*2:1 This refers to the deliberate effort to harm others. If they must ‘lay aside’ such attitudes and activities, the implication is that they have not yet, or at least not sufficiently—actually, if they are still involved in such activities they have quite a ways to go.

†2:2 Since Peter has just referred overtly to God's Word, it is generally assumed that the “milk” here is a metaphor for that Word. Peter is not saying that they are babies, just that they should imitate the craving.

‡2:2 Until quite recently, based upon von Soden's apparent ascribing of some 80% attestation to the shorter reading (80% of the extant Greek manuscripts), I was rather critical of the longer form; I argued that Peter was writing to the “elect” [1:2], to the “redeemed” [1:18], to the “born again” [1:23], to a “holy priesthood” [2:5], to “believers” [2:7], to “slaves of God” [2:16]—they did indeed need to grow, but not “into salvation”. However, the evidence as presented by ECM [Editio Critica Maior] looks quite different—some 65% for the longer reading, including the best line of transmission, and joined by all three ancient versions, a not insignificant witness. Time and again Peter presents both divine sovereignty and human responsibility; God guarantees His part, we must do our part. According to 1:5 above the full manifestation [at least] of our salvation is still future. Here in 2:2 the immediately following “if indeed” would appear to allow for some uncertainty as to their spiritual condition; Peter is emphasizing their responsibility.

§2:5 Spiritual growth is a process, much like physical growth.

*2:5 Much of the preaching nowadays focuses on what we are supposed to get, rather than what we are supposed to do. We need to talk more about what God is supposed to get—‘spiritual sacrifices’. Don't sacrifices cost?

†2:6 The quote is from Isaiah 28:16. I suppose that the not being humiliated refers to the final Accounting.

‡2:7 Instead of “disobey”, perhaps 8% of the Greek manuscripts have ‘disbelieve’ (as in NIV, NASB, TEV, etc.).

§2:7 The quote is from Psalm 118:22.

*2:8 The quote is from Isaiah 8:14. One is reminded of the Sovereign's words in Matthew 21:44. “Whoever falls on this stone will be broken to pieces; but upon whomever it falls, it will grind him to powder.”

†2:8 Were they ‘appointed’ to stumble, a direct and necessary consequence of being disobedient to the Word, or were they ‘appointed’ to be disobedient? If the latter, this would become one of a very few passages that overtly point to ‘double predestination’ or preterition (that the lost are predestined to be lost). The answer hinges on the grammar, the antecedent of the pronoun ‘which’—is it the finite verb ‘stumble’ or the participle ‘disobey’? Being higher in rank, the finite form presumably takes precedence. Also, since there are hundreds of passages that clearly teach human responsibility, I take the former option to be the preferred interpretation.

‡2:10 Peter alludes to a number of OT passages, including Hosea 2:23. Presumably it is in this world, this life, that we are to proclaim God's excellencies—which raises the question: how much time do we spend doing that?

§2:11 When we indulge the flesh our soul is adversely affected; to ‘indulge’ is more than normal, necessary use.

*2:12 The critics have already observed the good deeds—they know their criticism is false.

†2:12 What “day of visitation” might this be? Is it a personal visitation wherein God touches a critic, wakes him up and he glorifies God; or is it the Day of judgment where ‘every knee will bow and every tongue confess’, only it will be too late to do them any good? In either event, we are to live in such a way that we do not furnish any pretext to those who are looking for ways to ‘justify’ their unbelief.

‡2:14 But what happens if the ‘government’ does just the opposite, persecutes those who fear God and protects the corrupt? We have spiritual ‘weapons’ (authority) that we should learn how to use, but the time may come when we must say with Peter, “We ought to obey God rather than men” (Acts 5:29), and take the consequences.

§2:17 Since every human being carries the ‘image of God’, that image should be respected (even when it is scarcely recognizable).

*2:18 Slavery was a normal aspect of the culture at that time. Note that belonging to Christ did not automatically change one's social situation; and it did not change a bad boss. However, we can use our spiritual authority to ‘improve’ a bad boss.

†2:21 15% of the Greek manuscripts have “our” and ‘us’ (1st person pl., as in TR, AV and NKJV) while a different 15% have ‘your’ and “you” (2nd person pl., as in the eclectic text currently in vogue and most modern versions)—I take it that the 85% readings are correct (“our” and “you”); in addressing his readers Peter uses the expected 2nd person, but referring to the scope of the benefits of Christ's suffering he properly uses the inclusive 1st person.

‡2:24 This refers to the human body of Jesus that was nailed to the cross. Without a body there is no blood, and without the shedding of blood there is no remission of sins.

§2:24 Since the Lord died for our sins, we should die to them (separate ourselves from them).

*2:24 The Text has the definite article; the point being, I suppose, that there is only one true righteousness, God's.

†2:24 “Wound” is singular in the Text; of course the familiar ‘stripes’ sounds better, but do you really suppose that the marks left by the individual blows produce our healing? It was THE WOUND, when the Father placed on the Son the sins of the world (including yours and mine). In verses 22-25 Peter obviously has Isaiah 53:4-12 in mind, though he creates his own mosaic.

‡2:25 The evidence is split between “our” and ‘your’; both make good sense, but I take it that the best line of transmission reads “our”, inclusive.