Ch. 1:1,2. Introduction.

The Introduction gives the inscription, the character of the persons addressed, and the salutation. Simon — Symeon, or Simeon. Simon is the Greek form, and Symeon the Hebrew form. Even the Hebrew name had some variations. See Gen. 29:33 (Simeon); 1 Ciiron. 4:20 (Shimon.) Simeon is used in Acts 13:1 by the historian, and in Acts 15:14 by James in his speech before the assembly in Jerusalem. Simon is the form generally used. It is uncertain which is here the true reading, Simon or Symeon. The name was not uncommon among Romans and was very common among Jews. It means hearing. The application of the name to a child implied, at least sometimes, that God had heard. (Gen. 29:33.) The man who, in the temple, took up the infant Jesus in his arms, and, blessing God, uttered the singularly rich prophecy concerning the object of the child's advent, bore the name Simeon. (Luke 2:25.) The New Testament mentions, also, among others, Simon the "Canaanite,"¹ one of the twelve apostles, Simon of Cyrene, Simon the leper, Simon Magus, Simon the tanner, Simon the father of Judas Iscariot.

Peter. Sec on 1 Pet. 1:1. Simon, who is called Peter, is found in Matt. 10:2. It has been suggested that the apostle here uses both names in conscious reference to his earlier state, and that into which he is supposed to have come afterward. The suggestion is not without a basis of possibility, but the probability of such a reference is slender. For some account of the apostle's life, and for a brief characterization, see "I. Introduction to the First Epistle."

A servant and an apostle. In the First Epistle the official designation is briefer, "an apostle." In Jude, also, it is briefer, but there it is "servant." Paul sometimes designated himself in the longer form (Rom. 1:1; Titus 1:1), and sometimes in the shorter. (1 Cor. 1:1; 2 Cor. 1:1; Gal. 1:1, etc.) Neither James nor Jude says "apostle"; each says "servant." Here "servant" (bondservant) is not used merely in the sense in which it may be applied to Christians in general; it is doubtless an official use of the term, indicating that the writer regards himself as a servant in ministerial labor, while "apostle " is the narrower term, expressing not only the form of ministerial labor peculiar to the twelve, but also the authority peculiar to them. Farrar ("Early Days of Christianity") translates "slave," which is scarcely a just representation of the Greek. See upon this question the last part of the notes on 1 Peter 2:18. Peter's acknowledgment of himself as a servant of Christ, was an acknowledgment that Christ had the right to direct him in all his ministerial life; and it was precisely that right in which the apostle gloried. Like Peter, ministers of all times should wait for Christ's "orders," not for man's, and when the orders come should obey with promptness and alacrity. "An apostle"; one sent away, and while the word was applied in this general sense to the twelve, it had the special meaning implied in their peculiar official position in distinction from that of all other ministers. Peter has been called the first pope; he never calls himself pope. See further on 1 Pet. 1:1, and also on 6:1, on the nature of the apostleship.

Jesus Christ — as in 1 Pet. 1:1. Paul usually said the same, though in most cases, according to the approved reading,² he put "Christ" first, which fact has special significance. "Jesus" is the Greek form, while Joshua is the Hebrew form. Joshua is a shorter form of Jehoshua (help of Jehovah, Saviour). The Greek form is used for Joshua in Heb. 4:8. ("For if Jesus had given them rest.") "Jesus" was a common Jewish name, but was given to the first born son of the virgin Mary for the special reason that he was to save his people from their sins. (Matt, 1:21.) "Christ," anointed. It is used by the New Testament writers to designate the Being who was believed by the Jews of Old Testament times as appointed to come (Matt. 11:3), God's Anointed. It is equivalent to Messiah. "We have found the Messias, which is, being interpreted, the Christ." (John 1:41.)

To them that have obtained, etc. This is one of the cases, so common in the Greek, of a short method of expression. Given fully: to them that have obtained faith equally precious with that which we have obtained. "Them" and "us" must not be referred to Gentiles and Jews; the former refers to all who are described, whether Jews or Gentiles, and the latter to Peter himself, or to the apostles as a class.

Faith — not Christianity as external, but that faith which Christianity inspires. Peter writes, not merely to the Christians of Asia Minor, as in his First Epistle, but to all Christians then living; and indeed, according to the intention of the Holy Spirit, to all the saints of all the ages that were to follow. Comprehensive benevolence in a forger! As to the word "General" in the title of the Authorized Version, see on the same word in the title of the First Epistle, first paragraph of the notes.

Precious. See 1 Pet. 1:18, 19 (precious blood.) Here we have through the righteousness, etc. Precious also is this faith as the foundation of Christian character, as investing the present life with something of the power of the future life, and as giving the possessor ability to appropriate the future life as one of unending bliss.

Like — as precious in kind as that of Peter and the other apostles. Whether it is equally strong in all Christians is a question not touched.

Have obtained — literally, obtained by lot. See Luke 1:9; John 19:24. The faith was "obtained"; it came from a source external to themselves. In no sense did they originate it; personal merit, then, is not to be thought of.

The righteousness, etc. — not, as Fronmuller, "an attribute of God," not "the personal righteousness of believers" viewed as God's because given by him, but the entire scheme of the gospel as an exhibition of divine righteousness and mercy. Here is the germ of the doctrine so much enforced by Paul in Romans. (1:17; 3:21, 22, 25; 4:13 and elsewhere.) See also Galatians, and Crit. Notes.

"Through," either in or by means of. The Greek preposition means primarily in, but in the New Testament often expresses instrumentality. The righteousness is the medium or source of faith.

Of God and our Saviour Jesus Christ — of our God, etc. The question is, whether "God and Saviour" are both to be connected with "Jesus Christ" — that is, whether Jesus Christ is here called God as well as Saviour; or whether two distinct persons are meant, God the Father and Jesus Christ. In ver. 2 an evident distinction is made: of God, and of Jesus our Lord. See ver. 11, "our Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ," where the arrangement of the Greek is the same as here, but, which is a very important difference, Lord (κύριος) is used instead of God (θεός). See also 2:20, "of the Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ"; 3:18, "of our Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ." In Titus 2:13, "of the great God and our Saviour Jesus Christ." Nowhere, unless here, does Peter apply directly to Jesus Christ the word God, which is a strong, perhaps decisive, consideration that he does not so apply it here. See Crit. Notes.

2. Grace. . . . unto you. See on 1 Peter 1:2.

Though (in) the knowledge. Peter makes free use of this word knowledge (1;3,5, 8; 2:20; 3:18), but never in the sense in which it was used by the false philosophy which soon attempted to force its way into the churches. The kindred verb was used by Christ in his memorable prayer. (John 17:3.) Knowledge of God, in Scriptural use, is not mere speculative knowledge: it pertains to the heart quite as much as to the intellect; it implies knowledge of Jesus our Lord. A very few who, in consequence of having no written revelation, were ignorant of Christ, may have attained, nevertheless, to some knowledge of God, but such knowledge of God as it is possible for men to attain, is impossible if Christ is not known. Professing to know God, and at the same time rejecting Christ, is proof of great and culpable ignorance — ignorance which comes more from disease of the heart than from weakness of the head. Peter uses two words, both of which are represented in the English by knowledge (ἐπίγνωσις and γνῶσις). The former occurs in ver. 2, 3, 8; 2:20; the latter in ver. 5, 6; 3:18. The context of these verses makes it very improbable that the writer used the words in different senses, though the former may in itself include the idea of acknowledging in addition to the idea of knowledge, which is the exclusive meaning of the latter. It may sometimes be used in a stronger sense, full knowledge. Knowledge (γνῶσις) is a term which was much used in Alexandria and elsewhere. Gnosticism (the word is akin to that used by Peter) was one of the most dangerous errors of ancient times. It was a foolish kind of wisdom. Possibly Peter had the germ of the error in his eye. The "agnosticism" of the present is remarkable for being neither foolish nor wise, since it knows nothing at all.

Part I. Section First.

Ch. 1:3-11. The superscription and salutation being ended, the Epistle proper begins. This section divides itself thus: 1. What has been done for them; 2. What they themselves ought to do. The latter is hortatory; the former is the doctrinal foundation. The method is this: As God has done given things for them for a given end, they are earnestly to strive for given Christian traits. The second verse is closed by some with a period, and by some with a colon. The connection of ver. 3 with that verse is not so close as a comma indicates.

3. According as — inasmuch as. The sense is, persuaded, or knowing that. In the original, all things is made emphatic by being put next after the conjunction: Inasmuch as all things have been given. It is difficult to see what Peter could have intended in the all things, unless it were the promises. (vcr. 4.) These, through application to the heart by the Holy Spirit, would promote both life and godliness.

That pertain — and therefore subserve.

Life — spiritual life, the result of being begotten by the God and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ. (1 Pet. 1:3.) It implies blessedness, but that is not the principal thing meant. The difference between their former state of death and their present state of life is more than can be told. When men lose their prejudice against '"theology," and speak as educators, as men of business, as employers or employed, they have no difficulty in feeling that men are depraved, which is what the Scriptures mean by being dead. Consciousness of depravity, however, is not generally as marked as consciousness of life. Reason: Depravity ever tends to diminish self knowledge, while life ever tends to increase it. Hence, one may come to have little of that' unhappiness which is the natural fruit of sin; while another cannot but be conscious of the blessedness which is the fruit of life.

Godliness — a righteous state of heart toward God, but manifesting itself in holy activity. This is imparted righteousness. As to the distinction between imparted and imputed righteousness, see note on ver. 1.

Of him — of God, as in 1 Pet. 1:15; 2:9. The call came indeed "through" the Holy Spirit, on the ground of Christ's mediatorial work, but it came from God. The New Testament writers never become weary of referring the change which had been wrought upon the souls of their readers to the call of God. They give no prominence to the activity of man in conversion, except as the result of divine, effectual calling.

To glory and virtue. Revised Version: by his own glory arid virtue. (Westcott and Hort: vδιὰ δόξης καὶ ἀρετῆς, through glory and virtue; but they put in the margin, ἰδία δόξῃ καὶ ἀρετῇ, by his own glory and virtue.) Which is the true reading is uncertain. By "glory" may be meant his glorious nature, and by "virtue" his "superiority revealed in the work of salvation." "See Acts 2:11 (the wonderful works of God)." — Cremer. The glory and virtue were the means by which they were called — means, because they were used in effecting their regeneration. It is impossible to conceive how the apostle could have more strongly represented God as the source of all which the readers have above what they had by nature. But he has yet more to say (ver. 4) as preparatory to the exhortation of ver. 5-11.

'Virtue' (Ἀρετή) is a word of much historical interest, the New Testament use being very unlike that which prevailed in Greek literature. Intense worldliness and Pagan viciousness are to be seen in its derivation. It is traceable to Arēs (Ἄρης), Mars, son of Jupiter, and Juno, god of war. Hence, it was applied to war itself Some trace it to the word signifying man (ἀνήρ), and it is certain that manliness or bravery in war was the principal idea which it expressed. The Latin equivalent, virtus, was used by the Romans in the same way. As Trench says ("Study of "Words"):" It is as if for them all virtues were included in warlike courage alone." As the same writer also reminds us, the Italians of to-day "degrade the word virtuoso, or the virtuous, to signify one accomplished in painting, music, and sculpture, such things as are the ornamental fringe of a nation's life, but can never be made, without loss of all manliness of character, its main texture and woof, not to say that excellence in these fine arts has been in too many cases divorced from all true virtue and worth." Christianity took the word 'virtue' (ἀρετή) out from the ignoble uses to which it had been consecrated, and made it the watchword of Godlike excellence. The application of the word to God is very unusual, and has led to severe stricture of the Epistle (as not Peter's) by Dr. Edwin A. Abbott. See the "Introduction, I., Was Peter the Writer?" But the same word in the plural is applied to God in the First Epistle 2:9 ("shew forth the praises — virtues — of him"), and not, as Farrar ("Early Days") says it is, "in a very different sense." The sense seems to be essentially the same here as there.

4. Whereby — by which — that is, by which glory and power.

Are given — he hath given (granted as a gift);

him that called us (ver. 3) — still referring the readers to the divine source of all.

Exceeding great — literally, the greatest and precious, according to the Textus Receptus. But the manuscripts differ. Wescott and Hort, interchanging the adjectives say, precious and exceeding great. So the Revised Version. Promises which are so great cannot be of little value. The promises of God to the elect are resolvable into two classes: the one pertains to the coming of a Saviour; the other, to the coming of the Holy Spirit. The latter is the complement of the former. It would not have been in accordance with the boundless sweep of the divine benevolence to give the one and withhold the other. Neither class alone would have had any practical preciousness; but conjoined, the two classes of promises are of infinite value: for they have as their object the glory of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit, in making men partakers of the divine nature. For the first promise of the first class, see Gen. 3:15. See in many of the Psalms, in Isaiah, Jeremiah, Daniel, Joel, Micah, etc., promises of each class so great and precious as to have awakened the intensest interest of prophets and angels. (1 Pet. 1:10-12.)

Us — both Peter and those to whom he is writing.

That — the end for which the promises were given; for these refers to promises, not, as some say, to glory and virtue. The contents of the promises, applied to their hearts, had already made them so far like God that they are justly called God's children. In so far as they are the children of God, they have already become partakers of the divine nature. But the change is not complete. The effect of the promises will not be fully realized till the next life.

Might be — may become. Partaking of the divine nature implies no loss of their own individuality, no absorption of their personality in the personality of God. They partake of God's nature while retaining their own nature. They lose their own nature viewed as depravity, but viewed as organic and constitutional their nature cannot be absorbed into the nature of God. In regeneration God's spiritual life, not his essence, is communicated to the soul. In that sense they become sharers of God's nature, and only in that sense can they be said to have a new nature. See Heb. 12:10 ("partakers of his holiness"); 1 John 3:2 ("shall be like him"); and compare John 1:12, 13; 1 Pet. 1:23. May become implies growth, but might be expresses (which the apostle does not mean to express) a sudden, instantaneous, and completed participation.

Having escaped — a strong representation, having escaped from. It hints their activity, but makes prominent the result of God's interposition — a wonderful deliverance, since that from which they were delivered was so terrible.

The corruption. It describes the moral filth of the world without Christianity. (2:12, 19.) Paul uses the same word in Rom. 8:21 ("bondage of corruption"), contrasting it with the glorious liberty of the children of God, and in Gal. 6:8 ("shall of the flesh reap corruption"). The fearful immorality which, with few exceptions, characterized the social life of Greece and Rome, the highest state as well as the lowest, and which has equally marked non-Christian society in all lands and all times, fully justifies the apostolic application of the term 'corruption.' The vileness of man left traces of itself in durable form on the walls of dwellings and in bronze castings, the detail of which would be indecorous to relate; and in proportion as society, after being purified by Christianity, has withdrawn from the purifying influence, it has relapsed into similar pollution. The world's corruption, which is founded in lust, expresses the meaning.

5-7. What God has done for them should lead them to the manifestation of appropriate Christian traits. The contrast, on the one hand, between divine power, life, and godliness, knowledge of God, divine calling, glory and virtue, precious and exceeding great promises, sharing the divine nature; and, on 'the other hand, the corruption, which, originating in lust, pervades the world, is a strong ground of appeal. And besides this — but for this very reason also. The connection is with 'according as' in ver. 3, thus: Inasmuch as, or, as explained above, knowing that, all things have been given to us by his divine power, etc. — for this very reason manifest the Christian virtues which I am about to enumerate. If Paul was the first Christian logician of the apostolic time, certainly Peter was the second. Paul reasoned more, but Peter, when he reasoned, reasoned as divinely as Paul. In ver. 3 and 4 we have premises which are laid in God's power, glory, and promise, and here in ver. 5-7 are practical conclusions, under the popular form of exhortation, which flow from the premises with conclusiveness, not inferior to that which marks any section of Paul's great Epistle to the Romans.

Giving all diligence — exhibiting on your part earnestness. The apostle has told them in ver. 3, 4 what God has given them, and now he tells them what they ought to do.

Add. From this word the pulpit has drawn material for its rhetoric, but the idea of arithmetical addition is not Peter's. Furnish or minister, or supply (Revised Version), probably expresses the sense. See ver. 11, where for "shall be ministered" (shall be supplied. Revised Version) is the same Greek word; 2 Cor. 9:10, ministereth (supplieth, Revised Version); Gal. 3:5, ministereth (supplieth, Revised Version). The preposition in (ἐν) is not, strange to say, translated at all in the Common Version, for to was not intended as a rendering of the Greek preposition. But in is the only translation which the word here admits. Thus the apostle says, in your faith minister (or supply) virtue. You have faith; see that it be such as to include virtue, leading to it and embracing it. By virtue may be meant something more specific than moral excellence, as fortitude, energy, vigor (in the Christian life, and therefore a Christian virtue). Cremer gives it the more general meaning.

And to (in) virtue (supply) knowledge. For the meaning of 'knowledge,' as used in ver. 2, 3, see on ver. 2. While not excluding the ideas there expressed, it mjiy here be used more distinctly of the practical understanding which is so necessary to the successful accomplishment of the ends of their new life. They must not be satisfied with virtue. In it should be supplied knowledge. Without knowledge their virtue might be erratic.

And to (in) knowledge (supply) temperance. You have knowledge; let it be such as to include temperance. By 'temperance' is meant self-control in ail respects, though with special reference to the passions. See Acts 24:25; Gal. 5:23. And to (in) temperance (supply) patience — patience under trials, whether of cares or of persecutions — a virtue often enjoined in the First Epistle.

And to (in) patience (supply) godliness — i. e., right disposition toward God.

7. And to (in) godliness (supply) brotherly kindness. Let your godliness be such as to lead to and so include brotherly kindness. The Greek is the same as in 1 Pet. 1:22 ("love of the brethren"); 3:8 ("love as brethren"). Eight disposition toward God (godliness) implies love toward Christian brethren, though it is equally true that love. Christian love, toward the disciples of Christ implies right disposition toward God. See 1 John 4:20; 2:9; 3:11, 14, 17; 4:11.

And to (in) brotherly kindness (supply) charity (love). The latter is the more comprehensive, all mankind being its object, (1 Thess. 3:12; Gal. 6:10.) One of the few infelicitous renderings by the Revised Version is this final clause of the series: in your love of the brethren love. Twice they use the same English word love where the Greek uses different words: brotherly love or kindness (φιλαδελφία) and love (ἀγάπην). To the Greek reader of the Epistle, there could have been nothing so "intolerable" as the Revised Version gives us. The American Committee would have preferred brotherly kindness, and in some American editions this rendering is substituted. The sense of this clause may be expressed like that of the others: as you have love for the brethren, let it be such as to lead to universal love. If it is such as it ought to be, it will produce love for all mankind. It should be noticed, then, that these virtues are organically related. The relation is somewhat of a causal nature — that is, faith may cause virtue, and virtue may cause knowledge — not, strictly, originating, but causing a more abundant fruitage of what had already been originated.

8. For points to the reason why they should minister in their faith such virtues: they will attain to much knowledge of Christ. So the Spirit leads back the apostle to the very position which he took in ver. 2. There he wishes them knowledge; here he assures them that having the virtues they will have the knowledge. Such knowledge as Peter means is heart knowledge quite as much as head knowledge, and therefore the knowledge and the virtues may not always be easily distinguished. Which precedes, it is difficult to say. God's working is not limited to a given order. Know God and his Son Jesus Christ, and Christian graces will thrive; cultivate Christian graces, and knowledge of God will increase.

These things — the virtues of ver..5-7.

Be in you — are (really) yours.

Abound — an expressive word in the Greek — literally, to do, or, be more (than enough). Not dwarfs, but amply developed and ever developing must all these virtues be, if the result mentioned in the latter part of the verse is to be attained.

If does not imply doubt. No word for 'if' is used in the original. These things being in you and abounding is the literal rendering.

Barren — idle or slothful.

They make. According to Lillie the idea is, render, constitute, you, establish your character as, not idle, not unfruitful in (as to) the true knowledge of our Lord Jesus Christ. A better view is that which, making in (εἰς) equivalent to into, represents the knowledge as the aim toward an ever greater measure of which they are continually to advance. They render you neither slothful nor unfruitful into the knowledge — that is, in advancing in the knowledge of. Yet, as hinted above, this does not imply that in no degree is practicing the Christian virtues preceded by the knowledge of Christ. Notice that it is not, as in ver. 2, knowledge of God and of Jesus our Lord. Knowledge of Christ, then, is knowledge of God. In this verse are traces of the Lord's teaching:  'idle' in the market place (Man. '20:3); he becomcth 'unfruitful' (Matt. 13:22). There may have been no conscious reference to the Lord's use of the words, yet the words are like reflected touches of light, which the artist's pencil has left upon the canvas. See a remarkably condensed expression of the same sentiment made by the Lord to his disciples on the mountain:" Blessed are the pure in heart, for they shall see God." (Matt. 5:8.) The pure in heart is expanded by the apostle, not consciously, perhaps, into the numerous virtues of ver. 5-7, and 'see God' is represented in 'the knowledge of our Lord Jesus Christ.'

9, But should be for. The positive (ver. 8) is offset by the negative view, and is thereby confirmed — not an uncommon rhetorical way of enforcing a truth. What is called the rhetorical way may be the natural way. The apostle perhaps knew little of rhetoric; but illumined, controlled, inspired, by the Spirit of God, he wrote according to nature.

These things corresponds with these things in ver. 8, and therefore to the virtues specified in ver. 5-7.

That lacketh — in striking contrast with him 'who abounds.' These virtues no man has till he has been born again, but most men have the opposite sins.

Is blind. Applied originally to the eyes, it was applied figuratively and with great significance to the mind; and while the intellect of man is blind, it is chiefly the heart (the affections) in which blindness is seated. The blindness is alienation from spiritual things, which does indeed produce stupidity of understanding; but the latter is more the effect of the former than the cause. See Matt. 15:14; Luke 4:18; Rom. 2:19; Rev. 3:17.

Cannot see afar off — not a waste of words, but explanatory of 'blind.' He is so fear blind that he cannot see afar off (seeing only what is near, Revised Version); he is near-sighted. The Greek word is compounded of two, which mean to close or blink the eyes, which is a peculiarity of many near-sighted persons when, without artificial help, they desire to see a distant object. Those who lack the virtues in question are near-sighted, inasmuch as they cannot see things which are eternal and invisible. (2 Cor. 4:18.) God is invisible (Col. 1:15; 1 Tim. 1:17); his attributes are invisible (Rom. 1:20); but according to Heb. 11:27, the unseen can be seen. Though lacking Christian virtues, yet one may have sharp sight relative to things which are near — of this world.

And hath forgotten. When the heart has lost interest in the invisible, memory is brittle relative to things spiritual. It will fail to do its oflBce respecting even the work which has been done, or is believed to have been done, on the very mind of which memory is itself one of the faculties; as, for example, the work of being cleansed from former sins.

That he was purged — more literally, having forgotten the cleansing. The Greek for 'cleansing' is the same as is used in Heb. 1:3 ("When he had purged, cleansed, our sins"). It was used of Jewish ceremonial washings (John 2:6), and of the purification of lepers. (Luke 5:14.) But in what sense is he here said to be cleansed from his sins? It should be remarked as preliminary that the case is a supposed one rather than one directly and positively affirmed, though this does not appear from the Common Version or from the Revision. The sense is this: For he to whom these may be wanting — he who, by supposition, is lacking these things. It may, therefore, refer to a regenerated soul, without necessarily teaching, in contradiction to other Scriptures, an actual and continued fall. Like many other passages, it may be of the nature of a warning against apostasy. (Heb. 2:1-3; 4:1; 6:1-9; 10:26-29.) If it refer to a regenerated person, he was cleansed from his sins in the sense of being delivered from their dominion, which deliverance was effected through the atoning death of Christ received by faith. It may not be justifiable, however, to ground so important a view upon a very delicate peculiarity of the Greek tongue. In that case it must be assumed, in harmony with numerous passages which teach that no regenerated person will suffer a final, fatal fall; that being unregenerated, he belongs to that class of which there are not a few in every age, who are greatly enlightened and deeply affected by spiritual things, and at length identify themselves with the people of God by baptism, and show during a short period much interest in whatever concerns the kingdom of Christ, but, having no root in themselves, wither away. (Matt, 13:6.) Such a man forgets that he was, as he thought and as he appeared to others, cleansed from his old sins, such, perhaps, as are described in 1 Pet. 4:3.

10. The arrangement of the Greek is very emphatic: Wherefore the rather, brethren, be in earnest, sure your calling and election to take, for these things doing, not by any means shall ye fall ever. Every word drives the nail further, and the last clinches it beyond the possibility of being drawn. Wherefore — in view of the assurance (ver. 8), and the warning. (ver. 9.)

The rather — all the more in view of the assurance and the warning.

Brethren — never used in the First Epistle, and used only here in this. He addresses in the same way those who killed the Prince of Life (Acts 3:17); but Only as descendants with himself from the founder of the nation, Abraham. The readers are his brethren as born, like himself, from above. It is even more significant than dearly beloved in 1 Pet. 2:11. He and they have one Father.

The rather (the more) give diligence — give the more diligence — i. e., be the more earnest.

Calling. See on elect. (1 Pet. 1:2.) 'Calling' stands before election — not because they were first called, and then, having accepted the call, were elected; but because he is just now giving special prominence to what has been done for them in this life, not to what God did from eternity. But can they do anything toward making their calling and election sure? "What can be surer than God's eternal purpose and God's call? But how are they to feel sure that they were elected and called? Ananias and Sapphira must have felt quite confident at the time of their baptism that the question of their salvation had been settled in the counsels of God; and it had been settled, but not in the way they supposed. Dishonesty and lying spoke terribly against the supposition that they had been elected; for those who are elected are elected to holiness, not less than to heaven. The readers are to make their calling and election sure by doing these things — that is, by having (abounding in) the Christian virtues. So a holy life will prove to themselves that they were elected and called. Peter strikes hard blows at Antinomianism.

Shall never fall — shall not by any means ever stumble, and so lose salvation. Peter has not forgotten his Master's doctrine. They shall never perish. (John 10:28.)

11. This verse gives the blessed result; and this, as an expansion of the thought 'Ye shall never fall,' enforces the duty of doing these things: (for so).

Ministered. The Greek for 'ministered' is the same as in ver. 3 (add to).

Abundantly — richly; a word which, though applied to earthly things, is beautifully applied also to things spiritual.

Entrance. Strictly, 'ministered richly' qualifies 'entrance'; yet the idea pertains to what is to come after the entrance — eternal bliss. Compare 1 Pet. 4:18 (the righteous scarcely saved), and see notes, first paragraph. That one should be satisfied with the prospect of being barely able to pass through the heavenly gate, speaks poorly for his view of the "wideness of God's mercy." The gate is strait and the way is narrow which leadeth unto life; but the gate at the other end is broad to him who has been neither slothful nor unfruitful in the knowledge of Christ.

Kingdom — a word often used by our Lord, but rare in the writings of our apostle. It expresses substantially the same as 'inheritance' (1 Pet. 1:4); but that views heaven as related to the believer, this as related to Christ. Heaven is conceived as a kingdom over which Christ reigns, yet as embraced within certain limits; whence the expression, 'entrance into.' The conception of a kingdom into which the subjects of Christ are to enter after death is not contradictory to the idea of a kingdom in this world. (Matt. 3:2.) The kingdom has been already set up, and Christ is even now reigning; but as it is not here in its completed form, it is represented as it is in the verse before us. See Matt. 8:11. The conception of ti kingdom consisting of persons regenerated by the Holy Spirit is expressed in Jer. 23:5; Dan. 2:44, and many other places. Christ's kingdom may be viewed as external, as internal, as beginning, as advancing, as completed. God the Father is represented as King, and as having a kingdom: "Our Father who art in heaven. Thy kingdom come." But the kingdom is generally viewed as reigned over by Christ. Christ reigns over it as Glad's Vicegerent. In this mediatorial capacity Christ must reign till he has put all enemies under his feet (1 Cor. 15:25), and when that glorious end shall have come, he will relinquish his mediatorial character, delivering up the kingdom to God, even the Father; but the kingdom itself will continue forever. It is impossible that that should come to an end, unless those who constitute it shall all either become disloyal, or be annihilated.

Everlasting — eternal; used also in Matt. 25:46; and, what is very striking, the Greek word is there applied to future punishment as well as to future bliss.

12-21. Section Second.

The reason which prompted the apostle to write, and the truth of what he has taught, relative to the second coming of Christ.

12. Wherefore — in view of all I have said, but especially in view of the grand final result, (ver.11.)

Will not be negligent. Another and approved Greek reading gives the meaning, I will, I intend, and may be rendered freely, I will be ready.

These things — the things concerning which he has been writing. Peter, so forgetful of some things in the early part of his Christian life, is deeply impressed with the importance of reminding the readers concerning all these gracious things.

Though ye know. Memory is frail even respecting things which we know; the more worldly the more forgetful.

Present truth — truth of the present gospel; truth now preached by apostles, and now believed by the readers.

13. Yea — rather, but — but though ye know them.

Meet — proper or fit.

This tabernacle — this tent, the human body. (2 Cor. 5:1.) Like a soldier's or a traveler's tent, the body is only for temporary use, is frail, and is easily taken down. As a tent is for human beings to dwell in, so the body is the earthly dwelling place of the immortal spirit. Hence it would be improper to apply the figure to animals.

As long as. The apostle has no thought of "retiring."

Stir you up — not that they were asleep, as he himself once slept in Gethsemane, but that he purposes not to allow them to sleep. Literally, 'to stir you up' in remembrance. As long as he shall continue to live, he will continue to put them in mind, so that his exhortations may be remembered.

14. He is the more strongly impelled to this by the fact that the opportunity to do so will soon be closed. Knowing that shortly — more exactly, swiftly, as in the Revised Version. He knows that his death is to be sudden. How many of the apostles left the world by means of sickness is unknown. Peter expects to die by martyrdom, as his Lord (John 21:18.19) shewed him (not hath shewed him), indicated to him. Some say he learned it by revelation made at a later time — possible, not probable. The verb is in just the tense which Peter would have used had he meant the time referred to in John. The apostle has no reluctance to call to mind the fact of his departure from this world, and the fact that he must suffer death at the hands of the wicked. He is indeed to meet him whom he once denied, but long ago he received assurance of his Master's readiness to recognize him as his penitent disciple whenever the hour of his martyrdom should come.

For when thy deadly need is bitterest,
     Thou shalt not be denied, as I am here —
My voice, to God and angels, shall attest, —
     Because I know this man, let him be clear.

15. Moreover — but also. The 'also' points to the time after he shall have gone. They must remember the things, not only before, but 'also' after, he dies. But how are they to be aided in remembering them? By this very Epistle. Some think he refers to the Gospel of Mark. That is possible, but it would meet the requirement of the case if he should be supposed to refer only to the present Epistle.

After my decease — literally, after my exodus, departure, journey out of; that is, out of this world. This word (ἔξοδος) in the sense of death is rare, and it is an interesting fact that the death of the apostle's Master, which formed the subject of conversation on the Mount of Transfiguration, is expressed by the same word:" Who appeared in glory and spake of his decease" (his exodus). Does Peter make this uncommon use of the word because he remembers it as used then? It may not have been used in the conversation itself, but as Luke uses it in his narrative (9:31) it is probable that it had been used in the conversation. In ver. 11 is the opposite word (ἔισοδος, a journey into, "entrance"). To go out of such a world as this without going into such a world as heaven is inconceivably deplorable.

Always. A periodical remembrance will not suffice. Alternation of remembering and forgetting is condemned. Romanism has sharp sight. It is able to see here the doctrine of the saint's intercession in heaven on behalf of saints on the earth. Peter is instructing Christians that he will intercede for them after his decease! A logical inference would be that all Christians on the earth may pray to Peter in heaven to pray to God for them. See "Path to Paradise; or Catholic Christians' Manual," pp. 141-145, Dublin, 1846, in which is a long list of persons from that of "Holy Mary" to "St. Bridget" and all the "holy virgins and widows," for whose prayers Roman Catholics are taught to pray, and in the list are the names of the apostles headed by that of Peter.

16. For. The writer now proceeds to strengthen the position which he has taken. In his teaching he gave prominence to the power and coming of Christ, and he purposes to show that that teaching was truth: 1. By what he knew had occurred on the Mount of Transfiguration; 2. By ancient prophecy. This shown, he will have justified the preceding exhortation.

Have not followed — did not follow.

Fables — myths, and these wore devised (invented and wrought) cunningly (with great skill). A myth is a story with little or no historical basis. The mj'th has been defended as adapted to do the people good, but instead of healing the fever of sin it inflamed it. The Jews had their myths, as well as the Greeks and the Romans. Scarcely any people have been without a large stock of fabulous stories, and nearly all of them have been supremely silly.

Let all the heathen writers join
     To form one perfect book;
Great God, if once compared with thine,
     How mean their writings look!

Fables like Æsop's belong to a different class. They are simple, beautiful, and instructive. In his preface to "Antiquities of the Jews," Josephus says: "For as to other legislators" (contrasting them with Moses), "they followed fables; and by their discourses transferred the most reproachful of human vices unto the gods, and so afforded wicked men plausible excuses for their crimes." Elsewhere he speaks of Moses as having "preserved his writings from those indecent fables which others have framed." To what myths Peter referred is of no importance.

When we — the apostles in general, and in particular John and James, those being the two who, with himself, were in the holy mount, (ver.18.) They made known by preaching, and perhaps by their writings. It is possible that Peter includes his own First Epistle.

The power and coming of, etc. 'Coming' (3:4; Matt, 24:3, 27; 1 Cor. 15:23; 1 Thess. 2:19) at the last day to judge the world; ' the power' displayed at that time. They are viewed as prefigured in the events of the Transfiguration, and only so is his argument pertinent.

Were eye-witnesses. The Eleusinian were a celebrated religious festival of the Greeks in honor of two of their deities. Everything dune was supposed to be a mystery, and hence the name, Eleusinian Mysteries. Initiation into the mysteries was considered as one of the most obligatory and sacred of all human rites. In one year, passing from the less mysteries, they were initiated into the greater, and then were called epoptai (ἐπόπται), the name implying that they now look upon, see, the mysteries. This is the word used by the apostle: we were 'eyewitnesses' of his majesty. Of course, the word is used in a Christian sense, but its use seems to imply that what he and his companions, James and John, saw on the Mount was of the nature of a secret or mystery to which they were admitted, in distinction from the other apostles.

His majesty — glory, as seen on the Mount. The Greek word is the same as was used by Demetrius, the silversmith, who made little portable temples containing an image of Diana: "And her magnificence (glory) should be destroyed.'' (Acts 19:27.) The glory of Christ, and the glory of the goddess Diana! Wealth of meaning in the one, and shriveled poverty in the other! "Nothing but myths," says the unbeliever. "We have not followed artfully wrought myths," says Peter. Let the Christian cling with the confidence of an apostle to the gospel as containing, not fables wrought by "the cunning craftiness" of men, but truth revealed by God himself.

17. For. He now shows, by what he had himself seen on the Mount, that his teaching relative to the coming of Christ was true.

He — Christ.

Honor and glory. See Rom. 2:7, 10. 'Glory' — not the brilliant light which proceeded from the Lord's person (Matt. 17:2: Mark 9:3); this was additional to that. It came directly from God the Father, and it consisted of the remarkable audible expression of the Father's approval and love — an approval of him not merely as a good man, but as his beloved Son — as his Son in a sense applicable to no other being.

When, etc. — literally, such a voice being borne to him.

From the excellent glory — by instead of 'from.' ''All other expositions,' says Winer, "are arbitrary." By 'excellent (sublime) glory' is meant, not heaven, but God himself, the exalted Majesty. (Winer.)

My beloved Son. The original is very expressive, and cannot be reproduced in good English. With naked literalness it would be: the Son of me, the beloved. The idea may be expressed thus: My Son, who is the beloved. Whether the words "the Son of God" are used in the Scriptures to express the deity of Christ, or only his Messianic office, has long been a mooted question. It is certain that the Jews understood it as implying equality with God. (John 5:18.) " Thou art my Son, this day have I begotten thee" (Ps. 2:7) is clearly applicable to Jesus Christ, as is the entire Psalm; and on the surface of the passage it seems to be taught that the Sonship of Christ had a beginning, and if it had a beginning, the beginning may have been at the incarnation (John 1:14), or at the baptism (Matt. 3:16, 17), or at the resurrection. (Rom. 1:4.) In either case it may be only the declaration that he was the Son of God which is referred to. He may have been God's Son from eternity, but the declaration or recognition of the fact may have been made in time. See Crit. Note.

In whom, etc. On whom I let my pleasure rest is a more exact expression of the thought; or, my good pleasure be fixed upon him. (Winer.) See Crit. Notes. The verb expresses the feelings which God had toward him before he came into the world, while the context shows that such are God's feelings still. He who is displeased with one on whom God's pleasure is fixed, needs something more than God's goodness: he needs God's mercy.

18. This voice, not the mere sound, they guessing the meaning, but the words.

Which came. Correctly, we heard borne out of heaven (American Revisers); heard come (English Revisers; in the margin, brought).

We — Peter, James, and John. Here, unlike what is often the case, the pronoun in the original is expressed, and for emphasis, we ourselves (Rev. Ver.), not some other persons, or perhaps better, we, consciously we, heard it.

When we were with him. It is when we are in conscious communion with Christ that we feel most deeply the force of the evidence that Christ was and is the special object of God's love.

Holy mount — not yet certainly known. Mount Tabor has generally had the honor, but without reason. It was more probably an elevation near Mount Hermon. 'Holy': sacred in consequence of the events which occurred.

19. With the last verse he completed his first argument in support of his teaching concerning Christ's power and coming, and he now presents his second argument. The former is based upon what he had seen and heard on the Mount, the latter upon the prophetic Scriptures. Also (and) stands first in the Greek, and points to this new source of evidence.

A more sure word of prophecy. Either of two translations is possible: 1. We have a surer, the prophetic, word. This makes a direct and strong comparison with something else, and the question arises, "With what? With the evidence drawn from what he and two other apostles had witnessed? But how could he seem to disparage the strength of the first argument? Was not that decisive, and strongly decisive, of the truthfulness of his teaching? 2. We have as surer (more certain), the prophetic word, which is an equally correct rendering, and saves from all disparaging contrast with the evidence just given. Peter, then, may be understood as saying:" In consequence of what we saw and heard, and of which miraculous things you yourselves have heard, we may feel that the prophetic word is made more certain; we can have no doubt of the truth of ancient prophecy respecting the future power and coming of Christ." Many other explanations have been given, but while this is not without its difficulties, those have greater ones.

Word. The apostle groups all the prophecies together, even all the words of the Old Testament, and views them in their unity. To him the ancient Scriptures are as but one harmonious utterance of the Holy Spirit, (ver. 21.)

Do well — are doing well. He commends their present interest in the word. Then the rejection of the Old Testament, or any part of it, is ill-doing. The Christian who has little interest in the " Jewish " Scriptures is quite too ignorant of the relation between the Old Testament and the New Testament. The "Jewish" Scriptures are Christian in the sense that they as truly, though not as exclusively and clearly, as the New Testament, give forth divine music relative to the power and coming of Christ. The student of botany is not uninterested in the roots and stock of a plant. The beauty which is unfolded in the flower depends upon the stock and roots.

To take heed. It implies, not mere attention, which in itself is merely- an act of the intellect, but attention originated and continued in faith.

A light, a lamp.

That shineth — not, that shone. So the Old Testament still gives light.

Dark place — the times of the Old Testament, or the earlier and less enlightened state of believers, or the world in general as it was then and as it always is, apart from the Bible. The last meaning is to be preferred.

Until — take heed until.

The day — omit the article.

Daystar arise. The Greek word is phosphorus (φωσφόρος, light-bearer); not the sun, but the morning-star. Christ is the Morning Star (Rev. 22:16), but here the allusion is not to Christ.

Arise (above the horizon). The time referred to is probably that of the second coming of Christ, in which, as already seen (1 Pet. 1:13; 4:7, 13), the apostle has so deep an interest.

In your hearts — not implying that their hearts are now in darkness, but at the second coming the light of Christ will shine so much more brightly that one is justified in using language which seems to imply that their present state is one of darkness — a verse rich in sentiment and beautiful in coloring.

20. Knowing — connected with 'do well to take heed' — thus: to which ye are doing well to take heed, while ye know, or, for ye know.

First — of all (1 Tim. 2:1); first of all, in your recollection or consciousness. (Heb. 10;34.)

This (standing first in the Greek) gives greater prominence to what is to follow. It calls attention.

Scripture — the Old Testament.

Any private interpretation. Rome easily solves the difficulty which has been supposed to lie in these words. In the Douay Version is this note:" This shows plainly that the Scriptures are not to be expounded by any one's private judgment or private spirit. . . . . Some may tell us that many of our divines interpret the Scriptures; they may do so, but they do it always with a submission to the judgment of the Church, and not otherwise." In "The Most Reverend Dr. James Butlers Catechism," revised by four Roman Catholic archbishops of Ireland, is the question: "How do we know with certainty, what God has taught?" Answer: "By the authority of his Church." Says Archbishop Spalding ("Miscellanea," p. 392): "The fatal source of all this mischief is the principle of private judgment in matters of religion, in opposition to that of authority. The distracting and disorganizing principle of individuality has set itself up against the great conservative principle of an authority, based on antiquity, and secured from error by divine promise." The interpretation of these words by the Roman Catholic Church is therefore this: that nothing in Scripture is to be explained by any individual for himself He must take the interpretation made by the "Church," which is the Roman Catholic Church, and only that. As that body has itself often been fearfully convulsed by warring opinions?, it follows that the final decision must be made by the pope. However immoral, the pope cannot err in his interpretations of God's holy word, and all other men whatsoever, relinquishing their own judgment, must rest upon his. Even Protestants, while rejecting the Romish view, are not quite agreed as to the meaning; but the best view seems to be this: "That no prophecy of Scripture is matter of one's own explanation — that is, the prophets do not originate their own prophecies; they receive them entirely from above, as is clear from the fact given in the next verse. Peter, therefore, must be understood as saying nothing whatever relative to interpreting the Scriptures.

21. For confirms what he has just said concerning the prophets as not originating prophecy.

The prophecy — omit 'the' — prophecy in general.

Came not — or, better, was never borne — in old time.

By the will of man. Not the human will, but the Holy Spirit, was the source-of prophecy; yet the Holy Spirit did not impart the spirit of prophecy to men, not even to Christian men, in general; but, as we learn from other Scriptures, to comparatively few, and these were holy men of God. Were moved — borne by. They were not, strictly speaking, passive, for each prophet showed, in the style of language in which he uttered his prophecies, his own mental peculiarities. 'Holy men of God' (ἅγιοι θεοῦ ἅνδρωποι), is regarded by textual critics as of inferior authority to men from God (ἀπο θεοῦ ἅνδρωποι). Westcott and Hort adopt this text. Assuming this as the correct reading, we should have the translation, but borne by the Holy Spirit, men spake from God.

CRITICAL NOTES. — CHAPTER I.

1. The student who has not access to the work may desire to become acquainted with what Cremer says ("Lexicon of New Testament Greek") concerning this much disputed word, δικαιοσύνῃ (righteousness). "The righteousness of God is a state called forth by God's act of justification — namely, by judicial disengagement, or release from all that stands in the way of δίκαιος εἶναι" (becoming righteous), "a liberation of which man becomes partaker by means of faith. Hence, δικ. πίστεως" (righteousness of faith). "Rom. 4:11-13, ἐκ πίστεως" (from faith); "Rom. 9:30; 10:6, to which expressions the others. , δικ. θέοῡ (righteousness of God), ἐκ θεοῦ (righteousness from God) — correspond. Comp. Heb. 11:7, τῆς κατὰ πίστιν δικ, κ. τ. λ." (the righteousness which is by faith, etc.). "We see, therefore, that the Pauline conception of righteousness, which, as to form, always expresses a relation to the judgment of God, includes this special feature — namely, it denotes the state of the believing man called forth by the divine acquittal, and this is its force in all the passages in question, Rom. 8:10; Eph. 6:14; 4:24; Rom. 5:21; 6:16; 2 Cor. 6:7, 14, etc. This conception is to be recognized also in 2 Pet. 1:1, . . . . where the absence of the article in ἐν δικ." (in, or through, righteousness), "which is more closely qualified by the following genitive, and therefore cannot be taken adverbially, as in Acts 17:31, makes it more difficult to understand δικ τ. ϑ., κ. τ. λ." (righteousness of God, etc.) "as the principle on which it is communicated, and thus as the subjective righteousness of God." It will be noticed that imparted righteousness is not at all Cremer's conception. Righteousness, or, more specifically, holiness, is imparted to him who accepts God's righteousness as above explained. Righteousness, as taught by Paul in his Epistle to the Romans, is "reckoned" (Revised Version) to the sinner, or, to use the old word, which really means scarcely anything different, imputed. Righteousness reckoned is the foundation of righteousness imparted. As the life of God is breathed into the soul at the moment when righteousness is reckoned to it, it is unnecessary to suppose any lapse of time between the reckoning of righteousness and the imparting of righteousness. For aught we know, the two acts may be simultaneous, but their natures are different.

1. τοῦ θεοῦ ἡμῶν καὶ σωτῆρος Ἰησοῦ Χριστου (our God and Saviour Jesus Christ). It will be noticed that the Greek for Saviour has no article. Our God and the Saviour would have made it quite certain that two persons are meant, God the Father and also the Saviour Jesus Christ. Does the absence of the article prove that two distinct persons are not meant? and may we infer from this absence our Saviour's deity? Reply: The exact reason why Greek writers use the article, or do not use it, cannot always be given. To make, therefore, an important doctrine, like that of the deity of Christ, turn on the presence or the absence of the article is seldom to be justified. Still, as has been affirmed by learned grammarians, it is grammatically possible in the passage under consideration to refer θεοῦ (God) as well as σωτῆρος (Saviour) to Ἰησοῦ Χριστοῦ (Jesus Christ) — that is, there is nothing in the construction of the Greek language to forbid it. On the other hand, it is remarkable that Peter nowhere else, if here, applies θεός (God) to Jesus Christ. Expositors differ concerning the question. The weight of critical authority is against the view that but one is referred to.

[It seems to me not only "grammatically possible," but grammatically natural to refer θεοῦ as well as σωτῆρος to Ἰησοῦ Χριστοῦ,. We need a positive reason for not doing so. The circumstance that Peter does not elsewhere call Jesus Christ God is of some weight, but by no means decisive. Yet, as there is this ground for doubt, it is improper to rely on the passage as a proof-text. — A. H.]

5, 7. That ἐπιχορηγήσατε should not be translated add but minister or supply, and that ἐν should be rendered in is held by the majority of critical scholars. This is one of the passages used by Trench to illustrate the fact that "our translators do not always seize the precise force of the prepositions." "Tyndale," he says, "had rendered the passage: In your faith minister virtue, and In your virtue knowledge, etc., and all the translations up to the Authorized had followed him. Henry More ("On Godliness" b. 8; c. 3) has well expressed the objection to 'the present version: 'Grotius would have (in) (ἐν) to be redundant here; so his suffrage is for the English translation. But, for my own part, I think that ἐν is so far from being redundant that it is essential to the sentence, and interposed that we might understand a greater mystery than the mere adding of so many virtues one to another, which would be all that could be expressly signified if ἐν were left out. But the preposition here signifying causality there is more than a mere enumeration of those divine graces. For there is also implied how naturally they rise one out of another, and that they have a causal dependence one of another.' See this thought beautifully carried out in detail by Bengel."

When the passage is correctly understood, the thought is felt to be one of great richness, and the form of expression one of great beauty. No figurative representation of these eight virtues can do justice to the apostle's thoughts. Links of a golden chain; fruits growing on the same tree; faith the root and love the flower; a building with faith for the foundation and love as the crowning glory; rosary and conjugation of Christian virtues; adjoining colors of the rainbow all coalescing into one bright orb of beauty; a garland of virtues; the divine garden of a Christian heart, — all which metaphors have been used by different writers, — add little to Peter's description. The originality, simplicity, naturalness, and easy flow of the inspired words are remarkable. It is divine music. It is an oratorio surpassing all that the great masters have written. But apart from its beauty and power, to what fullness of Christian character does it incite us! Can it be the work of a forger? The writer cannot refrain from saying, that this one passage (5-7) with the verse following should have saved the Epistle from such severity of treatment as it has received from a Christian scholar of England.

9. The Greek tongue has "two orders of negatives," in the one of which is ov (not)., and in the other of which is μή (not). The former denies directly, the latter indirectly — that is, the latter is used in general when the writer wishes to express supposition or condition. See Winer, p. 453, §55, and Buttmann, p. 344, § 148. Now, in ver. 9 the negative is μή: For he to whom these things are not (who lacketh these things), as I am supposing; or to whom these things may not be; or, again, in better English, he who may not have these things. The use of the conditional may brings out with some degree of accuracy the meaning intended to be expressed.

17. On whom my good pleasure fixed. The preposition is εἰς (in, Common Version and the Revision), whereas in Matthew's own account of the Transfiguration (17:5) it is ἐν (in). The variation is worthy of being noticed; for, as it has been well said, it is not the way in which a forger would have acted. He would have kept more closely to his model.

1) The wrong spelling. The apostle here meant was not a Canaanite, for, as Dr. Schaff reminds us ("Companion to Greek Testament and English Version"), "None of the apostles belonged to the race of Canaanites." Simon the Cananean is correct. See Matt. 10:4. Revised Version.

2) Concerning different readings of Greek manuscripts, see remarks on 1 Pet. 1:8.