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!
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!
The man who is disposed to think of his sin as a great calamity, rather than as a heinous crime, is not likely either to reverence God or to respect His law. - John Kennedy, 1873
Meg
Blog
Member, Intown Presbyterian Church,PCA, Portland, OR
Click to get: Board Rules -- Signature Requirements -- Suggestions?
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.
Tim Phillips
Pastor, Midlane Park Presbyterian Church (ARP)
Louisville, KY
Husband of Scottish Lass
Father of Grace Cameron Phillips
My Blog: Gairney Bridge
My Facebook/My Avatar
Click to get: Board Rules -- Signature Requirements -- Suggestions?
"Wherever the gospel is preached, it is as if God Himself came into the midst of us." ~ John Calvin
turmeric (09-07-2009)
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.
Deuteronomy 32:5-6 says,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.
They have corrupted themselves, their spot is not the spot of his children: they are a perverse and crooked generation.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.
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?
Albert, The Republic of the Philippines
Pasig United Covenant Reformed Church (a Reformed church plant)
United Covenant Reformed Churches in the Philippines
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.” -
turmeric (09-07-2009)
Bookmarks