, we must assume that God considered them to be righteous. By divine enlightenment, Peter described the response of Lot’s heart and soul to the sin of his society, how he observed the wickedness of his fellow-citizens and was deeply and continually grieved by what he saw and heard (verse 8). I’m not that committed or grief-stricken over the sins of the United States. All too often we pride ourselves for not participating in the sin practiced all around us, yet we take pleasure in seeing and hearing it (television or movies, some internet sites).

Too often we judge the righteousness or wretchedness of a man by mere outward appearances, on where he lives or with whom he associates. God judges a person on the basis of what is in their heart. Lot may have lived in a wicked city, among very wicked men, but he never loved the “world” in which he lived. He loathed their sin, and it brought him constant grief.

“Then the Lord knows how to rescue the godly from temptation, and to keep the unrighteous under punishment for the day of judgment, and especially those who indulge the flesh in [its] corrupt desires and despise authority ….” 2 Peter 2:9-10a

If ancient history teaches us anything, it is that God knows how to rescue the godly from temptation, and keep the unrighteous under punishment for the day of judgment. This is true even when the righteous are living in a most unrighteous environment. Our examples are Noah and Lot and their families who did not succumb to the temptation of their society, even when that corrupt and violent society was ripe for divine judgment.

Christians today are frighteningly Pharisaical, wrongly supposing that holiness is measured in terms of the distance we put between ourselves and “sinners.” The Bible speaks of holiness more as our loss of affection for the world and its sinful lusts. We suppose that if we isolate ourselves and our families from the world, we will be untainted by it. What an encouragement I find in Peter’s assurance that God knows how to rescue us from temptation, even when we live in the midst of a society that is corrupt and violent, ripe for divine judgment.

On the other hand, we jump to the wrong conclusion about God’s ability to sustain the punishment of the unrighteous for the day of judgment. Peter’s examples from ancient history are not intended to demonstrate merely that God has judged sinners and therfore will judge them. This is true, but Peter’s examples are cited to prove that God can keep His priorities in view for the long haul.  The judgment of the society of Noah’s day, those fallen angels, and Sodom and Gomorrah is not yet complete. They still await their final doom, kept for a judgment still to come, as described in the Book of Revelation (Revelation 20:4-15). The ultimate judgment is not temporal but eternal. The wicked who perish as a result of God’s temporal judgment have not yet tasted His full and final judgment; they are being preserved for it like a condemned murderer awaits the day of his execution while confined on death row.

The events of ancient times are relevant and applicable to our own. The judgment of the ancient world of Noah’s day and of Sodom and Gomorrah in Lot’s is an example for people who live today, indicating that God is able and willing to deliver the wicked to judgment and to rescue the righteous from temptation. Peter didn’t invent the twin concepts of judgment and deliverance. The Old Testament prophets, Jesus and New Testament writers before Peter had presented these as symbols of divine judgment and rescue.  Perhaps the closest parallel to this passage came from the lips of Jesus Himself, where He referred to both these events as examples of past divine judgment (Luke 17:26-30), emphasizing the spiritual dullness of the doomed as they blindly continued pursuing the fleshly pleasures of life as destruction bore down on them.

Biblical history is not just history – it is prophesy. God doesn’t change; thus, His character and dealings with men do not change. He dealt with sinners and saints in ancient times in the same way that He deals with sinners and saints throughout all time. The sins of the people in those ancient times seem no greater than those of our own. Violence and corruption were prevalent then as now. Peter’s letter should serve as a warning to the wicked that a day of judgment approaches when sinful men dare not ignore God any longer. There is an ultimate day of eternal judgment which every sinner will face. These warnings may be denied by false teachers, but there will be no escape.

The good news – the happy text – is that there is still time for sinners to repent and be saved from the wrath of God. God delayed His judgment on past corrupt societies. He allowed His witnesses there time to preach so that people would have an opportunity to repent. Sad that they didn’t! God didn’t spare them in their folly as He did not spare Himself to die in the sinner’s place. Why do people today assume He will spare them even as Christians warn that He will not? Those who fail to learn from history will repeat it (Romans 8:31-34).

There is no need to perish in our sins, for Christ has died for sinners, bearing the wrath of God and the punishment for our sin. To be saved from the wrath of God, all we must do is acknowledge our sin and trust in Jesus as our Sin-bearer, Who died and was raised in our place. He bore our sins; He offers us His righteousness. All we must do is to receive it by faith. When we do, we have the assurance that God will not deliver us to judgment but will deliver us from temptation.

Yes, we live in a society so wicked that it is ripe for judgment. We must see and hear the corruption and violence all around us, but we need not succumb to it. God’s grace provides us with an escape from the icy grip of temptation and we will actually come to loathe it as Lot did. The task of the righteous is to practice righteousness and proclaim the gospel to the condemned people around us. Resistance is not futile; our culture need not assimilate us!

What a comfort to my imperfect soul to learn that Lot was a righteous man. Certainly, he was not perfect. His righteousness was not due to his good works but to Christ’s righteousness, which he believed in and received by faith. This borrowed righteousness caused him to grieve over the wickedness of Sodom and Gomorrah and to be victorious over the temptations of that society.

Christ’s righteousness will save, sanctify, and keep us from temptation and judgment as well.

False teachers can be identified by their morals and motives, for they are driven by their own lusts rather than led by the Holy Spirit. Greed motivates their ministry—not grace (verse 3). They do not seek to give sacrificially to others, but to gain from others. They do not seek to edify others but to exploit them (verse 3). Their life is one of sensuality (verse 2), not true spirituality. False teachers, Peter wrote, are self-centered, self-serving, and self-indulgent (verse 10, 12-14), for they are lost (verses 4-6, 12, 17-22; Jude 4, 7-8, 12-13, 15, 19).

They can be recognized by their methods. They like to introduce their heresies “secretly” (verse 1). They “creep in unnoticed”(Jude 4) in devious and deceptive ways, not wishing to be known for what they are. In some cases, they do not even recognize their own condition. They are themselves deceived (2 Timothy 3:13; 2 Peter 2:13). They rely on slick methods rather than on the Spirit of God and appeal to the lusts of the flesh (1 Corinthians 2; 2 Corinthians 2:17; 4:1-2).

False teachers can be distinguished by their message. They deny the truth and deal in error. Their doctrines are heresies which are “destructive,” while the truth leads to “life and godliness” (1:3). They claim to teach the Word of God, but actually distort the Scriptures so their interpretations justify their lifestyle and their lusts (3:16). Both Peter and Jude inform us as to how far these false teachers will go, denying the Master who bought them (2 Peter 2:1) and turning the “grace of our God into licentiousness” and denying Jesus Christ (Jude 4), the ultimate and most abominable error.

For some, 2 Peter 2:1 is a proof-text for their view of the atonement or at least a very crucial battle ground. Those who hold to an “unlimited atonement” (Christ’s atoning death was for the sins of all men, saved or lost) point to this verse as proof for their position. They believe Peter was saying that Jesus died for the sins of even these unsaved heretics. Those who believe that the sacrificial death of Christ on Calvary was atoning only for the sins of the elect say otherwise. My personal opinion is that Peter was not indicating the extent of the atonement here, but rather he was indicating the extent of the error to which false teachers will go. To focus on the debate over limited or unlimited atonement takes our eyes off the truth Peter was trying to teach us—the danger of unbelieving false teachers who deny the Master.

Peter chose to describe the false teachers of our day against the backdrop of the false prophets who arose after the Exodus. As there were false prophets in those days, there will most certainly be false teachers in ours. Those false prophets denied the Master Who purchased them from Egyptian slavery, making them His slaves (Leviticus 25:42, 55). Today’s false teachers go so far as to deny the Master Jesus Christ.

Just how do they deny Him? Peter implied they deny His authority, arrogantly assuming authority which is not theirs (2 Peter 2:10-11; Jude 8). They actively seek to undermine those in authority to establish their own authority, similar to how Satan rebelled against God’s authority (2 Corinthians 11:13-15).

Furthermore, the false teachers deny Christ as their Master by seeking to diminish His nature and attributes. They deny His humanity or deity (or both). They deny that He is the promised Messiah. They deny His promised return to punish His enemies and to reward the righteous. They deny His death and physical resurrection. They deny the sacrificial atonement which He accomplished at Calvary. As the false prophets rose up among the Israelites after the exodus and opposed Moses, so false teachers will arise among the saints and oppose the Lord Jesus Christ.

Josh McDowell, who was spent his ministry years speaking on college campuses across the nation says that the question he gets the most from the audiences he addresses is “Who is Jesus Christ?”   There are many Jesuses proclaimed today. There is Jesus the liberator, the revolutionary, the teacher, the exemplar, the healer, and the burden-bearer. Homosexuals and adulterers point to “an unconditionally accepting Jesus,” seeking to show that Jesus is on their side. Even the demons are willing to accept certain aspects of our Lord’s identity, though not His authority.

We want to have “Jesus” in our particular flavor of the month, conformed to our views and values. We don’t want Him to transform our views and values to match His. In his early days as a disciple, Peter believed in Messiah, but he wanted nothing to do with a suffering Savior. The Jewish religious leaders and the nation Israel also looked for the coming “Messiah”, but not the Messiah the prophets described. When He showed up, they rejected Jesus, because He was not their kind of Messiah. He was the wrong Jesus, and they liked their fantasy Messiah better.

In the parable of the soils, two of the soils initially received “Jesus,” but when they learned what kind of “Jesus” He really was, they fell away (Matthew 13:5-7). The crowds congregated around Jesus when they thought He came to give them a free meal (John 6:22-27). When He began to speak of His death, the crowds vaporized (John 6:60-65).

The false teachers speak of “Jesus,” but it is a “Jesus” of their own making, with whom sinful men feel comfortable and affirmed. They wish to follow and imitate such a person, but they deny the real Jesus, substituting a more user-friendly Jesus. False teachers gain a following by tickling the ears of those who reject the real “Jesus.”

How do false teachers arise? Peter did not tell us exactly, but I can suggest some ways false teachers might arise. First, they distort the emphasis of Scripture, focusing on the “acceptable” aspects of Jesus’ nature and mission, while minimizing or denying those aspects of His being and ministry which sinful men find offensive.

Second, false teachers can deny Jesus by narrowing the field of maladies for which the cross of Christ provides the solution. In evangelical circles, the cross is still the solution for our sin and guilt, but it seems to be inadequate for our “addictions,” a list that seems to grow daily. Many of the problems we once thought were spiritual are now considered psychological, therefore they must be solved by “trained specialists” rather than by simply being cleansed by the shed blood of Christ our Savior.

The Bible calls addictions “sin,” and our bondage to these sins is only broken through our identification with Christ and His cross (Romans 6). A well-known psychiatrist wrote a book entitled, whatever Happened to Sin? One might just as easily ask, “Whatever happened to the cross?” We sing songs with words like, “There is power, power, wonder working power; there is power in the blood of the Lamb.” But do we really believe this? If not, the false teachers have already arisen, and we have fallen for their false doctrines.

Peter wrote of false teachers in the letter, but he spoke to each of us, warning those who would become false teachers of the destruction which lies ahead for them (also James 3:1-12). He warned every Christian to be on the alert for false teachers. While Christian leaders have a responsibility to guard the flock from false teachers (Acts 20:28-39; 1 Timothy 1:3-11; 2 Timothy 2:23-26), this does not absolve ordinary Christians of our personal responsibility to be on guard for false teachers. There is only one way we will be able to spot false teachers: we must be knowledgeable concerning the truth of the Word of God. We dare not become lazy and expect others to do our studying and thinking for us (1 John 2:26-27).

Finally, this letter speaks to those who may not truly know Jesus Christ as Savior. You may believe in “Jesus”, as the Son of God, a great healer, or a great teacher. You may believe that He was a great leader and that He cared deeply for sinners. To be saved, you must believe in His atoning work on your behalf on the cross of Calvary. You must believe that He was the God-man Who bore the penalty for your sins, and that, as the risen Savior, His resurrection is, for you, life from the dead. Not until you believe in the real Jesus of the Bible will you be saved. May God grant you ears to hear and eyes to see, so that you might turn to Jesus for salvation today.

Only 8% of American adults now rate the economic as good or excellent while 67% rate it as poor. In September 08, just before Lehman Brothers collapsed, 18% rated the economy as good or excellent, while 16% said the economy was getting better. Currently, only 9% of those polls say the economy is getting better while 70% say it is getting worse.

Now, 66% of Democrats, 75% of Republicans and 73% of those not affiliated with either major party say the economy is getting worse.  

The RCI reached its highest level ever at 127.0 on January 6, 2004. It’s all-time low was reached on February 16, 2009. The baseline for the RCI was established at 100.0 in October 2001. At 55.7, the overall level of economic confidence is significantly lower today than they were in the aftermath of the 9-11 terrorist attacks.

Oddly, President Obama’s job performance rating remains steady and high, but the number those polled who strongly approve has slipped. Today 36% of the nation’s voters strongly approve of Mr. Obama’s performance as President, which is the lowest total of strong support yet measured for this President. Overall 60% of voters say they at least somewhat approve of the President’s performance while 39% disapprove. Mr. Obama’s Presidential Approval Rating has remained remarkably steady since inauguration day, consistently between 60-62%. Among African-Americans, his approval rating is 85%; 30% of white voters strongly approve of his performance; and, 33% of all other voters strongly approve.

Because I’m not a Rasmussen pollster and I don’t have to be fair, I’m going to hazard the opinion that there is a disconnect between what Mr. Obama does and his approval ratings. His fingers are all over this spending boondoggle packaged as an economic stimulus package, yet people insist that this is Congress putting forth the plan. People used to complain that George Bush had lost his veto pen. Well, Mr. Obama is going to sign this thing – probably today. So, why aren’t people are angry at him for not stopping this thing? He is an extremely charismatic man and people tend to forgive him for his behavior and try to find others to blame instead.

If this bill does not work or makes the economy worse, will Mr. Obama’s approval ratings drop?

I don’t know. It will be interesting to watch and see if there truly is a level of delusion in this country that hasn’t existed since Jack Kennedy was in office.

My husband and I own (or perhaps are owned by) a black Lab-Husky mix named Black Dog. Doesn’t that sound like an appropriately pirate-like name? This dog is about 65 pounds, but she can sneak up and steal a donut right out of your hands without your knowledge. She loves to escape her pen and run the neighborhood, where she manages to procure odd things like full gallons of ice cream and neatly wrapped pork roasts. She has the ability to hide in a shadow under a spruce tree; by not moving, she frequently can escape the notice of searching eyes and thereby escape detection. I believe she is personally responsible for a couple of nervous breakdowns over at Animal Control.

Black Dog reminds me of false teachers, who have preyed upon the church from its inception to our present-day.

Peter wrote about the unseen danger of false teachers who arise within the church, often unrecognized, especially in their earliest forms, partly because they profess to share a “like precious faith.” Secretly they introduce false teachings which are destructive to themselves and to all who follow them.

When we think of “false teachers,” our minds immediately turn to false religions or cults, to men like David Koresh whose bizarre teachings resulted in the fiery death of scores of men, women, and children at his Waco compound. False teachers do prey on the church from without, but they can also arise from within (Acts 20:28-30). Such are what Peter warned us about in this epistle.

False teachers and their teachings have always posed a danger to those in the household of faith (those outside as well). After Israel’s exodus from Egypt, God warned that false prophets would arise (Deuteronomy 13:1-5; 6-18; 18:14-22). False prophets did arise throughout the history of Israel (1 Kings 22:1-12; Isaiah 9:15; 28:7; Jeremiah 5:31; 6:13; 23:1-40; Ezekiel 13:3-4). Jesus also warned of false prophets (Matthew 7:15-23; 24:11-28). The apostles also had much to say about false prophets and teachers (Acts 20:28-35; 2 Corinthians 11:3–12:13; Galatians 1:6-9; Philippians 3:1-2; Colossians 2:8-15; 1 Thessalonians 1:3-12; 1 Timothy 1:3-7; 6:3-5; 2 Timothy 2:14-26; 3:2-8, 13; 4:14-18; Titus 1:10-16; 3:9-11; 1 John 2:18-29; 3:2-12; 4:1-6; 2 John 7-11; 3 John 9-10; Jude). Peter described the false teachers who would arise as “wolves” among us.

Understand that the apostles were the New Testament equivalent of prophets, raised up as God’s instruments to record God’s full and final revelation in Christ. They saw the power and glory of the resurrected Lord. Their writings were superintended by the Holy Spirit, Who caused them to remember all that the Lord had taught while He was with them. Paul was the last of the prophets whose writings are also inspired and authoritative (3:14-16). Since these original apostles have accomplished their appointed task, no further prophets are required (Hebrews 2:1-4). This does not mean that men and women may not speak authoritatively from the Word of God on present-day situations, but that new Scripture and future revelation have ceased. Peter indicated our concern should be for false teachers today, implying that the age of the prophets has passed away.

Peter taught us to expect false teachers to arise. The establishment of God’s written word indicates the need for prophets has ceased, but the need for teachers of the Scriptures continues. We should expect some false teachers among those who teach. They hold a Bible in their hands and tell us they are teaching the Scriptures, but their teaching is false. Their interpretation has not come from the Holy Spirit but from their own will (1:20-21). False teachers are no mere possibility; they are likely, and we must be watchful so we are not led astray by them.

Peter taught us to expect false teaches to arise from within the church as well as from without. In the Old Testament, false prophets came from “among the people” (verse 1). Today, false teachers arise within the church. It is often easy to identify false teachers in other religions or in liberal or apostate churches. We expect false teachers to arise outside the church, but Peter warned they will arise from within the community of believers, likely in the church we attend. Paul issued a similar warning to the elders of the Ephesian church (Acts 20:28-32).

Peter called the teaching of the false teachers “destructive heresies,” which will “bring swift destruction upon themselves” (verse 1). Their judgment is not “idle” nor is it “asleep” (verse 3). False teachers bring reproach upon true Christians and the church of Jesus Christ, causing “the way of truth” to be maligned. Christians suffer from the presence of false teachers, because they seek to gain status and recognition by identifying themselves as true saints and associating with true believers. Peter instructed that unbelievers can be expected to react against the righteousness of the saints because they are threatened by it (1 Peter 4:1-4). We can expect to be maligned for doing what is right (1 Peter 2:12, 15, 20). When the sin of false teachers is exposed, the unrighteous seem to delight in lumping all professing Christians together so that we are wrongly associated with the folly of fraudulent saints.

David Koresh was one example of how this can happen. Koresh was not orthodox. One could hardly call him Christian (whether he or his followers did or not). While the evangelical community looked upon Koresh and his followers as a cult, the secular press has not been so discerning. Those who like to use the excuse, “The church is full of hypocrites,” see little difference between Koresh and his followers and mainstream evangelicalism. They leap at the opportunity to find a reason to ridicule us and reject our faith. Koresh provided such an opportunity.

False teachers are not always so readily apparent. They rarely represent themselves making a false profession of faith. They rise up as one with us in Christ. Jesus warned they come as “wolves in sheep’s clothing” (Matthew 7:15), carrying out their ministry in Jesus’ name. They are just as surprised at being called unbelievers as we are when we realize they do not share a “like precious faith” with us (Matthew 7:15-23).  Jesus warned that we dare not attempt to distinguish false teachers from the true merely on the basis of their ability to perform mighty works. A true prophet need not perform great works. John the Baptist, for example, was a prophet without mighty works but with mighty words (John 10:41). If a prophet declares that something will happen, and it does not, then he is a false prophet (Deuteronomy 18:20-22), but the ability to perform great works does not prove one to be a prophet. His doctrine must also conform to the Word of God (Deuteronomy 13:1-5). Jesus taught that the “fruit” which distinguishes false teachers from true ones is the product of their own character and that of their followers.

This is a big topic, so I will present a second lesson on it.

We should not be surprised to find even more important reminders in the New Testament. Peter, like Paul, John, James and Judas, wrote his letters with the authority of Scripture, and their readers historically accepted their writings as inspired by the Holy Spirit and therefore to be considered Scripture. As Paul and Peter approached the end of their lives, they followed Christ’s lead in emphasizing the importance of Scripture, including their own contributions (Acts 20:25-32; 2 Timothy 3:14-17; 4:2; 1 Peter 1:22–2:2; 2 Peter 1:12-21). They wanted to leave concrete reminders for those they left behind on how to live the Christian life.

“Therefore, I intend to remind you constantly of these things even though you know them and are well established in the truth that you now have. Indeed, as long as I am in this tabernacle, I consider it right to stir you up by way of a reminder, since I know that my tabernacle will soon be removed, because our Lord Jesus Christ revealed this to me.  Indeed, I will also make every effort that, after my departure, you have a testimony of these things.” 2 Peter 1:12-15

It is clear Peter was intent on reminding his readers of what they already knew and embraced as the truth. It is impossible to “remind” someone of what they never knew. He sought to remind them of truths which they continued to embrace as the truth, and he reminded them of the things he had already written in verses 1-11.

Apparently it was Peter’s commitment to “always remind” his readers of the things he had already taught until he breathed his last breath. Sometimes we hear contemporaries complain that we keep repeating the same things in Christianity. Why don’t we move on to something new and different? Peter didn’t; why should we? In fact, Peter even sought to remind his readers after he has drawn his last breath. He knew as he wrote this letter that the day of his departure was near (verse 14) as our Lord indicated to him (John 21:18-23). He seemed aware that he was being used of God to pen Scripture to be used of God until the Lord Jesus returns to remind saints who have not yet been born. Writing this epistle greatly prolonged Peter’s ministry of reminding.

“For we did not follow cleverly concocted fables when we made known to you the power and return of our Lord Jesus Christ; no, we were eyewitnesses of his grandeur.  For he received honor and glory from God the Father, when that voice was conveyed to him by the Majestic Glory: “This is my dear Son, in whom I am delighted.” When this voice was conveyed from heaven, we ourselves heard it, for we were with him on the holy mountain. Moreover, we  possess the prophetic word as an altogether reliable thing.  You do well if you pay attention to this as you would to a light shining in a murky place, until the day dawns and the morning star  rises in your hearts.” 2 Peter 1:16-19

(Does anyone besides me think it’s cool that Peter quoted from the Gospels here?)

Peter reminds us, now as then, of those things vital to our spiritual lives and our escape from the corruption that is in the world through lust. His reminders are the “truth” (verse 12) which gives us “true knowledge”(verses 3, 8) of God. More importantly, these truths are God’s truth, truth from God (verse 21) communicated by the Spirit of God (verses 20-21), through the Son of God and witnessed to by the Father (verses 16-19). This “truth” has not been conjured up in Peter’s mind but is “truth” which has come from God, apostolic truth which God communicated through all of His inspired apostles—not just Peter (note the “we” in verses 16, 18, 19). It is the “truth” our Lord spoke to the disciples (John 14:25-26; Hebrews 2:3-4).

There were, and I believe still are, “false apostles” (2 Corinthians 11:13) who claim to speak for God but merely espouse “cleverly devised tales” (2 Peter 1:16). Peter contrasted these tales with the Scriptures God revealed through His apostles. To demonstrate the certainty (“more sure”) of the Scriptures revealed through the apostles, Peter turned to the transfiguration of our Lord which he, James and John (Matthew 17:12) witnessed.

Peter and the other apostles, similar to the Old Testament prophets, wrote of the “power and coming of our Lord Jesus Christ” (verse 16). The apostles writings were consistent with the prophecies of the Old Testament prophets, but their writings were also “eye witness” accounts. They wrote of things they heard from Jesus and also what they had witnessed with their own eyes, as Jesus Himself indicated they would (Matthew 16:27-28; Mark 8:38–9:1).

All of the apostles, including Paul, witnessed the glory and power of the Lord Jesus as we will also see when He comes to reign on the earth. The apostles, (“we,” verse 19) had “the prophetic word made more sure.” Peter asserted that the apostles (in contrast to false teachers), had a more sure word from God which “we” (average Christians) do well to heed. These apostles “saw the light,” as it were, of the glory and power of our Lord. When we heed the Scriptures God has revealed through them, we have all the “light” we need, sufficient for whatever period of time it takes for God’s purposes to be fulfilled and His kingdom to be established on this earth. We need no other “light,” particularly not the false “light” of “cleverly devised tales.”Peter’s words here strongly imply that the canon of Scripture is closed and that no further “prophecies” will be given.

“Above all, you do well if you recognize this:  No prophecy of scripture ever comes about by the prophet’s own imagination, for no prophecy was ever borne of human impulse; rather, men carried along by the Holy Spirit spoke from God.” 2 Peter 1:20-21

The Scriptures are God’s “light” for men. While some may lead men astray by other “revelations” than the Word of God, it is also possible for men to teach falsehood by distorting the Scriptures. This is the danger Peter addressed in verses 20 and 21

The Constitution of the United States of America has been radically “rewritten,” not by the writing of a new constitution per se but by a radical re-interpretation of the existing document. The same thing happens to the Scriptures when men with twisted minds try to grapple with the “straight and narrow” of God’s Word. At times, the distortion of divine truth may be unwitting since the unbelieving cannot and will not receive divine truth (1 Corinthians 2). But some actually distort the Scriptures deliberately. Peter warned his readers against such twisting of Scripture.

For Scriptures to be interpreted correctly, they must be interpreted consistent with their origin and nature. Two essential elements of Biblical interpretation are addressed in these verses. Biblical interpretation is not a “private” matter. Some people are attracted to certain interpretations because of the uniqueness of that interpretation. Peter warned that uniqueness should serve as a red flag rather than an attraction. Think of it. How was Biblical prophecy revealed? It has been revealed through a diverse group of men over a number of centuries. Peter had already indicated (1 Peter 1:10-12) that these prophets did not even fully understand their own writings. If God’s prophetic Word was revealed to a number of men, then how can its interpretation be “private property,” the exclusive possession of one man? Biblical prophecy is “hard to understand”(2 Peter 3:16; 1 Peter 1:10-12). There are many things over which Bible students disagree. We should be most confident about those matters with which a large number of saints agree, not just the saints of our age but those who have grappled with the Scriptures over the centuries of church history. I much prefer to embrace the interpretation for which godly men suffered and died than the new and novel interpretations which give contemporary men prominence and prosperity.

Biblical interpretation can only be achieved through the ministry of the Holy Spirit. Prophets did not originate prophecy; they were instruments of the Holy Spirit Who used them to speak from God. Prophecy does not begin with man’s will but with God’s. Therefore the interpretation of prophecy must not be subject to man’s will. Conversely, man’s will must be subject to the Scriptures, as the Spirit of God makes their meaning clear (1 Corinthians 2:6-15).

The Holy Spirit is the key to accurate interpretation, and the accuracy of this interpretation will be indicated, in part, by the consensus of many interpreters.

What a different man Peter was in this letter from the Peter of the Gospels. In the Gospels, Peter resisted our Lord’s discussion of His death (Matthew 16:21-28) and was none too excited about Jesus’ words concerning his own death (John 21:18-23). Now, his death was not a dreaded possibility but an accepted certainty. Peter viewed death through the hope of the gospel and the certainty of his future inheritance (1 Peter 1:7). In light of the limited time Peter had left, he was more intent on fulfilling his calling. He sought to remind his contemporaries and every generation hence of the life-transforming truths of the Word of God. Viewing the gospel through the lens of impending death, Peter saw that the one thing that matters most is man’s relationship to God through Jesus Christ, based upon the truths of the Word of God. The cleverly devised claims of men pale by comparison. We should also recognize that the time is short and that only what is done for Christ will last. Paul agreed with Peter on this (1 Thessalonians 5:11).

As we live out our days, there is no higher calling than to remind one another of the truths of the Word of God. Men do not need our advice nearly so much as they need to heed God’s Word. Men do not need new truth, but to be reminded of God’s truth. If we are to be reminded of the only truths which are eternally important, that reminder will come from the Scriptures. If we are to be reminded constantly, then we must constantly be in the Word ourselves, for this is where God’s reminders are found.

As Peter saw his days of ministry coming to their conclusion, he sought to employ his energy to eternally benefit his readers, so that his efforts would outlive him. Peter continues to minister to this day because he wrote this epistle, “laying up treasure in heaven” as a “good steward.” You and I cannot minister beyond the grave by writing Scripture, but we may invest our time, gifts, and resources so that our ministries outlive us. Let us give serious thought to how we may be good stewards of the gospel.

Like hiking in the Alaskan wilderness, the Christian lifestyle is not for wimps or cowards. It requires diligent awareness of our surroundings and comprehension of the dangers we face.

“For if  these things are really yours and are continually increasing, they will keep you from becoming ineffective and unproductive in your pursuit of knowing our Lord Jesus Christ more intimately. But concerning the one who lacks such things – he is blind. That is to say, he is nearsighted, since he has forgotten about the cleansing of his past sins. Therefore, brothers and sisters, make every effort to be sure of your calling and election. For by doing this you will never stumble into sin.  For thus an entrance into the eternal kingdom of our Lord and Savior, Jesus Christ, will be richly provided for you.” 2 Peter 1:8-11

The pursuit of holiness gives Christians stability, a steadfastness which should keep us from stumbling. Since Peter was/is writing to Christians here, I do not believe he was referring to a “fatal fall” resulting in the loss of salvation. I believe he was writing of the kind of stumbling which results in being useless and unfruitful, but not complete destruction (Psalms 37:24; Psalms 145:14; Proverbs 24:16). The term “stumble”is used elsewhere (Romans 11:11; James 2:10; 3:2). In these texts “stumble”seems to mean “to sin.” Peter surely knew, as do we, what it meant to “stumble”, but sinning is not inevitable. It is avoidable by the pursuit of godliness in the power and provisions of God, but when we cease to grow in Christian character and conduct, we set ourselves up for a stumble.

In my story, I was roped off to BJ, who had the power to keep my stumble restrained. Consider BJ to be God and the rope to be our salvation.

If our diligence to our calling and election keeps us from stumbling, it also promises those of us wise enough to exercise it something very positive—an abundant entrance into the kingdom of God (2 Peter 1:11). For those who neglect due diligent, the Bible teaches that some Christians will enter into God’s kingdom by the proverbial “skin of their teeth” (1 Corinthians 3:12-15; 1 Corinthians 5:5; 1 Corinthians 11:28-30).

It is certainly possible for a Christian to live in such a way that God removes him from this life (1 Corinthians 5:5; 11:28-30). I do not think such a one should expect a “Well done, good and faithful servant!” upon his arrival in the presence of God. He will be saved, yet as by fire (1 Corinthians 3:15). For the Christian who pursues holiness, there is a far better entrance into the kingdom of God. It is an entrance we eagerly anticipate (Philippians 1:19-23; 3:14; 2 Corinthians 5:6-10), abundantly supplied to us, but it is the reward of diligently seeking to confirm our calling and election.

While God has ordained that we should be conformed to the image of His Son (Romans 8:28-30), we need to be actively involved in this process. Paul wrote of a corporate growth involving the entire body of believers in Ephesians 4:11-16 and elsewhere in relation to the concept of spiritual gifts. Yet spiritual growth is also a life-long personal endeavor strenuously engaged in by every individual believer.

Peter urged that each individual believer actively pursue holiness, striving to manifest the “divine nature”in his/her life, This is our destiny and our duty because of what it promises and what it prevents.

The dangers Peter wrote of here are very real dangers for the Christian. They were dangers Peter knew well; they can and do happen to Christians today when we fail to pursue holiness. When we pursue spiritual growth through God’s provisions, we begin to display the “divine nature”of God. When we cease to grow, we stumble, and we become hardly distinguishable from non-believers or the false teachers described later.

The promises of God are just as certain as the warnings and threats of the Word. The threats or the promises of Scripture are “made sure” by our action either in obedience or disobedience to God’s commands. Our actions activate the promises or the threats—our choice. We avoid the sand traps of life by pursuing holiness—the characteristics of God which He has purposed to be ours. We may possess the promises by making use of what God has provided (Mark 4; Hebrews 5:11-14).

This text does not focus on doubt, but on faith and the proper aspirations and fears faith instills within the Christian. We are to remember what we once were and the redemption we have received in Christ. We are not to be content with what we are now in Christ. We are to press on to a greater and more intimate knowledge of Christ and a more complete obedience to His will and His Word.

Our motivation should be to become more like our Master, fulfill the task for which we were chosen and called. Our confidence is in Him, His character and provisions for our growth, godliness, and final salvation. We labor and strive, not to earn our salvation but to demonstrate the salvation God has accomplished in Christ. Our dread should be in falling short of what God’s provisions have enabled us to become.

This passage, I think, reveals a fundamental error in modern theology. I know I have always thought the “way of escape”was not evident until the time of crisis, and the escape was by some kind of divine intervention. Such “escapes” do take place occasionally, but we should not seek to force them by leaping from the pinnacle of some temple, as Satan sought to tempt our Lord, thereby forcing the Father to come to His rescue (Matthew 4:5-7). I have heard Christians say, “If God doesn’t want me to do this, He will stop me.” The problem is that what they are doing is biblically wrong. They should turn from sin rather than expect God to rescue them from it.

Peter’s words in 2 Peter 1:5-11 are God’s “way of escape.”We do not have to enter into temptation. We should desire to stay as far from temptation as possible (Matthew 6:13). The pursuit of godly character—the pursuit of holiness—is God’s primary means of escape. Growth in godliness keeps us from sin.

At a certain point in my Christian walk, I knew two Christian young men who loved to discuss the gospel’s finer points between themselves and would allow others to listen in. At first I found it fascinating and then, eventually, I found it tiresome because they never seemed to get to a point. They were discussing minutia rather than practical issues. We’ve all heard of the theologians’ debate of how many angels can fit on the head of a pin. This was the nature of their discussions.

Thankfully, the apostles were too busy to debate such nonsense. Peter showed this by his practical advice in the very first sentences of this letter. This section of Scripture is a battlefield that has spawned many heated debates, particularly among Calvinists. I know people on both sides of the debate, and I cannot fully side with either position. Perhaps it is asking too much to set aside our biases, but I hope we can acknowledge them and pray that God may, through His Spirit, use this text to reshape our theology rather than allow our theology (or prejudice) to warp our interpretation of this text.

“For if these things are really yours and are continually increasing, they will keep you from becoming ineffective and unproductive in your pursuit of  knowing our Lord Jesus Christ more intimately. But concerning the one who lacks such things – he is blind. That is to say, he is nearsighted, since he has forgotten about the cleansing of his past sins. Therefore, brothers and sisters, make every effort to be sure of your calling and election. For by doing this  you will never  stumble into sin.  For thus an entrance into the eternal kingdom of our Lord and Savior, Jesus Christ, will be richly provided for you.” 1Peter 1:8-11

Peter assumed his readers were saved. Every audience of believers probably includes some who are lost, but Peter assumed the salvation of his readers and thus, we should accept his teaching as to Christians and not unbelievers. There is no sense that Peter was trying to create doubt in the minds of his readers about whether they were saved. Rather, he was writing to them as though they were saved. He does not teach that a person must work to earn or obtain their salvation. Verses 1-4 are very clear that we are saved solely on the basis of the righteousness of Jesus. We in no way contribute to our salvation through our own efforts or works. Verses 5-7 call upon every Christian to diligently strive to apply the virtues which the grace of God makes possible for the saint. We do not work to be saved; we work because we have been saved. A living faith works (James 2), but it is a faith that has been received (2 Peter 1:1).

Thus, the list of dangers Peter enumerated here does not including “losing one’s salvation”. Just as Peter, nor any other biblical author, does not teach that one is saved by works, neither does he teach that one stays saved by works. All things are of Him, through Him, and to Him (Romans 11:36). We possess nothing spiritually which we have not received from God (1 Corinthians 4:7). Our salvation is certain because He is faithful and does not change, and no one shall pluck us from His hand (James 1:17; Philippians 1:6; John 10:27-30). Thus we have no cause for doubting our faith.

In the current faith/works debate, both sides seem to agree that 2 Peter 1:8-11 is about assurance. Those who emphasize faith insist that the believer’s assurance is to be found in God, His sovereignty, and the sufficiency of His provisions. Those who stress the necessity for works (as evidence of faith) insist that there is some measure of assurance to be gained by obedience and fruitfulness. As we see God at work in our lives, we are more confident that our faith is alive and well, they say. I see a measure of truth in both positions, but I do not see Peter emphasizing assurance in this text. Assurance is not so prominent, but what we attain (an abundant entrance into the kingdom of God, verse 11) and what we avoid (uselessness, unfruitfulness, blindness, short-sightedness, forgetfulness, stumbling).

In 1 Peter 1:13-21, Peter exhorted the saints to leave behind their former manner of thinking and conducting themselves and pursue holiness, because God is holy. Peter did not spell out how holiness was to be pursued to the degree that he did in 2 Peter 1:1-11. Here Peter informed us that the goal is to “become partakers of the divine nature”—becoming conformed to the image of Christ (Romans 8:28-30; Ephesians 4:13). The basis for this is found in the redemptive work God has accomplished in Christ and the provision of His Word. The means by which this is accomplished is our diligent pursuit of holiness, as we depend upon God and His provisions for our growth and maturity.

Here Peter enumerated some of the personal benefits the Christian gains from the pursuit of holiness. These benefits are described both negatively and positively. Peter began with the negative benefits and then urged us to “be all the more diligent to make our calling and election sure,” with the assurance that “as long as you practice these things,” you will never stumble, and you will have an abundant entrance into the eternal kingdom of our Lord Jesus Christ.

Salvation brings with it two-fold blessings. We are blessed by what we gain just as we are blessed by what we escape or leave behind. For example, we are blessed by being justified, declared righteous through the righteousness of Jesus Christ. We are also blessed by having our sins are forgiven and forgotten. Those who are saved gain entrance into heaven; we are likewise blessed by escaping the horrors of hell. In Peter’s words, we not only “become partakers of the divine nature,” we also “escape the corruption that is in the world by lust” (2 Peter 1:4). Let us consider those blessings which Peter listed that we experience by escaping evil and its consequences.

We are not idle or useless. Because we diligently pursue holiness, we are productive. The idle saint may not immediately appear to be idle or useless. Some are very busy spinning their wheels. The sluggard of the Book of Proverbs also worked hard at what he liked, but he was idle with regard to those things that were demanding or disgusting to him. The one who pursues holiness is neither idle nor useless with regard to spiritual attitudes and actions.

Those who are not saved are blind to spiritual truth (2 Corinthians 4:3-4). The Christian’s spiritual eyes are opened so that spiritual truth can be seen. The Christian is divinely enabled to “see” the “unseen:” (Matthew 13:14-16; Acts 26:17-18; Hebrews 11:1; Hebrews 12:1-2; 1 Peter 1:8; 2 Corinthians 4:16-18). Spiritual sight is divinely given at the time of one’s conversion, and spiritual illumination continues to take place through the ministry of the Holy Spirit (1 Corinthians 2:6-16). Spiritual blindness manifests itself as short-sightedness. Instead of“fixing our hope”on the spiritual and eternal certainties which God has promised and provided for us, we see only in the present. No wonder this generation has been called the “now generation.” It is a sad statement of the spiritual blindness of our age, a blindness which has resulted from ignoring the truths of the Word of God. The pursuit of holiness keeps us from impaired spiritual vision.

In one sense, Christians are to forget the past. We should not be haunted by guilt for those sins which have been forgiven. We are not to rest upon the laurels of past achievements but “press on for the upward call of God in Christ Jesus”(Philippians 3:13-14). Yet we should never forget what we once were apart from Christ, and what we have now become in Christ (Ephesians 2:11-22). We are to rejoice in our redemption, constantly filled with gratitude as we remember that our sins have been forgiven.

Paul never forgot who he was and what God had done in his life, forgiving him of his sins and trans-forming him from a persecutor of the church to a preacher of the gospel (1 Timothy 1:12-17).

Peter’s words indicate that the pursuit of holiness (verses 5-7) is a divinely appointed means of keeping our memories refreshed. When we cease to strive after holiness, we become forgetful of our forgiveness from sin. A kind of spiritual Alzheimer’s sets in and we become a different person than we once were when our spiritual memories were intact.

The spiritual life should be pursued in the same way we were saved. Salvation and sanctification are both found in the cross (1 Peter 1:17-21). We must “take up our cross daily” if we are to be Christ’s disciples. The pursuit of holiness is to die to self and to live out the life of Christ (Romans 6:2-11; 1 Peter 2:18-25; 3:15-22; 4:1-2).

False teachers take forgetfulness to the extreme. They forget the Master and His redeeming work on Calvary and they deny Him (2 Peter 2:1, 20-22). Peter described one who does not doubt his salvation; he is one who so carelessly lives his life he does not even remember it. He goes about his daily life as though he were not saved, not a possessor of eternal life. His life becomes centered on this world and what it has to offer (2 Timothy 4:10). Christians in this condition are indistinguishable from unbelievers, so far as their attitudes and actions can be judged by others.

10a … be all the more diligent to make certain about His calling and choosing you… 

This is a difficult verse to interpret and the answer is not necessarily found in the various English translations, but in the way this Greek term is used elsewhere in the New Testament. “Make certain about” is also found in Romans 4:16; 2 Corinthians 1:7; Hebrews 2:2; 3:6, 14; 6:19; 9:17; and 2 Peter 1:19. One of the most critical texts is Romans 4:16, which I’m quoting below for emphasis:

“For this reason [it is] by faith, that [it might be] in accordance with grace, in order that the promise may be certain to all the descendants, not only to those who are of the Law, but also to those who are of the faith of Abraham, who is the father of us all (Romans 4:16, emphasis mine).

Paul’s use of this term “certain” tells us what Peter could NOT mean when he used the same term. Paul wrote that God has designed “it” (justification) to occur “by faith,”so that “the promise”(of justification or salvation) might be certain. In the context, Paul instructed us that if salvation were by our works, it would not be certain because it would depend on us and, wow, what malleable lumps of clay we are. Justification by faith makes the promise of salvation—of the forgiveness of sins (verses 7-8)—certain. We can therefore hardly suppose that Peter was now saying the opposite, namely, that we make our election and calling certain by our works, by working hard at the pursuit of holiness. Remember, Peter was writing to Paul’s churches. He would have been denounced as a heretic had he contradicted Paul.

Looking at the other verses where this term is used, the expression referred to setting something in motion—to activate or fix something securely—so it cannot be changed, as how a will is activated upon the death of the one who made it (Hebrews 9:17). Christ set in motion the promises of the Old Testament prophets in such a way that they cannot be stopped (Romans 4:16; 15:8). God’s promises are a solid foundation, something we can trust as sure and certain. Just as God does not change (James 1:17), neither does His Word. We have “an anchor of the soul”(Hebrews 6:19) which cannot be moved. We are therefore held fast and secure.

Peter was not urging us to “make certain about”our election and calling. Our election and calling are from God, and they are not reversible (Romans 8:29-30; 11:29). The God Who has called us will confirm us to the end (1 Corinthians 1:4-8). Conversely, we are not to be passive in our salvation and sanctification. We must believe in the Lord Jesus Christ and receive the salvation God has provided through Him (John 6:28-29; Acts 2:38; 16:31; Romans 10:8-15). Likewise, while faith is a gift from God (2 Peter 1:1), we must add to our faith through the provisions God has given to us (2 Peter 1:3-7).

We are to continually strive to grow in our faith and in the godly qualities Peter spelled out in verses 5-7. Doing so, we confirm that which God began and which He is committed to establish in and through us. Assurance provides stability of our calling and election and sets our lives on a course that cannot (will not) be changed or moved away from the faith. It becomes so solid and stable that we will not be moved, especially by those who come to us with another gospel  (Ephesians 4:13-15; Colossians 2:6-8; 1 Corinthians 15:58; Galatians 1:6; James 1:6).

Feb. 9 (Bloomberg) -- Republican Senators are questioning whether President Barack Obama’s stimulus bill contains the right mix of tax breaks and cash infusions to jump-start the economy.

Tragically, no one from either party is objecting to the health provisions slipped in without discussion. These provisions reflect the handiwork of Tom Daschle, until recently the nominee to head the Health and Human Services Department.

Senators should read these provisions and vote against them because they are dangerous to your health. (Page numbers refer to H.R. 1 EH, pdf version).

The bill’s health rules will affect “every individual in the United States” (445, 454, 479). Your medical treatments will be tracked electronically by a federal system. Having electronic medical records at your fingertips, easily transferred to a hospital, is beneficial. It will help avoid duplicate tests and errors.

But the bill goes further. One new bureaucracy, the National Coordinator of Health Information Technology, will monitor treatments to make sure your doctor is doing what the federal government deems appropriate and cost effective. The goal is to reduce costs and “guide” your doctor’s decisions (442, 446). These provisions in the stimulus bill are virtually identical to what Daschle prescribed in his 2008 book, “Critical: What We Can Do About the Health-Care Crisis.” According to Daschle, doctors have to give up autonomy and “learn to operate less like solo practitioners.”

Keeping doctors informed of the newest medical findings is important, but enforcing uniformity goes too far.

New Penalties

Hospitals and doctors that are not “meaningful users” of the new system will face penalties.  “Meaningful user” isn’t defined in the bill. That will be left to the HHS secretary, who will be empowered to impose “more stringent measures of meaningful use over time” (511, 518, 540-541)

What penalties will deter your doctor from going beyond the electronically delivered protocols when your condition is atypical or you need an experimental treatment? The vagueness is intentional. In his book, Daschle proposed an appointed body with vast powers to make the “tough” decisions elected politicians won’t make.

The stimulus bill does that, and calls it the Federal Coordinating Council for Comparative Effectiveness Research (190-192). The goal, Daschle’s book explained, is to slow the development and use of new medications and technologies because they are driving up costs. He praises Europeans for being more willing to accept “hopeless diagnoses” and “forgo experimental treatments,” and he chastises Americans for expecting too much from the health-care system.

Elderly Hardest Hit

Daschle says health-care reform “will not be pain free.” Seniors should be more accepting of the conditions that come with age instead of treating them. That means the elderly will bear the brunt.

Medicare now pays for treatments deemed safe and effective. The stimulus bill would change that and apply a cost- effectiveness standard set by the Federal Council (464).

The Federal Council is modeled after a U.K. board discussed in Daschle’s book. This board approves or rejects treatments using a formula that divides the cost of the treatment by the number of years the patient is likely to benefit. Treatments for younger patients are more often approved than treatments for diseases that affect the elderly, such as osteoporosis.

In 2006, a U.K. health board decreed that elderly patients with macular degeneration had to wait until they went blind in one eye before they could get a costly new drug to save the other eye. It took almost three years of public protests before the board reversed its decision.

Hidden Provisions

If the Obama administration’s economic stimulus bill passes the Senate in its current form, seniors in the U.S. will face similar rationing. Defenders of the system say that individuals benefit in younger years and sacrifice later.

The stimulus bill will affect every part of health care, from medical and nursing education, to how patients are treated and how much hospitals get paid. The bill allocates more funding for this bureaucracy than for the Army, Navy, Marines, and Air Force combined (90-92, 174-177, 181).

Hiding health legislation in a stimulus bill is intentional. Daschle supported the Clinton administration’s health-care overhaul in 1994, and attributed its failure to debate and delay. A year ago, Daschle wrote that the next president should act quickly before critics mount an opposition. “If that means attaching a health-care plan to the federal budget, so be it,” he said. “The issue is too important to be stalled by Senate protocol.”

More Scrutiny Needed

On Friday, President Obama called it “inexcusable and irresponsible” for senators to delay passing the stimulus bill. In truth, this bill needs more scrutiny.

The health-care industry is the largest employer in the U.S. It produces almost 17 percent of the nation’s gross domestic product. Yet the bill treats health care the way European governments do: as a cost problem instead of a growth industry. Imagine limiting growth and innovation in the electronics or auto industry during this downturn. This stimulus is dangerous to your health and the economy.

(Betsy McCaughey is former lieutenant governor of New York and is an adjunct senior fellow at the Hudson Institute. The opinions expressed are her own.)

To contact the writer of this column: Betsy McCaughey at Betsymross@aol.com

I should note that Alaska actually has a Republican Majority, but some political shananigans in our Legislature resulted in a bipartisan coalition, so while a Democrat is listed as the Majority leader, he’s not really. It’s very frustrating for those of us who want Alaska’s conservative ideals represented in Juneau. It also explains quite a lot of the wrangling between our legislature and our governor.

To make it easier to follow, I highlighted Palin’s comments in green and her opponents’ in orange. Another Alaskan opinion is highlighted in purple.

_________________

From the Miami Herald, February 5, 2009 --

JUNEAU -- Gov. Sarah Palin is opposing the federal economic stimulus package pushed by her former campaign adversary, President Barack Obama.

"I agree with the decision of Senator (Lisa) Murkowski and Congressman (Don) Young to vote NO on the package," Palin said in a written statement.

Normally the views of a small-state governor on the stimulus package would draw only local interest. But Palin is a different story. There's been national media speculation about her position and, according to the governor's office, erroneous reports in the Lower 48 indicating that she is supportive of the stimulus.

By Wednesday afternoon, the press statement issued by the governor's office opposing the package was up on Palin's Facebook Web page -- right below an invitation to donate to SarahPAC, her new national political action committee.

Palin also e-mailed a letter to SarahPAC supporters around the country Wednesday, promising to speak out and propose new policies to "ensure that America's best days are ahead of us."

Palin said she agrees some kind of stimulus plan is needed and supports getting federal money for tax breaks and construction projects in the state. But Palin said she's "against increased federal programs that will become a state's unfunded mandate to continue funding for generations."

Palin and Republican leaders of the state Legislature wrote a letter to members of Alaska's Congressional delegation earlier this week expressing that same concern.

Alaska Democratic Sen. Mark Begich said Wednesday that he's pushing for changes to the federal stimulus plan that would allow the state to turn down money if it wants.

Palin hasn't gone so far as to say she'd send money back.

Begich said he's co-sponsoring an amendment "requiring governors or other appropriate local officials to certify that funds allocated to a state for economic recovery are reviewed to make sure they create jobs or improve the economy."

Begich said the funds need oversight but Alaska needs the economic recovery in the bill.

State Senate President Gary Stevens said one of his anxieties about the federal stimulus is that it could increase eligibility for Denali KidCare. That's the state's health insurance program for low-income children.

"If we allow Denali KidCare to include everyone in the state of Alaska who has an income lower than 300 percent of poverty, then we might be stuck with that in the future. We want to be careful about providing programs that next year, when we are on our own, we might have to retract," the Republican from Kodiak told reporters.

Stevens said he can understand why Young voted against the stimulus bill.

Stevens said he was "very nervous, frankly, as a Republican, looking at what I've seen reported. I'm concerned if the federal government can sustain this. And I'm also concerned, does this really stimulate the economy and does it add jobs."

Senate Majority Leader Johnny Ellis, D-Anchorage, disagreed, saying Young and other stimulus opponents don't get it.

"I think Congressman Young is out of touch with Alaskans. There is a lot of anxiety about the future of the country, economically, and the future of our state, and whether we will experience some of the negative effects the Lower 48 is feeling, we are starting to," Ellis said.

"Congressman Young stuck with his political party and I suppose his principles. But I believe he's out of touch with what Alaskans are thinking."

Meanwhile, the White House is pushing hard for the stimulus bill.

The Obama administration Wednesday released state-by-state estimates of the number of jobs created by the stimulus -- as well as the kind of programs that would be supported in it. The White House numbers have to be read in light of the fact that they are part of a lobbying blitz to gain support in state capitols across the country, but there currently aren't any studies to counter them.

The White House estimates the stimulus would "create or save" 8,700 jobs in Alaska over the next two years. It estimates about 220,000 workers and their families would be eligible for a tax cut of up to $1,000.

The measure would also provide tax credits to lower college costs, extend unemployment benefits, and modernize facilities at about 28 schools in Alaska, according to the White House.

____________________________________

With all due respect, Johnny Ellis is the one out of touch with the Alaskan voters. By and large, most Alaskans I know feel anxiety primarily over the coming influx of people from the Lower 48 who inevitably take our jobs. State trends are usually to do okay during economic turndowns in the Lower 48. We are also worried about S 22 (Omnibus Land Bill), which may tie up more of our land and we’re concerned that Mr. Obama will somehow prevent the permitting of the gas pipeline as Carter did back in the 1980s.

From the people I’ve spoken to and comments in the Daily News-Miner, I would say most of us wanted the economic stimulus package to be voted down and revisited in a smaller package that targets jobs and tax rate cuts. That's not going to happen now. The Democrats have poisoned their own well and I think the next two years will see the end of the liberal movement in this country for many years to come as people realize this package created 120 jobs for Obama supporters and sank our country into a 10-year economic depression which might actually be much longer given the interest payments coming our way and the increased taxation that will be REQUIRED to pay it off -- if we ever can.

We’re proud that Sarah is taking this stand and saying “no” to pork; though we’re not especially surprised.