Fleshly Desires & Despising Authority (part 1 of 3)

…especially those who indulge their fleshly desires and who despise authority. – 2 Peter 2:10  (NET)       

How should one go about interpreting and understanding what it is that is being communicated in this second chapter of the second epistle of Peter?  When one reads about the indulgence of fleshly desires and the despising of authority, there is most likely a temptation, owning to the almost thorough inculcation by modern-day Western Christendom, to understand this according to “spiritual” things.  In so doing, “fleshly desires” become those “sins” in which one desires to partake, while “despise authority” comes to be understood as rebellion against pastors and church leaders that are attempting to get their congregants to live “holy lives.” 

However, as one looks through this chapter, is it not possible to see traces of that first-century revolutionary fervor and messianic expectation and ongoing desire for rebellion against Rome that was so incredibly rampant?  Might it be possible to place this writing in a historical context, and thereby gain a better understanding of the message of the Gospel (Jesus is Lord and King)?  Let’s find out.

The author writes, “But false prophets arose among the people, just as there will be false teachers among you” (2:1a).  Simple enough so far, as past is prelude to present for the author’s audience.  It is said that “These false teachers will infiltrate your midst with destructive heresies” (2:1b), which is what false teachers are generally in the habit of doing, “even to the point of denying the Master Who bought them” (2:1c).  Clearly, the “Master” here should be understood to be Jesus.  What is the denial of Jesus?  Naturally, it is the denial that He is the Messiah.  If one denies that Jesus is the Messiah, the natural corollary is to continue looking for and pointing to potential messianic figures that could eventually be counted on to rise up to overthrow Rome through a gathered military might.  Ongoing evidence of this way of thinking can be observed for over one hundred years after the death and Resurrection of Jesus.  By extension then, denying that Jesus is the Messiah includes the denial of His way of going about bringing in the kingdom of God.

Just as there were messianic claimants and attempted revolutions before Jesus, so too there were messianic claimants and attempted revolutions after Jesus.  The re-subjugation of Palestine between 66 and 70AD, which included the destruction of Jerusalem and the Temple, was the result of these continued messianic movements.  Owing to this, one could certainly speak of “destructive heresies,” with this destruction being of a very real sort.  Going on then, one indeed finds “As a result, they will bring swift destruction on themselves” (2:1d).  This is both prophetic and eminently practical in its application.  Because by all estimates, the four hundred ninety years of Daniel had come and gone without any discernible actions that would demonstrate that God had vindicated His people by placing Israel, under their messiah, as the head of all nations, a denial that Jesus was the Messiah would only lead to furious and fervent actions on the part of His people (Israel) to take it upon themselves to prove their God’s covenant faithfulness, doing so by taking up arms against their oppressors in the tradition of the Maccabees of old (2nd century BC).

The reader/hearer then goes on to find, “And many will follow their debauched lifestyles.  Because of these false teachers, the way of truth will be slandered” (2:2).  Remember, this false teaching is predicated on denying the Master, which includes, at the very least, the denial of Jesus’ Messianic claims, status, and ways.  Certainly, one could say that denying Jesus, which would also entail the denial of His Resurrection as His vindication, would be a slandering of the way of truth.