Peter’s Warning Against Antinomian Interpretations of Paul’s Letters (2 Peter 3:15–17)
In 2 Peter 3:15–17, Peter warns his readers against those who twist Paul’s letters, and he associates their misinterpretations with “the error of lawless people.” In this article, I examine both the immediate and broader context of this passage as well as the specific language Peter uses to characterize those who twist Paul’s letters. I argue that 2 Peter 3:15–17 constitutes a warning against antinomians who misinterpret Paul’s letters to justify and encourage transgression of the Law of Moses.
Righteousness, Wickedness, and Coming Judgment: An Overview of 2 Peter
Peter opens his second epistle by acknowledging that his readers have obtained “faith” through the righteousness of the Messiah (2 Pet. 1:1). He then urges them to “make every effort to supplement [their] faith” (2 Pet. 1:5) with qualities such as virtue, knowledge, self-control, steadfastness, godliness, brotherly affection, and love (2 Pet. 1:5–7). Without these qualities, their faith will become “ineffective or unfruitful” (2 Pet. 1:8), but if they “practice these qualities,” they will “never fall” (2 Pet. 1:10). Thus, from the outset, Peter emphasizes that genuine faith is more than mere intellectual belief but must be evidenced through righteous conduct.[1]
This emphasis on righteous conduct continues throughout the remainder of the epistle. In chapter 2, Peter draws upon several biblical examples to illustrate the contrast between the righteous, who are delivered from judgment, and the wicked, who face destruction.[2] He describes Noah as “a herald of righteousness” (2 Pet. 2:5) and Lot as a “righteous man” (2 Pet. 2:8). In contrast, he describes the angels as having “sinned” (2 Pet. 2:4), Noah’s generation as “ungodly” (2 Pet. 2:5), and the inhabitants of Sodom and Gomorrah as “wicked” people who engaged in “sensual conduct” and “lawless deeds” (2 Pet. 2:6–8). Peter then turns his attention to the false teachers of his own time, declaring that they have “forsak[en] the right way” and followed “the way of Balaam” (2 Pet. 2:15). Although these teachers promise “freedom” (2 Pet. 2:19), Peter portrays them as having turned away from the “way of righteousness” and the “holy commandment” (2 Pet. 2:21).[3]
In chapter 3, Peter rebukes scoffers who mock the promise of God’s coming judgment and describes them as those who walk according to their own sinful desires (2 Pet. 3:3–4). As Jakub M. Pogonowski observes, this language of “walking” draws upon a recurring biblical metaphor in which walking refers to practical conduct, particularly obedience to the commandments of the Torah[4] For example, Deuteronomy 5:33 calls Israel to “walk in the way that the LORD your God has commanded you.” Similarly, in Luke 1:6, Zechariah and Elizabeth are described as “righteous before God, walking blamelessly in all the commandments and statutes of the Lord.” Thus, Peter’s description of the scoffers as those who walk according to their own sinful desires stands in contrast to the biblical emphasis on walking according to God’s commandments.
Peter goes on to declare that the “ungodly” will ultimately face destruction on the day of judgment (2 Pet. 3:7). Yet the apparent delay of that judgment does not indicate that God is indifferent to wickedness. Rather, as Peter explains, God is exercising patience, allowing time for people to “reach repentance” (2 Pet. 3:9). In the meantime, Peter urges his readers to pursue “holiness and godliness” as they await the coming day of judgment (2 Pet. 3:11). As Pogonowski observes, God’s patience “should not be interpreted as an excuse for inappropriate conduct,” but as an “opportunity to change one’s behavior.”[5]
Throughout his epistle, Peter consistently emphasizes the importance of righteous conduct. Those who walk in righteousness are delivered from judgment, while those who persist in wickedness face destruction. This recurring contrast provides the context for understanding Peter’s subsequent warning about those who twist Paul’s letters.
The Error of Lawless People
Immediately before referring to Paul’s letters, Peter again emphasizes the importance of righteous conduct:
Therefore, beloved, since you are waiting for these, be diligent to be found by him without spot or blemish, and at peace. (2 Peter 3:14)
The phrase “waiting for these” refers to the anticipated day of judgment and the promised “new heavens and a new earth in which righteousness dwells” (2 Pet. 3:13). As Pogonowski observes, the opening word “therefore” connects this exhortation to Peter’s preceding discussion of judgment, repentance, and righteous conduct.[6] In view of these coming events, Peter urges his readers to be found “without spot or blemish,” echoing his earlier exhortation to pursue “holiness and godliness” (2 Pet. 3:11). This emphasis on holiness recalls 1 Peter 1:14–16, where the exhortation to holy conduct is explicitly grounded in the commandment from Leviticus: “You shall be holy, for I am holy” (1 Pet. 1:16; cf. Lev. 11:44–45; 19:2). This parallel suggests that the call to holiness in 2 Peter may similarly be understood in light of the Law of Moses, which 1 Peter explicitly invokes as a standard for holiness. Peter’s subsequent reference to Paul’s letters therefore follows an exhortation to righteous conduct rooted in the broader biblical emphasis on holiness.
Peter then writes:
And count the patience of our Lord as salvation, just as our beloved brother Paul also wrote to you according to the wisdom given him, as he does in all his letters when he speaks in them of these matters. (2 Peter 3:15–16)
Significantly, Peter presents Paul’s teaching as consistent with his own exhortations to righteous conduct. The reference to “these matters” appears to encompass the themes Peter has just discussed, particularly God’s patience, the coming judgment, and the call to pursue holiness. Indeed, Paul similarly urges believers to pursue holiness and righteous conduct, warning against the misuse of freedom as an excuse for sin and exhorting them to remain blameless in anticipation of the Lord’s coming (e.g., Rom. 6:15–19; Gal. 5:13–23; 1 Thess. 4:1–8; 5:23). Thus, rather than presenting Paul’s teaching as contrary to his own, Peter portrays the two apostles as sharing the same fundamental ethical concerns.
Nevertheless, Peter acknowledges that certain individuals distort Paul’s writings:
There are some things in them that are hard to understand, which the ignorant and unstable twist to their own destruction, as they do the other Scriptures. You therefore, beloved, knowing this beforehand, take care that you are not carried away with the error of lawless people and lose your own stability. (2 Peter 3:16–17)
Peter describes those who distort Paul’s letters as “ignorant and unstable.” The Greek adjective translated “ignorant” (ἀμαθεῖς) conveys the sense of being unlearned or lacking instruction.[7] Although Peter does not specify what knowledge these individuals lack, Pogonowski argues that their deficiency may have been an inadequate understanding of the Hebrew Scriptures, which form the foundation of much of Paul’s reasoning.[8] This is particularly significant for interpreting Paul’s statements about the Law of Moses, many of which presuppose familiarity with Israel’s Scriptures and the Jewish debates surrounding the inclusion of Gentiles in the people of God.
Pogonowski further suggests that Paul’s original audiences would have possessed contextual knowledge that later readers might not have shared. The Book of Acts repeatedly portrays Paul preaching in synagogues, where Jews and Gentiles alike heard the Hebrew Scriptures taught (Acts 13:14–16, 26, 43–48; 14:1; 17:1–4; 18:4). These synagogue settings would have provided at least some of Paul’s Gentile hearers with familiarity with the Hebrew Scriptures and the debates surrounding Gentile inclusion in the community of believers. Later readers who lacked this synagogue background may therefore have been more susceptible to misunderstanding Paul’s arguments, particularly his nuanced discussions of the Torah.[9] This offers a plausible explanation for why Peter describes those who twist Paul’s letters as ignorant.
Peter also states that these individuals twist Paul's letters “to their own destruction” (2 Pet. 3:16). This language recalls his earlier warnings about the destruction awaiting false teachers (2 Pet. 2:1, 3, 12) and the judgment of the “ungodly” (2 Pet. 3:7). In chapter 2, Peter describes the false teachers as having turned away from the “way of righteousness” and “the holy commandment delivered to them” (2 Pet. 2:21). These parallels suggest that there is a connection between those who distort Paul’s letters and the false teachers condemned throughout the epistle. Thus, Peter presents their error as more than an intellectual misunderstanding; the error encourages unrighteous conduct and ultimately leads to destruction.
The nature of this error becomes clearer in Peter’s concluding warning: “Take care that you are not carried away with the error of lawless people and lose your own stability” (2 Pet. 3:17). The expression translated “lawless people” (ἀθέσμων) is particularly noteworthy. Within 2 Peter, the same term appears in 2 Peter 2:7, where it describes the wicked inhabitants of Sodom. Its use in 2 Peter 3:17 therefore recalls Peter’s earlier contrast between righteous conduct and lawless behavior. Significantly, the term also appears in Jewish Greek literature in contexts involving transgression of the Law of Moses. For example, Philo uses the term when introducing the curses pronounced upon those who violate the Torah. After discussing the blessings associated with obedience, he writes:
These are the blessings invoked upon good men, men who fulfil the laws by their deeds, which blessings will be accomplished by the gift of the bounteous God, who glorifies and rewards moral excellence because of its likeness to Himself. We must now investigate the curses delivered against the law-breakers and transgressors [ἀθέσμων]. (Philo, On Rewards and Punishments 126)[10]
Philo then proceeds to discuss the punishments prescribed for disobedience in Leviticus 26 and Deuteronomy 28. Because he is explicitly discussing the blessings and curses associated with obedience to the Law of Moses, his use of ἀθέσμων (“transgressors”), alongside the related term ἐκνόμων (“law-breakers”), provides a clear example of the word being applied to those who transgress the Torah. This demonstrates that ἀθέσμων, the same term Peter employs in 2 Peter 3:17, could refer specifically to those who violate the Law of Moses.
Read in light of the broader context of 2 Peter, this parallel lends support to the interpretation that the “error of lawless people” involves more than a general disregard for moral conduct. Throughout the epistle, Peter emphasizes righteous living and condemns those who abandon the “way of righteousness” and “the holy commandment” (2 Pet. 2:21). As discussed above, the biblical language of walking in the way of righteousness is also closely associated with obedience to God’s commandments. Pogonowski argues that Peter’s emphasis on obedience to God’s commandments should not be understood as limited to the moral requirements of the Torah. He observes that “Nothing in the text indicates that the author of 2 Peter distinguished between moral and ceremonial or Jewish commandments,” noting that this distinction was introduced later in Christian interpretation. Consequently, he concludes that “it cannot be presumed that he requires the addressees to adhere to ethical or moral rules, with the exclusion of other Torah commandments.”[11] Restricting Peter’s condemnation of lawlessness to violations of moral commandments alone therefore risks imposing a later theological distinction on the text. In the absence of evidence that Peter makes such a distinction, his warning against the “error of lawless people” may reasonably be understood as encompassing the rejection of the Law of Moses more broadly.
In sum, 2 Peter 3:15–17 provides substantial grounds for understanding Peter’s warning as directed against antinomians who distort Paul’s letters to justify transgression of the Law of Moses. The broader context of the epistle consistently emphasizes obedience, holiness, and the danger of turning away from the way of righteousness. Peter’s warning against being “carried away with the error of lawless people” suggests that these individuals were interpreting Paul’s writings in ways that encouraged disregard for the Torah. Rather than presenting Paul’s teaching as contrary to his own exhortations, Peter portrays the two apostles as fundamentally aligned in their emphasis on righteous conduct. The error, therefore, lies not in Paul’s teaching itself, but in the misinterpretation of his writings to justify lawlessness.
Confusion About the Delay of the Messiah’s Return?
The interpretation advanced above has important implications for understanding Peter’s warning about Paul’s letters. If the “error of lawless people” involves the rejection of the Law of Moses, then Peter is warning against interpretations of Paul that encourage believers to disregard the Torah. This interpretation challenges the common assumption that Paul’s letters teach believers to disregard the Law of Moses. Instead, such readings of Paul reflect the very error that Peter warns against.
An alternative interpretation that avoids this implication has been proposed by R. L. Solberg, a prominent critic of pronomian interpretations of the New Testament. Rather than understanding Peter’s warning as a condemnation of those who distort Paul’s letters to justify disregard for the Law of Moses, Solberg argues that Peter is addressing confusion about the apparent delay of the Messiah’s return. He states:
What exactly is Peter talking about when he says that some things are hard to understand? What “things” is he talking about? Well, if we read the whole chapter, we find that Peter is talking about the delay of Christ’s return. That’s the issue that’s hard to understand. He says humans are impatient, and it’s hard to know why Jesus is so slow in returning.[12]
Solberg is correct that the apparent delay of the Messiah’s return is an important subject in 2 Peter 3. Peter responds to those who question the fulfillment of God’s promises and explains that the Lord’s apparent delay reflects his patience and desire for repentance (2 Pet. 3:3–10). Moreover, Peter’s reference to Paul follows directly from this discussion, making it plausible that the timing of the Messiah’s return is among the matters addressed in Paul’s letters. It is therefore possible that misunderstandings concerning this subject are included in Peter’s warning.
Nevertheless, Solberg’s interpretation fails to account adequately for the nature and consequences of the error Peter describes. As Pogonowski observes, such an interpretation “does not explain why this kind of misinterpretation would result in destruction.”[13] As discussed above, the language of destruction appears repeatedly throughout the epistle in connection with the judgment awaiting the wicked and the false teachers (2 Pet. 2:1, 3, 12; 3:7). Peter states that those who distort Paul’s writings do so “to their own destruction” (2 Pet. 3:16) before warning his readers against being carried away by the “error of lawless people” (2 Pet. 3:17). These expressions indicate that Peter’s concern extends beyond confusion about the timing of the Messiah’s return. Rather, he associates the distortion of Paul’s letters with the lawlessness and unrighteous conduct condemned throughout the epistle.
Furthermore, Peter’s treatment of his readers differs significantly from his description of those who distort Paul’s letters. When addressing the apparent delay of the Messiah’s return, he calls his readers “beloved” and reassures them that the Lord remains faithful to his promises (2 Pet. 3:8–10). By contrast, those who distort Paul’s letters are characterized as “ignorant and unstable,” and their misinterpretations lead to destruction (2 Pet. 3:16). Although these distinctions do not entirely exclude a connection between the distortion of Paul’s writings and the expectation of the Messiah’s return, they suggest that Peter’s principal concern is not simply a misunderstanding of the timing of that event.
Jörg Frey similarly connects the distortion of Paul’s letters with the false teachers condemned earlier in the epistle. He suggests that these individuals appropriated Paul’s writings to support positions that the author of 2 Peter regarded as incompatible with Paul’s actual teaching. Frey further observes that the error in question “can hardly be the interpretation of the alleged delay of the Parousia or skepticism of the expectation of the Parousia alone.” Instead, he identifies the broader concern as the promotion of an “unethical, generally antinomian way of life,” concluding that “the ethical dimension is at issue here” and that the distortion of Paul’s letters “leads concretely to sinful behavior.”[14]
Frey’s interpretation is consistent with the broader context of 2 Peter, which repeatedly contrasts righteous conduct with lawlessness and warns against abandoning the “way of righteousness” (2 Pet. 2:21). Together, the observations of Pogonowski and Frey support the conclusion that Peter’s warning concerns the ethical consequences of misinterpreting Paul, rather than merely confusion about the timing of the Messiah’s return. Read alongside the terminology of 2 Peter 3:17, the parallels with the false teachers in chapter 2, and the Jewish usage of ἀθέσμων discussed above, their arguments lend further support to the interpretation that Peter is warning against those who distort Paul’s letters to justify transgression of the Law of Moses.
Conclusion
Peter’s concluding warning provides important insight into how Paul’s letters were understood and misinterpreted within the early Jesus movement. Throughout his epistle, Peter emphasizes the importance of righteous conduct, contrasting those who walk in the way of righteousness with those who reject God’s commandments. When he refers to Paul’s letters, he presents Paul’s teaching as consistent with his own exhortations to holiness and godliness in anticipation of the Messiah’s return. Nevertheless, Peter warns that certain individuals distort Paul’s writings to their own destruction. As argued above, their error may be understood as arising from an inadequate knowledge of the Hebrew Scriptures and the Jewish context of Paul’s letters, leading them to interpret his nuanced statements about the Law of Moses as a rejection of the Torah’s authority. Peter identifies this danger with the “error of lawless people” and urges his readers not to be carried away by it. Peter’s warning thus provides substantial grounds for challenging antinomian interpretations of Paul that portray him as rejecting the authority of the Law of Moses as a standard of conduct for believers.
[1] As Jakub M. Pogonowski observes, “According to the author, then, pistis is a concept that is not merely an abstract idea, but rather is pragmatic and belongs to the realm of praxis.” Pogonowski, “Reception of Paul in 2 Peter 3:14–18 as an Early Witness to the Emergence of an Antinomian Paul without Judaism,” in Cultural Translation and Receptions of Paul in the First Four Centuries, ed. František Ábel (New York: Fortress Academic, 2025), 377.
[2] Pogonowski argues that the contrast between the righteous and the wicked in 2 Peter 2 is primarily one of conduct, with the wicked characterized by disobedience and the righteous by their opposition to it. Pogonowski, “Reception of Paul,” 377–78.
[3] Pogonowski notes that the false teachers apparently promoted some notion of freedom, but that Peter presents their rejection of the holy commandment as a return to bondage. Pogonowski, “Reception of Paul in 2 Peter 3:14–18,” 378.
[4] Pogonowski, “Reception of Paul,” 378. See also his note 11, where he identifies additional examples of the language of “walking” in 2 Peter and the Hebrew Scriptures.
[5] Pogonowski, “Reception of Paul,” 379.
[6] Pogonowski, “Reception of Paul,” 378–79. Pogonowski draws attention to the conjunction διο (“therefore”) in 2 Peter 3:14, which connects the exhortation to righteous conduct with the preceding discussion.
[7] William D. Mounce, “ἀμαθής,” Greek New Testament Dictionary, accessed October 14, 2026, https://www.billmounce.com/greek-dictionary/amathes
[8] Pogonowski, “Reception of Paul,” 380–81.
[9] Pogonowski, “Reception of Paul,” 381–82.
[10] Philo, On Rewards and Punishments 126, in Philo, vol. 8, trans. F. H. Colson, Loeb Classical Library 341 (Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 1939), 388–89.
[11] Pogonowski, “Reception of Paul,” 385.
[12] R. L. Solberg, “Is Paul Hard to Understand?,” YouTube video, August 23, 2023.
[13] Pogonowski, “Reception of Paul,” 385.
[14] Jörg Frey, The Letter of Jude and the Second Letter of Peter: A Theological Commentary, trans. Kathleen Ess (Waco, TX: Baylor University Press, 2018), 426–27.
About David Wilber
David is first and foremost a passionate follower of Yeshua the Messiah. He is also a writer, speaker, and teacher.
David’s heart is to minister to God’s people by helping them rediscover the validity and blessing of God’s Torah and help prepare them to give an answer to anyone who asks about the hope within them (1 Peter 3:15)…
Origen’s Commentary on Romans offers a fascinating perspective on the Apostolic Decree in Acts 15. Rather than seeing the Council as setting aside the Torah for Gentile believers, Origen argues that the apostles looked to the Torah itself to determine what God required of Gentiles. This article explores his reasoning concerning blood, strangled meat, and circumcision, and what it might contribute to the larger question of Gentile Torah observance.