Subscribe
Share
Share
Embed
In 2 Peter 1:19-21, the apostle Peter presents a sure word that believers can depend upon completely. As Peter approaches the end of his earthly ministry, he directs his readers not to apostolic successors or church tradition, but to the prophetic Word of God. This passage reveals that Scripture's testimony is absolutely dependable—more certain than even eyewitness accounts. Peter describes God's Word as a lamp shining in a dark place, illuminating dangers and guiding believers until the day dawns and the morning star rises. The prophetic word encompasses the entire Old Testament and New Testament revelation, all anticipating Christ's return in glory. Unlike cleverly devised myths, Scripture provides a sure word that is fixed in meaning, divine in origin, and utterly reliable. Believers do well to pay attention to this lamp, clinging to its light in a murky world filled with errors and false teaching, until Christ returns to usher in the messianic age.
★ Support this podcast ★
Creators and Guests
What is Kootenai Church Morning Worship?
The expository preaching ministry of Kootenai Community Church by Pastors/Elders Jim Osman, Jess Whetsel, Dave Rich, and Cornel Rasor. This podcast feed contains the weekly sermons preached from the pulpit on Sunday mornings at Kootenai Church.
The Elders/Teachers of Kootenai Church exposit verse-by-verse through whole books of the Bible. These sermons can be found within their own podcast series by visiting the KCC Audio Archive.
Second Peter 1. We are back in this passage. It's been a little bit, so I've got to give somewhat of a recap, but this will be brief for you. We come to a familiar passage, one that describes the nature of Scripture, the significance of Scripture, the work of Scripture, and the value of Scripture. And interestingly, when you talk about the sufficiency of Scripture, which we spent a good amount of time talking about prior to September, before I left for a little bit—we spent a bit of time talking about the sufficiency of Scripture and the implications of that. There is another passage in the New Testament that goes along with 2 Peter 1 that we typically turn to for sort of a proof text or an explanation of the value of Scripture, and that would be 2 Timothy 3:16–17. You may be able to recite this from memory, but I'll read it to you. “All Scripture is God-breathed and profitable for teaching, for reproof, for correction, for training in righteousness, so that the man of God may be equipped, having been thoroughly equipped for every good work.”
Now, like our passage in 2 Peter 1, this describes the inspiration of Scripture. All Scripture is God-breathed. It presents a high view of Scripture, that it is profitable for teaching. It describes the value of Scripture in that passage, that we need it. This is what makes us the men and women of God. It is the Word of God.
Now, what is interesting is that like our passage in 2 Peter 1, those words were written by one of the two most prominent apostles in the New Testament on his deathbed, as it were, at the end of his life as his final words. Both of our passages which point us to the Word of God—that's 2 Timothy 3, or the book of 2 Timothy, and 2 Peter 1—both of those were the final writings of the two most prominent apostles in the New Testament. Second Peter was written by Peter, obviously, and 2 Timothy was written by the apostle Paul. And so we can observe from that what was on the minds of these two great men as they were about to pass from the scene.
Did they point us to a growing magisterium of church officials who would answer every question for us and give us decrees from on high? Did they point us to a continuing prophetic revelatory office? Did they point us to the next pope? Did they point us to personal impressions and nudgings and internal promptings and feelings and personal revelation? Did they point us to the next generation of apostles or an apostolic successor? Did either one of these men say, “Look, my time is coming to an end. I know that my time in this earthly tent is coming to a close, so I want to remind you that there will be yet another generation of apostles that will come after us, and to them you can turn, to them you can listen. They will tell you what to think, what to believe, how to behave”? Neither of these men did this.
Instead, in their final writings, they pointed us to the Word of God. They didn't point to the next pope, more apostles, further prophets, a magisterium, a bunch of church officials, or church tradition. They didn't point to any of that, but instead to the Word. Both of them, to the Word. Here's the value of the Word of God, and that is what the apostles left to us.
So 2 Peter 1. Let's begin reading in verse 16. Verses 16–18 we covered before we took a break from 2 Peter, and then today we're going to be looking at verses 19, 20, and 21. Actually specifically verse 19, but I'll give you kind of an outline for 19, 20, and 21. Second Peter 1. Let's pick it up at verse 16. And we're starting here because you will remember verses 16–21 is all really one argument that he is making. Verse 16:
16 For we did not make known to you the power and coming of our Lord Jesus Christ, following cleverly devised myths, but being eyewitnesses of His majesty.
17 For when He received honor and glory from God the Father, such an utterance as this was made to Him by the Majestic Glory, “This is My beloved Son with whom I am well-pleased”—
18 and we ourselves heard this utterance made from heaven when we were with Him on the holy mountain.
19 And we have as more sure the prophetic word, to which you do well to pay attention as to a lamp shining in a dark place, until the day dawns and the morning star arises in your hearts.
20 Knowing this first of all, that no prophecy of Scripture comes by one's own interpretation.
21 For no prophecy was ever made by the will of man, but men being moved by the Holy Spirit spoke from God. (2 Pet. 1:16–21 LSB)
Now we start in verse 16, as I said, because it is really one argument from verse 16 to verse 21. He is talking about a dawning day, a morning star arising in their heart. He talks about the power and coming of the Lord Jesus Christ in verse 16. Peter is describing there not the first coming of Christ but the second coming of Christ when He comes in His glory, in His kingly majesty, to judge His enemies. He talks about the parousia in verse 16 when he describes the power and coming of the Lord Jesus Christ.
And Peter is teaching about the return of Christ, and in doing so, he says, “We did not follow cleverly devised myths. These are not fables, not something we invented.” But he says in verses 16–18, “I was an eyewitness and an earwitness to His majesty. In other words, we're not telling you about the coming of the Lord as if it's cleverly devised fables that we apostles have come up with, but I saw His kingly majesty.” Peter’s saying, “I know that the Lord is coming because I witnessed a preview of that.”
Now, a month ago, I gave you an outline for verses 16–21. We saw in verses 16–18 that the coming of Christ was previewed by eyewitnesses. Peter gives us his eyewitness testimony of the coming of Jesus at the transfiguration. That's what he's describing there. The transfiguration was a preview of His kingly glory and His kingdom. When that King, who is promised by the Old Testament, returns, He is going to come in kingly glory and He is going to do everything that the Old Testament promised that that coming King is going to do.
Peter's reference to a holy mountain in verse 18 isn't accidental. He's actually alluding very strongly there to the second Psalm. Verse 6: “But as for Me, I have installed My King upon Zion, My holy mountain.” Peter is connecting the transfiguration with Psalm 2 and he's saying that at the transfiguration, Peter, James, and John got an eyewitness glimpse, a preview, as it were, of coming attractions, the return of the Lord Jesus Christ. And he says, “I saw His majesty. So when I talk to you about the coming of the Lord, I'm not talking to you about some myth, something we conjured up. I'm talking to you about something that's actually going to happen.” That's verses 16–18.
Then Peter argues in verses 19–21 that the prophets described the dawning of this day. Not only is it previewed by eyewitnesses, but it was prophesied or predicted by prophets. That's verses 19–20. And that is our passage here this morning.
19 And we have as more sure the prophetic word, to which you do well to pay attention as to a lamp shining in a dark place, until the day dawns and the morning star arises in your hearts.
20 Know this first of all, that no prophecy of Scripture comes by one's own interpretation.
21 For no prophecy was ever made by the will of man, but men being moved by the Holy Spirit spoke from God. (LSB)
Peter says you do well to pay attention, to heed the Word, because not only is the coming of Jesus Christ in glory to judge His enemies something that Peter saw with his own eyes when he heard the Father from Heaven declare His love and approval of the Son—“This is My beloved Son with whom I am well-pleased”—Peter heard that. He saw that. He got a glimpse of that coming glory. But then Peter says this is also something that we have in Old Testament prophetic revelation, and to that you do well to pay attention.
So I see in verses 19–21 that Peter gives us three reasons to give heed to Scripture. And each verse contains one reason, so it makes it real simple. We're going to look at the first reason today, and then we'll look at the next two reasons next Sunday. There are three reasons we should give heed to Scripture in verse 19. First, because its testimony is dependable. We have the more sure prophetic word.
Second, because its meaning is determined. “No prophecy of Scripture comes by one's own interpretation” (v. 20). That is to say that God in giving Scripture has fixed its meaning. Our job is to figure out what it means. Sometimes it's difficult, sometimes it's obvious, but our job is to figure out what it means. But its meaning is determined. Now, if you and I were given a revelation that means one thing one day and another thing the next day, and it means something to you but means something entirely different to me, then I would submit to you that there is no reason at all to give heed to this book. Set a match to it, burn it for warmth, prop up your kitchen table, whatever you want to do to it. If the meaning of this passage is not determined already and fixed by the One who wrote it, then it is meaningless. It doesn't matter what you think it means. It doesn't matter what I think it means. Its meaning is fixed. It's determined, and God determines it.
Third, its origin is divine. Verse 21: “No prophecy was ever made by the will of man, but men being moved by the Holy Spirit spoke from God.” So its testimony is dependable, its meaning is determined, and its origin is divine. Those are three reasons that you and I should give heed to the Word of God.
So let's look at the first one in verse 19. Scripture's testimony is dependable. Peter says, “We have as more sure the prophetic word, to which you do well to pay attention as to a lamp shining in a dark place, until the day dawns and the morning star arises in your hearts.” Now what does Peter have in mind by “prophetic word”? You'll notice that in verse 19, he refers to the prophetic word, in verse 20, prophecy of Scripture, and in verse 21, prophecy. What is Peter describing there?
Now there are some who would say that what Peter has in mind is a very narrow section of the Old Testament—namely Psalm 2, which he has made reference to in 2 Peter 1:18 (“On the holy mountain”). He's referring to Psalm 2 there, and he refers to Isaiah 42, which describes the Father's favor with the Son. And so that's what Peter has in mind, Psalm 2 and Isaiah 42, and that's it. Some people would say that what Peter has in mind is the Old Testament prophets—Isaiah, Jeremiah, Ezekiel, and then the twelve minor prophets at the end of your Old Testament.
I would suggest that, at the bare minimum, what Peter has in mind is the entire Old Testament. And before I limit it to that, I would say by implication he also has in mind New Testament revelation as well. But let's just focus on the Old Testament. I would say that what Peter has in mind here by “prophetic word,” because he's talking about its divine origin and its fixed meaning and its dependability, he doesn't mean just the prophetic sections. He means the entire Old Testament.
Now, the entire Old Testament is prophetic, not in the sense that every line of it is prophecy. That's the wrong way to think of the Old Testament, that I have to read every verse and find in every verse a prophetic anticipation of something future. But we can say that on the whole, the entire Old Testament anticipates something else, doesn't it? It looks forward from the very beginning of that testimony when the Lord said that the seed of the woman would crush the serpent's head. That entire testimony of the Old Testament looks forward to and anticipates the coming and the consummation and the wrapping up of everything that was started in the garden. And so in that sense, it is anticipatory and prophetic. It is the prophetic Old Testament.
There are parts of the Old Testament that we don't typically think of as prophecy, like the Psalms, for instance, but the Psalms are filled with prophetic statements. Psalm 2, Psalm 65, even Psalm 37. “The righteous will inherit the land” (Ps. 37:29). When will that happen? That's going to happen in the eschaton at the end of times. Then the righteous will get the land that was promised to Abraham.
So it's not just the prophetic books that are prophetic, but actually there are narrative passages of the Old Testament that are prophetic as well, like 2 Samuel 7, which describes the promise of God to David that God would raise up a Son for David who would sit on his throne and rule the nations forever. That was a prophecy, but that's in the historical section, the narrative section.
And in fact, Peter, later on in this passage when he talks about the morning star, alludes to a prophecy in the book of Numbers. Even in the book of Numbers there are references to this coming Messiah. So Peter has in mind here not just the narrow application of Psalm 2 and Isaiah 42 and not just Old Testament prophets, and I would suggest to you not just the entire Old Testament, but the New Testament, which has words of prophecy as well and anticipation of the coming kingdom. Peter has that in mind as well. If its origin is divine and if it is Scripture, Peter is referring to it here because the New Testament also anticipates the consummation of all things. We're waiting for that. And Peter has that in mind when he talks about the day of the Lord. So he anticipates the culmination of all of world history.
And don't forget, Peter calls the apostle Paul's writing Scripture later on in 2 Peter 3. So Peter and the apostles were aware that they were writing Scripture, and they were aware that the others were writing Scripture. That is why Peter can refer to Paul's writings as Scripture. Paul in 2 Timothy—I think it's 2 Timothy; it's in one of the Timothys—refers to Luke's writings as Scripture. They were well aware that they were writing out the prophetic Word of God. So when Peter talks about it being dependable and its meaning being fixed and its origin being divine, he has in mind the entire Old Testament, but by implication, he means New Testament Scripture, which was being written, and he was aware of that at the time. He means that as well.
Now Peter describes that prophetic word as “made more sure” or “more sure” or “certain,” depending on your translation. Now this is a bit of a confusing phrase. I kind of want to walk through with you three possible interpretations of that phrase. One of them is OK, one of them is really bad, and one of them I think is spot-on. So I will give you the really bad one first. Let's begin with that.
Some have suggested that when Peter says that we have the prophetic word made more sure, that what he is saying is that the prophetic word, the Old Testament Scriptures, is validated or made certain in our minds and our hearts by his experience in verses 16–18, that the prophetic word is made certain by Peter's experience. In other words, what Peter is saying is, “I saw the transfiguration glory of Christ, and my experience and eyewitness of that event makes me certain that what the Old Testament described is true and valid and real.” So the Old Testament prophetic word is made sure or certain to us, validated, as it were, by Peter's experience. Do you follow me?
Now here's why that is really bad. That is really bad because Scripture itself is its own self-authenticating revelation and doesn't need me to validate it. It doesn’t need our experience to validate it. That's the next verse, verse 20. Its meaning is fixed. And God does not need me to swear to His truthfulness. Right? Can we all agree with that? God doesn't need me to swear to His truthfulness, nor does He need my experience to make certain what He has already revealed. Scripture would mean what it meant and what it means even if I never existed. Even if I never had any experiences whatsoever, Scripture still is true. And even if my every experience contradicted Scripture, Scripture would still be true. So our experiences don't validate or make certain the Old Testament text or the prophetic revelation.
Second, here's the meaning that is kind of possible, and I think that there's some validity to this, but we’ve kind of got to walk through this thought process as well. The prophetic word is better than Peter’s experience. So in other words, in verses 16–18, “I saw this on the mountain. I was with Him. I heard the testimony. All of that is true. This is my eyewitness testimony. Here's what I'm here to tell you. I'm here to vouch for that. But the prophetic word of the Old Testament is even more certain than my experience.” So by this understanding, Peter is comparing his experience with the Old Testament text and saying that the Old Testament prophets’ revelation is more certain and more sure and more reliable than even my personal experience. Do you follow it? We have the prophetic word made more sure. So this understands “more sure” as a comparative. He's comparing his experience, the validity of that, with the Old Testament prophecy and saying one is far more certain than the other.
Now, what Peter saw on the Mount of Transfiguration was an incredible and remarkable thing. It was extraordinary in every way. He was an eyewitness of it. The rest of us know of it by their firsthand testimony. What Peter experienced was incredible. But I do not think that Peter here is trying to compare his experience with the prophetic word because that would undermine his point.
Instead, Peter is offering two valid lines of argument. We know that the return of Christ is certain, something that the false teachers he addresses in chapter 2 were denying. We know that the return of Christ is certain because, Peter says, number one, my first argument, I saw a preview of His coming glory. Second argument, we have the certain prophetic word that is sure to us. These are two valid lines of argument that Peter is giving. He's not comparing one with the other—listen carefully—as if to suggest that his eyewitness testimony is pretty good, but his eyewitness testimony is not as reliable and truthful as the prophetic word is. I don't believe that Peter here is trying to undermine his own argument from his eyewitness testimony.
Now, if this interpretation of Scripture, if you've heard this before, that Peter here is comparing the two, if you've heard that, you might've heard it from me because that's what I taught on this passage in the past. I'm here to tell you I don't think that that's what he's saying anymore. Now, listen, it is true that our experience is not validated by Scripture, that our experience does not validate Scripture. And it's true that our experience is not as certain and sure as the Word of God. That is true. But I don't think that's what Peter's point is. Peter is not suggesting that we take apostolic eyewitness with a grain of salt but really believe what is written. I think that these two things are going together. They are two arguments, and they're equally valid. And that is what Peter is saying.
So that brings us now to our third possibility, and that is that the prophetic word agrees with Peter's experience. Now, let me back up and give you these two positions that I've already critiqued one more time, and I want to show you some modern expressions of the same mentality. So the first one, that my experience validates Scripture. This, by the way, is a very modern concept. You see this all the time, everywhere you look inside of evangelicalism, and here's how it plays out. So I'm going to come up to you and say, “I have this book. It's about a four-year-old's testimony of going to Heaven during a surgery, and he saw the face of Jesus. Read this.” And then you read the book and you find out that this kid, while drugged up, had some experience, and he's convinced that the experience validates Scripture. So you read his experience about going to Heaven, and whether it's Colton Burpo, or whether it's Don Piper’s 90 Minutes in Heaven or Eben Alexander or whoever the latest person is who claims to have made a trip to Heaven and lived to come back to tell us all about it, this is their approach: “I had this experience. Look at my experience. Oh, see this thing in my experience? Well, it's a lot like this thing here that Scripture says. See, Scripture is real. Scripture's true. How do we know Scripture's true? Because I had this experience and I'm here to tell you about it.” That is the subtle bait and switch of all of those approaches to truth. So that's how that view plays out in modern evangelicalism.
The second view, that our experience is inadequate to or less than the prophetic word—here's what you have happening inside of evangelicalism. You will have people to whom you will say, “Scripture says X, Y, and Z.” And they will say, “But my experience tells me A, B, and C. So I have to take the Word of God and form it, mold it, and then shoehorn it into my experience so that my experience becomes the test for truth and the Word of God becomes the prop for truth.” Those are two approaches to truth and to understanding that are common in modern evangelicalism, and both of them are wrong.
So now that leads us to the third possible interpretation of this, and that is that Peter's simply saying, “My experience and the prophetic word, these are describing the same event. This is absolutely certain, and I have experienced this. These two truths go together.” This, by the way, is the apostolic argument for the resurrection when you read the New Testament. This is how the apostles argued. It was necessary that the Christ rise from the dead because the certain Word of God promised it, and we are eyewitnesses of that very thing. My eyewitness testimony and the prophecy of Scripture, they agree. These are two arguments that are irrefutable, and that's what Peter is doing in this passage. “I have eyewitness testimony. I saw the coming regal, kingly glory. And the Word of God, which is absolutely certain, testifies to this as well.”
So this third interpretation takes it not as a comparative—I'm not comparing Scripture with my experience and weighing one against the other—but instead takes this “more certain” as just a superlative. Peter's simply saying the Word of God is absolutely certain. In this instance, it agrees with his eyewitness testimony. The coming of Christ will be a literal, physical, real event in time and history, yet future to us.
Now, not to put too fine a point on this, but—I'm going to touch on this, but I'm not going to iron this out for you. If the transfiguration of Christ and the prophetic testimony both describe the same thing—that is, the coming of Christ—if those both describe the same event, one a preview and one a prediction, then what we have in the transfiguration provides us an interpretation of the prophetic word. Again, I don't want to put too fine a point on it, but don't miss it. If what those two things are describing is the same event, then the transfiguration is God's exegesis of the prophetic Scriptures, which means that all of the prophecies regarding the coming of Christ, we don't take those and just spiritualize them and say, “Well, what it’s really talking about is when the Spirit comes to dwell in your heart.” “Well, what about bodily resurrection?” “Well, is Jesus raised up in your heart? Do you believe that in your heart? Then really, He's come back to you, hasn't He? These are just spiritual promises regarding spiritual realities. We can't take them too literally.”
Peter would say, “No, the Old Testament predicted that He was going to come in glory, and I got to see that very thing happen,” which means the transfiguration is God's exegesis of Old Testament prophecy. Do you want to know how to interpret Old Testament prophecy? I'd suggest you interpret it the same way God interprets it. And we have that in the transfiguration. Christ will return in kingdom glory and regal majesty to fulfill Old Testament prophecy, and therefore, Scripture's testimony to that event is dependable. It is certain. It is more sure.
And Peter says it is like “a lamp shining in a dark place,” to which we do well to pay attention (2 Pet. 1:19). It is a lamp shining in a dark place. That analogy that Scripture is a light or a lamp, that is something that is, quite frankly, all the way through the Old Testament in so many different places.
Psalm 119:105: “Your word is a lamp to my feet and a light to my path.”
Psalm 119:130: “The unfolding of Your words give light; it gives understanding to the simple.”
Psalm 43:3: “Oh send out Your light and Your truth, let them lead me; let them bring me to Your holy mountain and to Your dwelling places.”
Peter is pointing his readers, and thus us, to the Word of God, which is like a lamp in a dark place. And the word translated “dark” means murky or kind of hazy, foggy, uncertain. Imagine, if you will, somebody holding a lamp in a room. Imagine this room was entirely dark, the kind of darkness that you get when you go down into the center of the earth, into a cave that's a mile below the surface, and they turn out all the lights, and you feel that the darkness almost pierces through you at a molecular level. Imagine that this room was that, and you had somebody in there with a lamp. And further, imagine that the room itself was filled with errors and dangers and pitfalls and wild animals and a hundred things that wanted to kill you. Imagine that. If that's the picture in your head, and if you have somebody there with a lamp, how would you treat that lamp? What would you do with that lamp? How would you respond to that lamp?
Something tells me you would huddle around that, really close to that lamp, because that lamp is going to illumine all of the dangers and be a light to your feet and a lamp to your path. That's the imagery that Peter is using. You do well to pay heed to Scripture, which, in this dark and fallen and murky world, is like a lamp. And you hold it in your hands. You have it in your lap. You have it on your phone. You have it in your home. You have it in your very own language. And people all over the world throughout church history would have killed and died, and some of them did, to possess what we possess in terms of God's Scripture.
It is a lamp to us in a murky place until that day dawns. What day? It's the coming of the Lord, the parousia, the power and coming of Christ. When that dawn happens and Christ returns in power and coming glory (v. 16), when that day dawns, that is the day of the Lord. Then we won't need the lamp because we will have full illumination at that point, when He returns. But until that time, we need the lamp to illumine our steps and to guide us lest we fall prey to the false teachers and the errors and the lies and the deceptions of the world and in the church and out around us that constantly threaten to undo us. This is why we need the lamp.
This is why Peter is pointing his readers not to a succession of apostles or a pope or to a prophetic office or future prophets in the church but to the Word of God. That's the lamp. Not other men, not other luminaries, not magisteriums, not church councils, not tradition. The lamp is the Word of God.
And Peter says you do well to take heed to that until that day dawns, the day described by Jesus in Matthew 24:30. “And then the sign of the Son of Man will appear in the sky, and then all the tribes of the earth will mourn, and they will see the Son of Man coming on the clouds of the sky with power and great glory” (Matt. 24:30). Matthew 25:31: “But when the Son of Man comes in His glory, and all the angels with Him, then He will sit on His glorious throne.” That's what Peter got a glimpse of at the transfiguration, that return, that coming. The day of the Lord will be glory and deliverance to His people, and it will be certain judgment and destruction to His enemies.
Let me give you some Old Testament passages. Isaiah 13:
6 Wail, for the day of Yahweh is near! It will come as destruction from the Almighty.
7 Therefore all hands will fall limp, and every man's heart will melt.
8 They will be terrified, pains and labor pangs will take hold of them; they will writhe like a woman in labor, they will look at one another in astonishment, their faces aflame.
9 Behold, the day of Yahweh is coming, cruel, with fury and burning anger, to make the land a desolation; and He will exterminate its sinners from it.
10 For the stars of heaven and their constellations will not flash forth their light; the sun will be dark when it rises and the moon will not shed its light.
11 Thus I will punish the world for its evil and the wicked for their iniquity; I will also put an end to the pride of the arrogant and bring low the lofty pride of the ruthless. (Isa. 13:6–11 LSB)
Now passages like that are not anomalies in the Old Testament. I could read you dozens upon dozens of such passages, entire chapters that read like that about the day of the Lord. The day of the Lord is a day of judgment and the execution of divine wrath. And here's something to understand about the day of the Lord. There were a lot of little days of the Lord in the Old Testament because all of the judgments in the Old Testament were harbingers and promises and reminders of what eventually is to come. Every last one of them was supposed to catch the attention of everybody and say, “But a greater and more thorough judgment is certainly to come. It is on the horizon.”
Amos 5:18:
18 Woe, you who are longing for the day of Yahweh, for what purpose will the day of Yahweh be to you? It will be darkness and not light;
19 as when a man flees from a lion and a bear meets him; or he goes home, leans his hand against the wall, and a snake bites him.
20 Will not the day of Yahweh be darkness instead of light, even thick darkness with no brightness in it? (Amos 5:18–20 LSB)
Now you might be thinking to yourself, “But hold on, Jim, you just talked about the day of the Lord dawning and being a light. How are you now describing it in the Old Testament as a day of darkness?” That is because to the wicked, the day of the Lord is a day of darkness. But for the righteous, it is a day of light.
1 “For behold, the day is coming, burning like a furnace; and all the arrogant and every worker of wickedness will be chaff; and the day that is coming will set them aflame,” says Yahweh of hosts, “so that it will leave them neither root nor branch.
2 But for you who fear My name, the sun of righteousness will rise with healing in its wings; and you will go forth and skip about like calves from the stall.
3 And you will tread down the wicked, for they will be ashes under the soles of your feet on the day which I am preparing,” says Yahweh of hosts. (Mal. 4:1–3 LSB)
That day of judgment will be a day of darkness, and men will pray and ask that the mountains should crush them and cover them rather than have to stand before the fury of Yahweh of hosts. They will be destroyed in that judgment. There will be no light in it for them. But for the righteous, it's like the dawning of a new day. For the wicked, it is a day of darkness and judgment and destruction. Peter describes that “the day of the Lord will come like a thief, in which the heavens will pass away with a roar and the elements will be destroyed with intense heat, and the earth and its works will be found out” (2 Pet. 3:10).
So we have the lamp, which shines like a light to us in a dark world, that illumines for us the pitfalls, the dangers, the errors, and the lies so that we may walk safely in this world. And we cling to that lamp, trusting it, loving it, obeying it, reading it, knowing it, walking in the light of its truth, until that day dawns, the coming of the Lord, and—look at the next phrase—“the morning star arises in your hearts” (2 Pet. 1:19). What is that a reference to? The morning star arises in your hearts. Now that sounds awfully spiritual, doesn't it? That sounds like a hippie wrote those words. The morning star. Morning Star is something you would name your child in the sixties. And rising in your hearts, like what's going on here, Peter?
The word that is translated "morning star” is a Greek word from which we get our English word phosphorus. It means “light bringer.” It was the name for the planet Venus in the ancient world. It would appear above the horizon before the dawning of the sun would come. So the morning star would appear first, and then the sun would come up after that in the heavens. Peter is not here referring to Venus. He's not referring to anything other than the Lord Jesus Christ because the reference to Christ as a star was a messianic term that went back all the way to the book of Numbers 24:17. It comes out of Balaam's prophecy. In Numbers 24:17, Balaam said, “I see him, but not now; I behold him, but not near; a star shall come forth from Jacob [that's a messianic title for Christ], a scepter shall rise from Israel, and shall crush through the forehead of Moab, and tear down all the sons of Sheth.”
In Revelation 22:16, Jesus says this: “I, Jesus, sent My angel to bear witness to you of these things for the churches. I am the root and the descendant of David, the bright morning star.” Christ Himself is the star.
So what is Peter talking about here in 2 Peter 1 when he talks about the day dawning and the morning star rising in our hearts? Peter is saying that the return of Christ is going to usher in a new age. And when that morning star rises, immediately following Him will be the dawn of that messianic age and the fulfillment of all of the Old Testament expectation and prophecy. He will come and He will return at the beginning of that, not at the end of that. He will return at the beginning of that because He is the morning star. So He comes, and that day the messianic age then dawns with His arrival.
And when Peter says that that star rises in our hearts, he's not suggesting that this is a spiritual reality that we only experience in our hearts when we're born again or anything like that. Peter is simply saying that when that day dawns, the presence of Christ will so transform the righteous, it will so illumine the hearts and the minds of the righteous, that it will be like the sun has arisen not just upon our faces when we see Him as He is, but it will be as if the sun itself burns within our hearts.
Paul describes this reality in 2 Corinthians 4:6 when he says, “For God, who said, ‘Light shall shine out of darkness,’ is the One who has shone in our hearts to give the Light of the knowledge of the glory of God in the face of Christ.” And Paul is saying there that in your regeneration, God has shone in Christ the light of truth upon your hearts. So you have been changed inwardly.
But listen, when that day comes and we see Him as He is, face-to-face, that moment of your salvation when the light dawned on your heart and your mind and you were transformed within, that is going to seem like a night-light compared to what we hope for and look forward to. When that day dawns and that morning star rises in our hearts, that day is going to shine forth in us and will transform us. Then we'll reach the full and ultimate and final consummation of knowing God in Christ when we see Him as He is. That is the forward-looking hope of the people of God.
Our hope is not misplaced because Scripture is dependable. We long for the glorious appearing of our great God and savior, Jesus Christ. And that hope does not rest on cleverly devised myths and fables. It is certain. It is utterly dependable. We have eyewitness testimony from those who have previewed it. And we have the testimony of the most certain Word of God. And for now, we do well to give heed to that word, like a man or a woman clinging to a lamp in a dark room filled with pitfalls.
Peter says in 1 Peter 1:13, “Therefore, having girded your minds for action, being sober in spirit, fix your hope completely on the grace to be brought to you at the revelation of Jesus Christ.” We are called to live our lives every day in light of and with expectation that the Lord could return today. That is our hope. And until that day happens, we cling to His promises given to us in the Word of God. They are a lamp now. Eventually, the lamp will be eclipsed by the light of the sun of righteousness, who will rise with healing in His wings. But until that day, we cling to the Word of God.