Exegetical and Hermeneutical Commentary of 2 Peter 3:6
Whereby the world that then was, being overflowed with water, perished.
6. whereby the world that then was, being overflowed with water, perished ] The “whereby” is not without its difficulties. Does it refer to the whole fact of creation described in the previous verse, or to the two regions in which the element of water was stored up? On the whole, the latter has most in its favour. In the deluge, as described in Gen 7:11, the “fountains of the great deep were broken up, and the windows of heaven were opened,” and so the waters above and those below the firmament were both instruments in the work of judgment. The stress laid on the same fact here and in 1Pe 3:19-20 is, as far as it goes, an evidence in favour of identity of authorship. In the use of the word “perished,” or “was destroyed,” we have a proof, not to be passed over, as bearing indirectly upon other questions of dogmatic importance, that the word does not carry with it the sense of utter destruction or annihilation, but rather that of a change, or breaking up, of an existing order. It is obvious that this meaning is that which gives the true answer to those who inferred from the continuity of the order of nature that there could be no catastrophic change in the future.
Fuente: The Cambridge Bible for Schools and Colleges
Whereby – Di’ hon. Through which, or by means of which. The pronoun here is in the plural number, and there has been much difference of opinion as to what it refers. Some suppose that it refers to the heavens mentioned in the preceding verse, and to the fact that the windows of heaven were opened in the deluge (Doddridge), others that the Greek phrase is taken in the sense of ( dio) whence. Wetstein supposes that it refers to the heavens and the earth. But the most obvious reference, though the plural number is used, and the word water in the antecedent is in the singular, is to water. The fact seems to be that the apostle had the waters mentioned in Genesis prominently in his eye, and meant to describe the effect produced by those waters. He has also twice, in the same sentence, referred to water – out of the water and in the water. It is evidently to these waters mentioned in Genesis, out of which the world was originally made, that he refers here. The world was formed from that fluid mass; by these waters which existed when the earth was made, and out of which it arose, it was destroyed. The antecedent to the word in the plural number is rather that which was in the mind of the writer, or that of which he was thinking, than the word which he had used.
The world that then was … – Including all its inhabitants. Rosenmuller supposes that the reference here is to some universal catastrophe which occurred before the deluge in the time of Noah, and indeed before the earth was fitted up in its present form, as described by Moses in Gen. 1. It is rendered more than probable, by the researches of geologists in modern times, that such changes have occurred; but there is no evidence that Pater was acquainted with them, and his purpose did not require that he should refer to them. All that his argument demanded was the fact that the world had been once destroyed, and that therefore there was no improbability in believing that it would be again. They who maintained that the prediction that the earth would be destroyed was improbable, affirmed that there were no signs of such an event; that the laws of nature were stable and uniform; and that as those laws had been so long and so uniformly unbroken, it was absurd to believe that such an event could occur. To meet this, all that was necessary was to show that, in a case where the same objections substantially might be urged, it had actually occurred that the world had been destroyed. There was, in itself considered, as much improbability in believing that the world could be destroyed by water as that it would be destroyed by fire, and consequently the objection had no real force. Notwithstanding the apparent stability of the laws of nature, the world had been once destroyed; and there is, therefore, no improbability that it may be again. On the objections which might have been plausibly urged against the flood, see the notes at Heb 11:7.
Fuente: Albert Barnes’ Notes on the Bible
Whereby; by which heavens and water, mentioned in the former verse, the fountains of the great deep being broken up, and the windows of heaven opened, Gen 7:11. Or, by the word of God, as the principal cause, and the water as the instrumental, which, at his command, was poured out upon the earth both from above and below.
The world; the earth, with all the inhabitants of it, eight persons excepted. This the apostle allegeth against the forementioned scoffers, who said that all things continued as they were, when yet the flood had made so great a change in the face of the lower creation.
Fuente: English Annotations on the Holy Bible by Matthew Poole
6. WherebyGreek, “Bywhich” (plural). By means of which heavens and earth (inrespect to the WATERSwhich flowed together from both) the then world perished(that is, in respect to its occupants, men and animals, andits then existing order: not was annihilated); for inthe flood “the fountains of the great deep were broken up”from the earth (1) below, and “the windows of heaven“(2) above “were opened.” The earth was deluged by thatwater out of which it had originally risen.
Fuente: Jamieson, Fausset and Brown’s Commentary Critical and Explanatory on the Whole Bible
Whereby the world that then was,…. The old world, as it is called in 2Pe 2:5; and as the Ethiopic version here renders it; the world before the flood, that had stood from the creation 1656 years:
being overflowed with water; by the windows of heaven being opened, and the waters over the earth poured down upon it; and by the fountains of the great deep being broken up in it; thus by these waters from above and below, a general inundation was brought upon it; for that the deluge was universal is clear from hence, and from the account by Moses; for as the earth was filled with violence, and all flesh had corrupted its way, God threatened a general destruction, and which was brought by a flood, which overflowed the whole earth; for all the hills that were under the whole heaven were covered with it, and everything that had life in the dry land died, and every living substance was destroyed that was upon the face of the ground; see Ge 6:11; and hence it follows, that hereby the then world
perished; not as to the substance of it, whatever alteration there might be in its form and position; but as to the inhabitants of it; for all creatures, men and cattle, and the creeping things, and fowls of the heaven, were destroyed, excepting Noah and his wife, and his three sons and their wives, and the creatures that were with him in the ark; see Ge 7:23; and by this instance the apostle shows the falsehood of the above assertion, that all things continued as they were from the beginning of the creation; for the earth was covered with water first, and which, by the command of God, was removed, and, after a long series of time, was brought on it again, and by it drowned; and from whence it also appears, that this sort of reasoning used by those scoffers is very fallacious; for though the heavens and the earth may continue for a long time, as they did before the flood, in the same form and situation, it does not follow from thence that they always will, for the contrary is evident from what follows.
Fuente: John Gill’s Exposition of the Entire Bible
By which means (‘ ). The two waters above or the water and the word of God. Mayor against the MSS. reads ‘ (singular) and refers it to alone.
Being overshadowed (). First aorist passive participle of , old compound, here only in N.T., but see in 2:5.
With water (). Instrumental case of .
Perished (). Second aorist middle indicative of .
Fuente: Robertson’s Word Pictures in the New Testament
The world that then was [ ] . Lit., the then world. The word for world is literally order, and denotes the perfect system of the material universe.
Being overflowed [] . Only here in New Testament. Cataclysm is derived from it.
Fuente: Vincent’s Word Studies in the New Testament
1) “Whereby the world that then was.” (di on ho tote kosmos) “through which things (flood judgments) “the then world order,” that had corrupted all God’s ways, orders, or course of conduct, Gen 6:10-13.
2) “Being overflowed with water, perished:” (Greek hudati kataklustheis apoleto) “by water being inundated perished” or was brought to great ruin, Gen 7:11; Gen 7:21; Gen 7:23; 2Pe 2:5.
Fuente: Garner-Howes Baptist Commentary
It seems, however, strange that he says that the world perished through the deluge, when he had before mentioned the heaven and the earth. To this I answer, that the heaven was then also submerged, that is, the region of the air, which stood open between the two waters. For the division or separation, mentioned by Moses, was then confounded. (Gen 1:6😉 and the word heaven is often taken in this sense. if any wishes for more on this subject, let him read Augustine on the City of God. Lib. 20. (178)
(178) The two verses, the fifth and the sixth, have been differently explained. “The earth,” say some, “subsisting from water and through water,” that is, emerging from water and made firm and solid by means of water; which is true, for through moisture the earth adheres together and becomes a solid mass. Others render the last clause, “in water,” or in the midst of water, that is, surrounded by water; and this is the most suitable meaning.
The δι ᾿ ὧν at the beginning of the sixth verse, refers, according to Beza, Whitby, and others, to the heavens and the earth in the preceding verse, the deluge being occasioned by “the windows of heaven being opened,” and “the fountains of the great deep being broken up.” (Gen 7:11.) “By which (or by the means of which) the world at that time, being overflowed with water, was destroyed.”
The objection to this view is, as justly stated by Macknight, that the correspondence between this verse and the following is thereby lost: the reservation of the world to be destroyed by fire is expressly ascribed, in verse seventh, to God’s word; and to the same ought the destruction of the old world to be ascribed. This is doubtless the meaning required by the passage, but “which” being in the plural, creates a difficulty, and there is no different reading. Macknight solves the difficulty by saying that the plural “which” or whom, refers to “word,” meaning Christ, and “God,” as in the first verse of this chapter, “in both which,” a reference is made to what is implied in “the second Epistle,” that is, the first. He supposes that there is here the same anomalous mode of speaking. But the conjecture which has been made is not improbable, that it is a typographical mistake, ὧν being put for οὗ or for ὃν. Then the meaning would be evident; and the two parts would correspond the one with the other:
5. “For of this they are wilfully ignorant, that the heavens existed of old and the earth (which subsisted from water and in water,) by 6. the word of God; by which the world at that time, being over- 7. flowed with water, was destroyed. But the present heavens and the earth are by His word reserved, being kept for fire to the day of judgment and of the perdition of ungodly men.”
By “word” here is meant command, or power, or the fiat by which the world was created; and by the same it was destroyed, and by the same it will be finally destroyed. Instead of αὐτῶ “the same” Griesbach has introduced into his text αὐτοῦ, “His.” — Ed
Fuente: Calvin’s Complete Commentary
(6) Whereby.The meaning of this is much disputed. The original literally signifies, by means of which things. But what things? The context allows various alternatives: (1) These facts about the Creation; (2) the heavens and the earth; (3) the water out of which, and the water by means of which, the world was made; (4) any or all of these together with the word of God. There is good reason for preferring the second of these. Both the heavens and the earth contributed to the deluge; for then all the fountains of the great deep were broken up, and the windows of heaven were opened (Gen. 7:11). The English whereby is as vague as the original.
The world that then was, . . . perished.So that it is absurd to say that all things continue unchanged since the Creation. The world was so transformed by the deluge that the world previous to that catastrophe perished, chaos for the moment returned, and a new world issued from the crisis. The world that then was, perished is equivalent to He spared not the old world in 2Pe. 2:5.
Fuente: Ellicott’s Commentary for English Readers (Old and New Testaments)
6. Whereby Literally, through which; that is, through, or by means of, the doubly-mentioned waters. By means of the waters the earth was overflowed with water.
Perished Not was annihilated, but wrecked and ruined; so as to require a renewal for any purpose of a moral kingdom of God on earth. A type, though perhaps a feeble one, of the final dissolution. As Adam Clarke notes, the divine fiat separating the oxygen of the atmosphere from the other elements could reduce the world to molten fluid. The same divine fiat could renew the earth in a new and divine perfection. All these changes may, under divine authority, take place in the natural order of cause and effect, or by the special interposition of the divine cause.
Fuente: Whedon’s Commentary on the Old and New Testaments
2Pe 3:6. Whereby , by which things; that is, by the heavens and earth being of such a constitution.
Fuente: Commentary on the Holy Bible by Thomas Coke
2Pe 3:6 . . . .] The question is, to what has retrospect? The answer depends on the meaning attached to: . To appearance this phrase must be regarded as identical with , 2Pe 3:5 ; 2Pe 3:7 (2Pe 3:10 ; 2Pe 3:13 ), and in support of this view appeal may be made also to the as distinguished from , 2Pe 3:7 . On this interpretation, accepted by most expositors (as also in this commentary), can refer only either to and (Gerhard, Brckner, Besser, Wiesinger, in this commentary also), or to alone (Calvin, Pott, etc.) [91] the plural being explained from the circumstance that the water was formerly spoken of both as substance and as medium. The objection to this explanation, however, is that in the account of the flood there is nothing to show that it caused the destruction both of the heaven and of the earth, and that the earth only but not the heaven was submerged; Hofmann accordingly understands by , “the world of living creatures,” as Oecumenius already had done: , . On this view (where only, 2Pe 3:6 , seems to cause difficulty) refers to (Oecumenius, Beza, Wolf, Hornejus, Fronmller, Steinfass, Hofmann). [92]
[91] With this reference Burnet ( Archaeol. Philos . p. 467) agrees, yet he incorrectly explains by: earn ob causam, or: propter illam (aquam); for he strangely assumes that whilst the former world was ex aqua et per aquam constituta, this constitutio perished by the flood, so that therefore the that now is, is no longer, ex aqua et per aquam, but aliter constitutus.
[92] Beda likewise applies to heaven and earth, but interprets (evidently erroneously) thus, that these are not the causa, but the objectum perditionis; i.e. as equivalent to in quibus partibus aere et terra.
Fuente: Heinrich August Wilhelm Meyer’s New Testament Commentary
6 Whereby the world that then was, being overflowed with water, perished:
Ver. 6. Being overflowed with water ] Therefore that is not altogether true, that all things continue as they were at first, as the scoffers affirmed, 2Pe 3:4 .
Fuente: John Trapp’s Complete Commentary (Old and New Testaments)
6 .] by means of which (two) (viz. the waters under the firmament and the waters above the firmament: for in the flood (1) the fountains of the great deep were broken up, and (2) the windows of heaven were opened, Gen 7:11 . The interpretations of have been very various. c. understands to refer to the heavens and the earth, , : and so Bed [22] (but giving a curious meaning to : not, as Huther states, ‘ in quibus partibus ,’ but grammatically, though strangely, ‘ by means of which (its parts perishing), the world, which was made up of heaven and earth, perished :’ “per hc enim perdita mundus qui in his constiterat, periit”), Beza, Wolf, Horneius, De Wette, al. Again Grot., Piscator, Dietlein, al., take for ‘ quamobrem ,’ i. e. because the world was . . ., or because it was . Luther renders wrongly, dennoch nevertheless. Calvin, Pott, al. and recently Huther, understand of waters; and account for the plur. by the as material and the as medium, above, or as Gerhard by understanding “things,” and taking in also the word of God as comprehended) the then world (i. e. the whole state of things then existing. The Apostle’s argument is, as against the assertors of the world’s endurance for ever, that it has once been destroyed , so that their assertion is thereby invalidated. The expression must neither be limited, as c., , , : nor strictly pushed to its utmost extent, as Huther, who maintains that it must be exactly identical with below. The analogy is not exactly, but is sufficiently close: and , as an indefinite common term, takes in the . , which were then instrumental in, and purified by, the destruction, if not altogether swept away by it. Nay the analogy is closer than this: for just as Noah stepped out of the Ark on a new world, the face of the heavens clear, and the face of the earth renewed, so we look for a new heavens and earth ( 2Pe 3:13 ), yet like these others constructed out of the materials of the old) being inundated with water, perished ( , see last note; not, was annihilated , but lost its then form and subsistence as a , and passed into a new state. Only thus, as Huther observes, does the verse come in logically as a contradiction to the saying of the scoffers, ):
[22] Bede, the Venerable , 731; Bedegr, a Greek MS. cited by Bede, nearly identical with Cod. “E,” mentioned in this edn only when it differs from E.
Fuente: Henry Alford’s Greek Testament
2Pe 3:6 . . Mayor and Schmeidel, against the evidence of nearly all manuscripts, read . This is rendered unnecessary (1) if the above rendering of . . . is taken, and the plural refers to the two waters. would refer to alone, or (2) if relers to and taken together, which would in some ways suit the sense of the whole passage better. The false teachers had ignored the agency of the Divine word. ; . . in N.T.; found several times in P.Tebt. e.g. 54 17 ff (B.C. 86) [ ] . “So that in consequence of what happened, it was flooded”; 56 5 f (late ii. B.C.) [ ] “but know about our plain having been inundated”.
Fuente: The Expositors Greek Testament by Robertson
Whereby = By (App-104. 2Pe 3:1) which (means).
the world, &c. Literally the then world (App-129.)
overflowed. Greek. katakluzo. Only here. Compare 2Pe 2:5.
perished. See Joh 17:12.
Fuente: Companion Bible Notes, Appendices and Graphics
6.] by means of which (two) (viz. the waters under the firmament and the waters above the firmament: for in the flood (1) the fountains of the great deep were broken up, and (2) the windows of heaven were opened, Gen 7:11. The interpretations of have been very various. c. understands to refer to the heavens and the earth, , : and so Bed[22] (but giving a curious meaning to : not, as Huther states, in quibus partibus, but grammatically, though strangely, by means of which (its parts perishing), the world, which was made up of heaven and earth, perished: per hc enim perdita mundus qui in his constiterat, periit), Beza, Wolf, Horneius, De Wette, al. Again Grot., Piscator, Dietlein, al., take for quamobrem, i. e. because the world was . . ., or because it was . Luther renders wrongly, dennoch nevertheless. Calvin, Pott, al. and recently Huther, understand of waters; and account for the plur. by the as material and the as medium, above, or as Gerhard by understanding things, and taking in also the word of God as comprehended) the then world (i. e. the whole state of things then existing. The Apostles argument is, as against the assertors of the worlds endurance for ever, that it has once been destroyed, so that their assertion is thereby invalidated. The expression must neither be limited, as c., , , : nor strictly pushed to its utmost extent, as Huther, who maintains that it must be exactly identical with below. The analogy is not exactly, but is sufficiently close: and , as an indefinite common term, takes in the . , which were then instrumental in, and purified by, the destruction, if not altogether swept away by it. Nay the analogy is closer than this: for just as Noah stepped out of the Ark on a new world, the face of the heavens clear, and the face of the earth renewed, so we look for a new heavens and earth (2Pe 3:13), yet like these others constructed out of the materials of the old) being inundated with water, perished (, see last note; not, was annihilated, but lost its then form and subsistence as a , and passed into a new state. Only thus, as Huther observes, does the verse come in logically as a contradiction to the saying of the scoffers, ):
[22] Bede, the Venerable, 731; Bedegr, a Greek MS. cited by Bede, nearly identical with Cod. E, mentioned in this edn only when it differs from E.
Fuente: The Greek Testament
2Pe 3:6. , by means of which) by means of the heavens and the earth; whence the water flowed together.- , the world which then was) that is, the human race: for , destruction, is not here attributed to the heaven and the earth, as Burnet understands it. Comp. the end of 2Pe 3:7 and 2Pe 3:10-13. The deluge was universal.-, perished) There follows an emphatic increase of the sense by the figure Epitasis[18] of judgment and perdition, 2Pe 3:7. With this corresponds the saying, they shall perish, they shall be judged, Rom 2:12. Before the deluge God said: My Spirit shall not always pass sentence (judgment) upon man, Gen 6:3. Judgment is reserved for the last day.
[18] See Append. on this figure.-E.
Fuente: Gnomon of the New Testament
world
kosmos = mankind. (See Scofield “Mat 4:8”).
Fuente: Scofield Reference Bible Notes
2Pe 2:5, Gen 7:10-23, Gen 9:15, Job 12:15, Mat 24:38, Mat 24:39, Luk 17:27
Reciprocal: Gen 6:13 – the earth Gen 7:19 – and all the high hills Gen 7:23 – and Noah Gen 8:21 – as I Pro 21:12 – overthroweth Isa 28:17 – and the waters Nah 1:8 – with Mat 24:37 – General Luk 17:26 – as Heb 11:7 – warned
Fuente: The Treasury of Scripture Knowledge
2Pe 3:6. World is from Kontos, which means the inhabitants of the earth, and that is the world that perished in the flood. The account of the flood is in the book that the scoffers did not deny being true, but their interest in lustful practices had kept them from learning about it.
Fuente: Combined Bible Commentary
2Pe 3:6. whereby the then world being flooded with water perished. The term used for world here is the one (cosmos) which describes it as a system of order and beauty, and presents it (in distinction from another term aeon, which deals with it under the aspect of time) under the aspect of space. It has a wide variety of application in the N. T., being equivalent, e.g., sometimes to the whole material universe (Mat 13:35; Joh 17:5; Joh 21:25; Act 17:4; Rom 1:20), sometimes to mans world or the system of things of which he is the centre (Joh 16:21; 1Co 14:10; 1Jn 3:17), sometimes to the totality of men occupying that system (Joh 1:29; Joh 4:42; 2Co 5:19), and sometimes to the world in the ethical sense of the totality of men living without God and outside His kingdom (Joh 1:10; 1Co 1:20-21; Jas 4:4; 1Jn 3:13). Here the phrase need not be restricted to the idea of the world of men, or of living creatures, but may cover the whole order of things, with the men occupying it, which existed prior to the Deluge. As the participle, which is rendered overflowed by both the A. V. and the R. V., is a form cognate to the noun fur flood (e.g. in chap. 2Pe 2:5), it should be translated flooded here. When it is said that the then world, perished, it is obvious that the meaning is not that it was annihilated, but that it was broken up, had its order destroyed, and was reduced to another form. The verb is the one for which the advocates of annihilation or conditional immortality, as the Scripture doctrine of the end of the unrighteous, claim the sense of absolute destruction, or final extinctiona sense not accordant with such occurrences as the present. The main difficulty here, however, is in the statement of the means by which this perishing came upon the old world. The whereby of the A. V. represents a plural relative, by means of which things, the antecedent to which is not apparent. Some take it to refer to the heavens and the earth, the idea then being either that the antediluvian world of living creatures was destroyed by the heavens and the earth uniting to overflow them with their waters (Hofmann, Beza, Fronmller, etc.), or that the material system perished by means of the very things of which it consisted, in so far as the heavens and the earth, which made its constituents, broke up (Bede). Others (Calvin, Lumby, etc.) suppose it to refer to the before-mentioned water, the writer using the plural relative instead of the singular, because he had in his mind the two several relations of water, as substance and as instrument, to the formation of the old world, or the two several waters, namely, those from above the firmament and those from beneath. In support of this interpretation (which on the whole is the most widely accepted) appeal is made to the Mosaic record, which represents the windows of heaven as opening as well as the fountains of the great deep as being broken up. On the analogy of the indefinite whereunto in 1Pe 2:8, some give the whereby here the general sense of by means of which circumstances, or in consequence of which arrangement of things. Probably the best explanation, however, is to regard the relative as referring to the two things last mentioned, viz. the water and the Word of God; the point then being this, that the old and seemingly constant order of things perished by being overwhelmed with water, the agents of the destruction being the agents that first formed our earth and heavens, namely, the creative word of God and the element of water on which it acted. And this unquestionable fact was sufficient refutation of the argument from all things having continued without change since the beginning of the creation.
Fuente: A Popular Commentary on the New Testament
3:6 {5} Whereby the world that then was, being overflowed with {c} water, perished:
(5) Secondly he sets against them the universal flood, which was the destruction of the whole world.
(c) For the waters returning into their former place, this world, that is to say, this beauty of the earth which we see, and all living creatures which live upon the earth, perished.
Fuente: Geneva Bible Notes
The flood in Noah’s day was Peter’s third example. God spoke again and the earth flooded. "Through which" (a plural relative pronoun in Greek) probably refers to "the Word of God" and "water" (2Pe 3:5).
". . . the author apparently takes the account of the Flood to imply a complete destruction of the created world by water [as opposed to a local flood or to the destruction of human beings only]." [Note: Sidebottom, p. 120.]
". . . in 2Pe 3:6 his [Peter’s] emphasis is on the Flood as a universal judgment on sinful men and women. But he evidently conceives this judgment as having been executed by means of a cosmic catastrophe which affected the heavens as well as the earth." [Note: Bauckham, p. 299.]
This catastrophe involved the opening up of the heavens to deluge the earth with rain (Gen 7:11-12). Peter spoke of world history in three periods divided by two cataclysms: the world before the Flood (2Pe 3:6), the present world (2Pe 3:7), and the future world (2Pe 3:13).