2 Peter - Verse-by-Verse Biblical Exegesis

“way of righteousness.” Their involvement in reversionism does not mean they are
unregenerate or have lost their salvation … Turning from the “way of righteousness” and
“the holy commandment” indicates they have forsaken their spiritual life, ceased to
metabolize doctrine, failed to advance to the high ground, and behaved just like an
unbeliever. It would be better for these dupes of false teaching had they never possessed
“full knowledge.” (R.B. Thieme, Jr.) Their danger was in falling into carnality, not into
apostasy. It is a picture of true Christians living in tragic sin. (D. Dunham)
As long as they have not rejected the truth, they still have an uncomplicated opportunity to
recover and advance. But once they have succumbed to false teaching and immersed
themselves in the latter stages of reversionism, strong delusion and satanic evil complicate
the road to spiritual recovery. There is no more miserable creature on earth than a believer
who once fully understood “the way of righteousness” but has reverted to a life of unchecked
carnality. (R.B. Thieme, Jr.) “Not to have known” implies that the false teachers did possess
a personal knowledge of the insistence of apostolic Christianity upon righteous conduct, and
“after knowing it” makes clear that they did not then become ignorant of Christianity’s
demands for a moral life. Their vaunted boast of freedom deliberately rejected that claim,
resulting in a deteriorated status. Ignorance can be a very bad thing, but disobedience is
always worse. The false teachers did not act in ignorance when they chose to turn back from
the holy commandment delivered to them. Their decision involved a departure. (D. Hiebert)
More than a sinful life is necessary in a person if he is to be declared unregenerate. (C.
Hodge)
What the new converts are said to know and leave is not the Savior. It is “the way of
righteousness.” It is a lifestyle that is in view, not a personal relationship. Of course, the
relationship is assumed, and it is expected that the believers will live like newbom creations,
but here the question is one of action—if Peter intended to teach that their failure was
apostasy, a final turning from God to Satan or a life of sin and rejection of their former faith,
he has chosen some rather pallid terms with which to do it ... Peter was not writing about
their returning to paganism or Judaism, nor about their utterly repudiating their faith in
Christ. True, their temptation was heavy; their danger, acute. However, their danger was in
falling into carnality, not into apostasy. While true faith results in proper living, it is possible
(though obviously not desirable!) for a believer to live for a while like a sinner, failing to live
up to his position in Christ ... Does a person’s involvement in moral filth, however,
necessarily indicate an unregenerate nature? Paul attacked the terrible sin of incest (1 Cor. 5)
but he made no appeal for regeneration, nor did he imply that the lack of salvation might be
the problem. (D. Dunham)
Peter was saying that their current condition as Christians was in some way worse than their
former one as unbelievers. Being a Christian and ensnared by sin is worse, in some respects,
than being a non-Christian ensnared by sin … Their real danger here is not in rejecting
Christ, but in leaving the new way of holiness for the former path of carnality ... Peter was
warning those most susceptible to the bait being offered by false teachers. He was not
attempting to depict the awful consequences of apostasy. Nor was he dealing with the
problem of whether or not one can lose his salvation in Christ. Instead he was warning those
recently saved that the subtle enticements of false teachers and the wooings of their old