» Site Navigation | | | » Online Users: 69 | | 11 members and 58 guests | | Chippy, David'sBeloved, JDWiseman, johnbugay, Knight, nleshelman, Piano Hero, PuritanCovenanter, WAWICRUZ, William Price | | Most users ever online was 856, 07-06-2007 at 12:19 AM. | |  | 
09-07-2009, 12:50 PM
|  | Megerator | | Join Date: Jan 2004 Location: Portland,OR
Posts: 10,721
Thanks: 1,738
Thanked 951 Times in 792 Posts
| | | 2 Peter 2; "the one who bought them"
Mom has a question, how could Christ have "bought" the false prophets spoken of in these verses if they apostatized? I read her the stuff from my super-duper-ESV form Monergism, but it wasn't compelling. Any help?
Thanks!
| 
09-07-2009, 01:12 PM
|  | Drunk with Powder | | Join Date: Jul 2008 Location: Louisville, KY
Posts: 7,100
Thanks: 2,777
Thanked 2,441 Times in 1,223 Posts
| |
This article is good and may give a more satisfying answer.
The things to keep in mind are: 1) the verb used ( agorazo -- "bought") pertains more to "ownership" rather than redemption/atonement; 2) Peter is probably making a reference to statements from Deuteronomy 32 in the passage; 3) "Master" ( depotes) probably is referring to God and not specifically to Christ in the passage.
Also, here is another (much longer) article that deals with the verse.
| | The Following User Says Thank You to Marrow Man For This Useful Post: | | 
09-07-2009, 01:23 PM
|  | Puritanboard Junior | | Join Date: Jan 2009 Location: Taytay, Rizal Province, The Philippines
Posts: 1,567
Thanks: 745
Thanked 452 Times in 302 Posts
| |
In the past, I came across this short post from the Reformation Theology blog summarizing the comments of Dr. James White of aomin.org on 2 Peter 2:1. The summary is helpful IMO. Quote:
Regarding 2 Peter 2:1, Dr. White writes:
1) Derive soteriological truths from soteriological passages (this isn't);
2) "Lord" is δεσπότης (despotes--sovereign title) not κύριος (kurios--soteriological title);
3) Is this the Father or the Son? Can it be proven?
4) "bought" (ἀγοράζω) has no purchase price mentioned, which would be the only time that happens in the NT *if* this is a soteriological reference;
5) The passage says the Master did not *potentially* purchase these men, but that He did, in fact, purchase these men (sovereignty, not redemption). Compare Deuteronomy 32:5-6 for parallel use in the OT.
6) Derive the extent of the atonement from Hebrews that discusses it, not from 2 Peter's reference to false teachers.
Though obviously these six short comments are not full rebuttals to the Arminian understanding of the verse, there is enough here to hopefully whet the appetitite for further study.
| Deuteronomy 32:5-6 says, They have corrupted themselves, their spot is not the spot of his children: they are a perverse and crooked generation.
Do ye thus requite the LORD, O foolish people and unwise? is not he thy father that hath bought thee? hath he not made thee, and established thee? God "bought" the Israelites (in the Deuteronomy 32:5-6 sense) but we know that many of them were reprobates. Similarly, the fact that the false prophets in 2 Peter 2:1 were "bought" does not necessarily mean that Christ in fact died for them.
__________________
Albert, The Republic of the Philippines
Pasig United Covenant Reformed Church (a Reformed church plant)
United Covenant Reformed Churches in the Philippines (UCRCP)
Three Forms of Unity and Westminster Confession of Faith
Psalm 27:1a (AV) The LORD is my light and my salvation; whom shall I fear? “Perseverance is the badge of true saints. The Christian life is not a beginning only in the ways of God, but also a continuance in the same as long as life lasts.” - | | The Following User Says Thank You to A.J. For This Useful Post: | |  | | Thread Tools | | | | Display Modes | Linear Mode |
Posting Rules
| You may not post new threads You may not post replies You may not post attachments You may not edit your posts HTML code is Off | | | |