By Obed Mortey | Spotlight on the Word

Abstract

The closing clause of 2 Peter 3:10 contains one of the most debated textual problems in the Catholic Epistles. Major early witnesses support the difficult reading εὑρεθήσεται (“will be found”), while many later and widely distributed witnesses attest the smoother conflagration verb κατακαήσεται (“will be burned up”). A few manuscripts preserve mixed or expanded forms, and some editors have even proposed conjectural emendation. This study surveys the principal readings, evaluates them using transparent external and internal criteria, and presents the strongest arguments on both sides—including the contextual and apocalyptic considerations often cited in favor of κατακαήσεται. Nevertheless, the cumulative evidence favors εὑρεθήσεται as the earliest recoverable wording, best understood in an eschatological–forensic sense (“will be found out / exposed”) that coheres with 3:14 and complements rather than softens the surrounding imagery of cosmic dissolution. The study concludes with brief reflections on translation strategy and the theological implications of the passage, noting that—regardless of which reading is adopted—the verse unmistakably depicts the present created order as fully subjected to divine judgment and destined for ultimate removal in anticipation of the promised new creation.

1. Introduction

English translations of 2 Peter 3:10 diverge at the final clause. Older versions often read that “the earth and the works in it will be burned up,” while several modern translations render the clause in terms of disclosure or exposure (e.g., “will be disclosed,” “will be exposed,” “will be laid bare”). The divergence reflects a genuine textual problem and an interpretive challenge: how should the Greek verb be read, and what does it mean in context?

This article aims to (1) summarize the main variant readings, (2) evaluate them using standard text-critical and exegetical criteria, and (3) offer a coherent construal of the most likely text and sense that is academically careful yet accessible to non-specialists.

2. Method and Criteria

Text-critical judgment typically proceeds by weighing external and internal evidence. External evidence considers the age and character of witnesses, distribution across text-types and regions, and whether a reading can plausibly explain the rise of others. Internal evidence asks which reading best fits the author’s style and argument, and which readings are more likely to have arisen through known scribal habits (e.g., smoothing difficulty, harmonizing with the immediate context, or clarifying perceived obscurity). The principle lectio difficilior (“the more difficult reading”) is not a mechanical rule, but it is often relevant where later readings appear to simplify earlier difficulty.

3. The Principal Variant Readings in 2 Peter 3:10

The textual issue centers on the verb describing the fate of “the earth and the works done on it.” The principal options may be summarized as follows:

1. εὑρεθήσεται (“will be found”): Attested by א B K P 424c 1175 1448 1739txt 1852 syrph, arm, and Origen.
2. κατακαήσεται (“will be burned up”): Attested by A 048 049 056 0142 33 81 307 436 442 614 642 1611 1739v.l. 2344 Byz Lect syrh copbo eth Cyr al.
3. Minor or mixed readings (limited attestation), including expansions such as “will be found dissolved” (εὑρεθήσεται λυομενα ) and substitutions such as “will disappear” (ἀφανισθήσονται): Attested by 𝔓72, C
4. Conjecture (e.g., adding a negation to yield “will not be found”), proposed to obtain an unambiguous sense of disappearance. No manuscript attestation.

4. External Evidence: Which Reading Is Best Supported?

On external grounds, εὑρεθήσεται (“will be found”) enjoys broad support and appears in prominent early witnesses. κατακαήσεται (“will be burned up”) is also early-attested but is characteristically abundant in later Byzantine transmission. Standard reference tools accordingly treat the variation as difficult and weigh εὑρεθήσεται as a strong candidate for the Ausgangstext (Nestle-Aland, 2012).

External evidence alone, however, does not resolve the issue. Because both readings have significant attestation and because the passage is rhetorically vivid, internal evidence becomes decisive: which reading better accounts for the origin of the other(s) given common scribal tendencies?

5. Internal Evidence: Interpreting εὑρεθήσεται in Context

The central objection to εὑρεθήσεται is that, taken woodenly (“will be found”), it may sound semantically incomplete: found by whom, and to what effect? Yet the passive “be found” frequently functions in biblical Greek as a shorthand for disclosure under scrutiny—being discovered to be in a certain state at the decisive moment.

A key intratextual parallel appears in 2 Peter 3:14, where believers are exhorted to be diligent to be “found” (εὑρεθῆναι) by Christ “without spot or blemish, and at peace.” Here, “be found” carries evaluative force: one’s state is disclosed at the parousia. If Peter can use εὑρίσκω-language this way for persons in v.14, he can plausibly use it for the created order and human works in v.10: the world and its deeds will be ‘found out’—laid open for divine assessment.

On this reading, εὑρεθήσεται does not deny the cosmic catastrophe described in the same verse and the next (“heavens pass away,” “elements dissolved”). Rather, it adds the moral dimension: the day of the Lord not only shakes creation but also reveals it. The clause then anticipates Peter’s ethical application (3:11–14): if everything is coming under God’s searching judgment, the proper response is holy conduct and readiness.

6. Why Might κατακαήσεται Have Arisen?

If εὑρεθήσεται is original, the rise of κατακαήσεται is readily explained. The surrounding clauses emphasize burning and dissolution. A scribe encountering an obscure ‘will be found’ could reasonably ‘correct’ the text by supplying a verb that matches the dominant imagery: “will be burned up.” This is a common scribal move—harmonizing a difficult phrase with a clearer near context. Conversely, if κατακαήσεται were original, the emergence of εὑρεθήσεται is harder to explain. Accordingly, many scholars judge κατακαήσεται to be a smoothing reading, while retaining εὑρεθήσεται as the more difficult and thus potentially earlier wording (Metzger, 1994).

6a. The Strongest Case for Retaining κατακαήσεται (“Will Be Burned Up”)

Although the internal and external evidence often leads modern editors to prefer εὑρεθήσεται, a responsible text‑critical study must acknowledge that κατακαήσεται has been defended by capable scholars and remains the reading of many traditional translations. The following represent the strongest arguments that can be made in favor of retaining “will be burned up” as the original wording.

1. Contextual Coherence With the Fiery Imagery of 2 Peter 3

Advocates of κατακαήσεται argue that it fits the immediate context more naturally than εὑρεθήσεται. The surrounding verses emphasize:

• “the heavens will pass away with a roar” (3:10)
• “the elements will be dissolved with fire” (3:10)
• “the heavens will be set on fire and dissolved” (3:12)

Within this rhetorical environment, a verb meaning “will be burned up” appears to maintain thematic unity. By contrast, “will be found” introduces a semantic shift from destruction to disclosure that some consider contextually abrupt. On this view, κατακαήσεται preserves the momentum of the fiery judgment discourse.

2. The Possibility That the More Difficult Reading Is Secondary

While lectio difficilior often favors εὑρεθήσεται, defenders of κατακαήσεται note that scribes sometimes introduced more difficult readings, not easier ones. A scribe might have replaced κατακαήσεται with εὑρεθήσεται in order to:

• avoid redundancy (“everything burns… and will be burned up”),
• introduce a moralizing nuance, or
• harmonize v.10 with v.14’s “be found” language.

Thus, εὑρεθήσεται could be viewed as a deliberate interpretive innovation rather than the original text.

3. Broad and Early Geographical Attestation

Although εὑρεθήσεται appears in strong early witnesses, κατακαήσεται enjoys:

• representation in multiple text‑types,
• wide geographical distribution,
• support from early versions (Syriac, Coptic, Ethiopic), and
• attestation in important uncials (A, 048, 049, 056).

This breadth of distribution suggests that κατακαήσεται is not merely a late Byzantine smoothing but may reflect an early and widespread textual tradition.

4. Alignment With Early Christian Apocalyptic Expectation

Early Christian eschatology frequently emphasizes fiery judgment and cosmic destruction. κατακαήσεται aligns naturally with this apocalyptic idiom. Defenders argue that εὑρεθήσεται introduces a forensic nuance more characteristic of later moralizing tendencies than of first‑century apocalyptic discourse. Thus, κατακαήσεται may better reflect the eschatological imagination of the earliest Christian communities.

5. Explanatory Power for the Rise of Other Variants

If κατακαήσεται were original, the emergence of other readings could also be explained as attempts to clarify or soften the sense of destruction:

• εὑρεθήσεται λυόμενα (“will be found dissolved”) appears to be a harmonizing expansion.
• ἀφανισθήσονται (“will disappear”) looks like a conceptual paraphrase.
• Conjectures such as “will not be found” attempt to capture the idea of disappearance more explicitly.

Thus, κατακαήσεται may be the root reading from which others developed.

6. The Difficulty of εὑρεθήσεται as a Potential Sign of Corruption

Finally, defenders argue that εὑρεθήσεται is not merely difficult but unnaturally abrupt. The phrase “the earth and the works in it will be found” may appear incomplete or semantically disjointed without interpretive supplementation. Such awkwardness could indicate accidental corruption—perhaps through omission, misreading, or homoioteleuton—rather than originality.

Summary of the Counter‑Case

Taken together, these arguments form a coherent defense of κατακαήσεται as the original reading. They emphasize contextual fit, broad attestation, apocalyptic resonance, and the possibility that εὑρεθήσεται represents a later interpretive development. While the present study ultimately favors εὑρεθήσεται, the case for κατακαήσεται is substantial enough to merit careful consideration in any responsible treatment of the textual problem.

7. The Case for and Against Conjecture

Conjectural emendation is sometimes proposed here to yield an unambiguous sense of disappearance (e.g., “will not be found”). The motivation is clear: it neatly matches the imagery of cosmic dissolution. Nevertheless, conjecture should be employed only when all attested readings are virtually impossible.

In this case, εὑρεθήσεται is difficult but not impossible. It can be read coherently as “will be found out/exposed” in line with 3:14 and broader biblical usage of ‘being found’ at the last day. Because a coherent interpretation is available without introducing unattested Greek, conjecture is not required. The more responsible course is to retain the attested reading and interpret it carefully.

8. Translation Options and Theological Cautions

If εὑρεθήσεται is retained, translators face a choice between a formally close rendering (“will be found”) and an interpretive rendering that makes the implied sense explicit (“will be exposed/laid bare/disclosed”). Either can be defended, but the interpretive option has the advantage of preventing misunderstanding by readers who might otherwise hear “found” as incomplete.

It is important to caution here, that the presence of disclosure language does not domesticate the passage. 2 Peter 3 still describes a cosmic crisis: heavens pass away; elements dissolve; creation is judged. ‘Exposure’ is not a denial of termination and judgment but the moral dimension of it (See New Heavens and a New Earth (2 Peter 3:10–13): Nuanced Readings and a Case for Cosmic Replacement – Spotlight On The Word).

9. Conclusion

The textual problem in 2 Peter 3:10 is both genuine and consequential, and it has understandably produced divergent translations across the history of interpretation. When the external and internal evidence are considered together, however, εὑρεθήσεται (“will be found”) remains the strongest candidate for the earliest recoverable wording. Read within its immediate context—especially in light of the evaluative use of the same verb in 3:14—it most plausibly bears an eschatological-forensic sense: the earth and its works will be uncovered, brought to light, and subjected to divine judgment.

The competing reading, κατακαήσεται (“will be burned up”), is best explained as a scribal harmonization with the surrounding conflagration imagery, which repeatedly emphasizes fire, dissolution, and cosmic unmaking. Yet the case for κατακαήσεται is not trivial; its broad attestation, contextual coherence, and resonance with early Christian apocalyptic expectation make it a reading that deserves careful and respectful consideration in any comprehensive treatment of the passage.

Ultimately, however, the central thrust of Peter’s message does not hinge on which verb one adopts. Whether the final clause speaks of disclosure or incineration, the overall picture remains unmistakable: the present created order is destined for decisive divine judgment, its works laid bare, its structures undone, and its existence brought to an end. In its place, God brings forth the promised new order—a realm in which righteousness dwells and the corruption of the present age is no more.

Works Cited

1. Barbara Aland et al., eds., Novum Testamentum Graece, 28th rev. ed. (Stuttgart: Deutsche Bibelgesellschaft, 2012), 714;
2. Bruce M. Metzger, A Textual Commentary on the Greek New Testament, 2nd ed. (London/New York: United Bible Societies, 1994), 636.