sola_gratia
Puritan Board Freshman
Could someone explain to me 2 Peter 3:9? I am not sure how to explain this to an arminian.
2 Peter 3:9
- Thread starter sola_gratia
- Start date
- Status
(Mat 18:12-14) How think ye? if a man have an hundred sheep, and one of them be gone astray, doth he not leave the ninety and nine, and goeth into the mountains, and seeketh that which is gone astray? And if so be that he find it, verily I say unto you, he rejoiceth more of that sheep, than of the ninety and nine which went not astray. Even so it is not the will of your Father which is in heaven, that one of these little ones should perish.
I just take it Peter was referring to this statement of Jesus, in light of the following passage that John records. Maybe it is rather simplistic but It fits.
(Joh 10:26-29) But ye believe not, because ye are not of my sheep, as I said unto you. My sheep hear my voice, and I know them, and they follow me: And I give unto them eternal life; and they shall never perish, neither shall any man pluck them out of my hand. My Father, which gave them me, is greater than all; and no man is able to pluck them out of my Father's hand.
[Edited on 8-4-2005 by puritancovenanter]
I just take it Peter was referring to this statement of Jesus, in light of the following passage that John records. Maybe it is rather simplistic but It fits.
(Joh 10:26-29) But ye believe not, because ye are not of my sheep, as I said unto you. My sheep hear my voice, and I know them, and they follow me: And I give unto them eternal life; and they shall never perish, neither shall any man pluck them out of my hand. My Father, which gave them me, is greater than all; and no man is able to pluck them out of my Father's hand.
[Edited on 8-4-2005 by puritancovenanter]
sola_gratia
Puritan Board Freshman
You know, I actually did take the verse that way. It's nice to know someone else sees it that way and I wasn't just "wanting".What led me to think he was talking about the elect was this: "but is longsuffering to us-ward", right there you can see Peter is addressing believers. I never made the connection with those other verses.
That helps a lot...thank you![Edited on 8-4-2005 by sola_gratia]
toddpedlar
Iron Dramatist
Martin's got it exactly right, and you've drawn the right conclusion. I think you'll find that many issues in which Arminians see "universal" promises and statements about God's love have to do with the presuppositions that they bring to the table. They aren't, in my experience, often willing to look at the audience of texts like 2 Peter 3:9 - which, as you have said, is addressed specifically as an encouragement to believers.
If one reads this in the Arminian manner, then it is one of a few places where God REALLY looks like a poor, powerless individual. God really, really wants all to be saved, but, alas, he just can't muster up the strength to make it happen. In discussing this passage, one really can see how desperately the Arminian desires to hold onto his presuppositions of the sovereignty of man's choice.
Todd
2 Peter 3:9
The Lord is not slow about His promise, as some count slowness, but is patient toward you, not willing for any to perish but for all to come to repentance.
1. What promise is being discussed in this passage? Is it the promise of eternal life? Arminians will usually say yes. However, Peter is not discussing the promise of eternal life in verse nine, but is referring back to verse 4 "Where is the promise of His coming?" The second coming of Christ is being discussed here.
2. Who is the Lord patient with? Peter is telling the recipients of his letter that the Lord is patient with THEM. Who is Peter writing to? Vs. 1 "Simon Peter, a bond-servant and apostle of Jesus Christ, to those who have received a faith of the same kind as ours, by the righteousness of our God and Savior, Jesus Christ. "
3. What "willing" is being discussed here? In theology, the will of God is distinguished between what is known as the secret will (predestination) and revealed will (the Word of God). If we take this verse in the Arminian sense, neither will fits in!
Let's examine the verse in the Arminian sense using the secret will"¦God is patient toward every single person, and predestines that none should perish. Makes no sense. We know that some (or most) people will end up in hell, so this interpretation can NOT fit. How about if we use the revealed will? God is patient toward every single person, and commands that none should perish. Surely God does command that we should turn from our wicked ways and live, but is could this possibly fit the context of what is being said? I don't think any Arminians would be happy with this interpretation.
Now, let's apply the will of God to this verse assuming that it is talking about the elect only. Does the revealed will fit? God commands SOME not to perish? Again, God commanding doesn't seem to fit the context of what is being said. But what about the secret will? God predestines that his elect should not perish, but that THEY should come to repentance! It fits perfectly!
4. This also fits with the biblical idea that repentance is a gift from God, and is granted by him alone. See Jeremiah 31:18, Acts 5:31, Acts 11:18 and Romans 2:4.
In short, this verse is about God's promise to send his Son for the second time. In this verse, he promises that none of his sheep shall be lost, but all will be converted before he sends his Son to judge the world.
The Lord is not slow about His promise, as some count slowness, but is patient toward you, not willing for any to perish but for all to come to repentance.
1. What promise is being discussed in this passage? Is it the promise of eternal life? Arminians will usually say yes. However, Peter is not discussing the promise of eternal life in verse nine, but is referring back to verse 4 "Where is the promise of His coming?" The second coming of Christ is being discussed here.
2. Who is the Lord patient with? Peter is telling the recipients of his letter that the Lord is patient with THEM. Who is Peter writing to? Vs. 1 "Simon Peter, a bond-servant and apostle of Jesus Christ, to those who have received a faith of the same kind as ours, by the righteousness of our God and Savior, Jesus Christ. "
3. What "willing" is being discussed here? In theology, the will of God is distinguished between what is known as the secret will (predestination) and revealed will (the Word of God). If we take this verse in the Arminian sense, neither will fits in!
Let's examine the verse in the Arminian sense using the secret will"¦God is patient toward every single person, and predestines that none should perish. Makes no sense. We know that some (or most) people will end up in hell, so this interpretation can NOT fit. How about if we use the revealed will? God is patient toward every single person, and commands that none should perish. Surely God does command that we should turn from our wicked ways and live, but is could this possibly fit the context of what is being said? I don't think any Arminians would be happy with this interpretation.
Now, let's apply the will of God to this verse assuming that it is talking about the elect only. Does the revealed will fit? God commands SOME not to perish? Again, God commanding doesn't seem to fit the context of what is being said. But what about the secret will? God predestines that his elect should not perish, but that THEY should come to repentance! It fits perfectly!
4. This also fits with the biblical idea that repentance is a gift from God, and is granted by him alone. See Jeremiah 31:18, Acts 5:31, Acts 11:18 and Romans 2:4.
In short, this verse is about God's promise to send his Son for the second time. In this verse, he promises that none of his sheep shall be lost, but all will be converted before he sends his Son to judge the world.
2 Peter 3:9, cannot mean that God is waiting for every single person to come to Christ and to repentance. If that was true, then Christ would never come, for that is what is being delayed here in the passage. Rather, as the passage itself indicates, the all here refers to all of us. Peter says that it is to us, to all of us that God is longsuffering and for whom He is waiting, for all the elect, or for all of the church.
andreas.
andreas.
Puritanhead
Puritan Board Professor
The biggest exegetical error you have to point your Arminian friend to-- is their failure to qualify the verse by any of the preceding verses or establishing the verse in its proper context. They have a tendency to hyper-atomize Scriptures-- that is single out a verse, and not read it in context or exegetically.
Second Peter 3:9 reads as follows:
First, the verse speaks of a promise, and where do we find another reference to a promise in that passage? In 2 Peter 4, where mockers after considerable time from Christ's earthly ministry began to mock and blaspheme Christ's testimony, and deem him an absentee God.
For your reference 2 Peter 4 reads as follows:
The Apostle Peter recognizes that the apparent delay of God's divine judgment is a sign of God's forbearance and mercy towards the elect. God is longsuffering toward the elect, and enduring for their sake, hence his "not [being] willing that any should perish." He is delaying his coming for the sake of the elect "” for those children of the world not your born yet, neither having done any good or evil, but are predestined to come to salvation that election might stand (Rom. 9:11).
"Us" clearly delienates a body of believers, and if there is any doubt that "toward us" is not a sufficient qualification, then efer back to the epistle's salutation which is backdrop upon who the audience Peter is addressing. It would be prudent to quote the salutation to the epistle of 2 Peter, in verse 1 and remind the objector that the epistle is written to a body of believers, and "beloved" is a term of endearment for God's elect:
Additionally, in 2 Peter 3:1, Peter addresses the reader as "beloved." Beloved is an appellation reserved for the elect (1 Thess. 1:4; 2 Thess. 2:13; 1 John 3:2; 1 John 3:21; 1 John 4:11).
Likewise, revisiting the original verse, it is vitally important to notice that all is a qualifier. All does not necessarily mean all and all without exception or qualification. In the context of the preceding clauses in 2 Peter 3:9, the scope of all is qualified by the statement to us-ward, or as the NKJV text more clearly states toward us.
The epistle is clearly written to a body of believers, that is those who "have received a faith," and this should be added as a qualifying statement to 2 Peter 3:9, particularly in light of the reference "to us-ward". Us represents a body of believers.
After, you elaborate upon the passage, and always do say in spirit of 2 Timothy 2:24-25, you should volley a number of verses related to the extent of the atonement if objections are thrown out. Scriptures such as Matt. 26:28 where Jesus died for "many"; John 10:11, 15 which states that Jesus died for the sheep (not the goats, per Matt. 25:32-33); and of course John 17, particularly emphasizing v.9 where Jesus in prayer acknowledges intercession only for the ones given Him, not those of the entire world. You might want to shift to perseverance of the saints or irresistible grace, and give your Arminian objector time to speak, and if he is quarrelsome remind him of 2 Tim 2:24.
Any real serious efforts to exegete the verse 2 Peter 3:9 should entail reading and elaboration upon 2 Peter 3:1-9.
Hope that is helpful...
Welcome to the Puritanboard.
[Edited on 8-7-2005 by Puritanhead]
Second Peter 3:9 reads as follows:
First, the verse speaks of a promise, and where do we find another reference to a promise in that passage? In 2 Peter 4, where mockers after considerable time from Christ's earthly ministry began to mock and blaspheme Christ's testimony, and deem him an absentee God.
For your reference 2 Peter 4 reads as follows:
The Apostle Peter recognizes that the apparent delay of God's divine judgment is a sign of God's forbearance and mercy towards the elect. God is longsuffering toward the elect, and enduring for their sake, hence his "not [being] willing that any should perish." He is delaying his coming for the sake of the elect "” for those children of the world not your born yet, neither having done any good or evil, but are predestined to come to salvation that election might stand (Rom. 9:11).
"Us" clearly delienates a body of believers, and if there is any doubt that "toward us" is not a sufficient qualification, then efer back to the epistle's salutation which is backdrop upon who the audience Peter is addressing. It would be prudent to quote the salutation to the epistle of 2 Peter, in verse 1 and remind the objector that the epistle is written to a body of believers, and "beloved" is a term of endearment for God's elect:
Additionally, in 2 Peter 3:1, Peter addresses the reader as "beloved." Beloved is an appellation reserved for the elect (1 Thess. 1:4; 2 Thess. 2:13; 1 John 3:2; 1 John 3:21; 1 John 4:11).
Likewise, revisiting the original verse, it is vitally important to notice that all is a qualifier. All does not necessarily mean all and all without exception or qualification. In the context of the preceding clauses in 2 Peter 3:9, the scope of all is qualified by the statement to us-ward, or as the NKJV text more clearly states toward us.
The epistle is clearly written to a body of believers, that is those who "have received a faith," and this should be added as a qualifying statement to 2 Peter 3:9, particularly in light of the reference "to us-ward". Us represents a body of believers.
After, you elaborate upon the passage, and always do say in spirit of 2 Timothy 2:24-25, you should volley a number of verses related to the extent of the atonement if objections are thrown out. Scriptures such as Matt. 26:28 where Jesus died for "many"; John 10:11, 15 which states that Jesus died for the sheep (not the goats, per Matt. 25:32-33); and of course John 17, particularly emphasizing v.9 where Jesus in prayer acknowledges intercession only for the ones given Him, not those of the entire world. You might want to shift to perseverance of the saints or irresistible grace, and give your Arminian objector time to speak, and if he is quarrelsome remind him of 2 Tim 2:24.
Any real serious efforts to exegete the verse 2 Peter 3:9 should entail reading and elaboration upon 2 Peter 3:1-9.
Hope that is helpful...
Welcome to the Puritanboard.
[Edited on 8-7-2005 by Puritanhead]
sola_gratia
Puritan Board Freshman
Ryan,
Thanks for taking the time to give me such an in-depth explanation on it. It really helped me a lot. Especially since the arminian I was talking to was looking for truth, and was not just out to prove someone wrong. So thanks again!
-Levi
[Edited on 8-7-2005 by sola_gratia]
Thanks for taking the time to give me such an in-depth explanation on it. It really helped me a lot. Especially since the arminian I was talking to was looking for truth, and was not just out to prove someone wrong. So thanks again!
-Levi
[Edited on 8-7-2005 by sola_gratia]
Puritanhead
Puritan Board Professor
Well a lot people are not really Arminian, just confused, and exploring the Bible... usually people never become avowed Arminians until they hear of Calvinism, and some have a tendency to reject doctrines of grace obviously because of that natural pride in man.... Man has no room to boast in anything but the Cross, but Arminianism gives glory to man in his salvation.
When I stand before God on the throne of judgment, I won't be able to say I chose him because I was more righteous than the next guy or because I was little smarter than most people -- I chose Christ because he first chose me.
Soli Deo Gloria! All the Glory to God!
When I stand before God on the throne of judgment, I won't be able to say I chose him because I was more righteous than the next guy or because I was little smarter than most people -- I chose Christ because he first chose me.
Soli Deo Gloria! All the Glory to God!
RamistThomist
Puritanboard Clerk
throw a reductio ad absudum at him. Assume his position to be correct, then draw the logical consequences from it, which would be:
either a weak, impotent god who is limited by the nigh-sovereign will of man,
OR
universalism
Allow him no way to get off the horns of this dilemma.
[Edited on 8--7-05 by Draught Horse]
either a weak, impotent god who is limited by the nigh-sovereign will of man,
OR
universalism
Allow him no way to get off the horns of this dilemma.
[Edited on 8--7-05 by Draught Horse]
RamistThomist
Puritanboard Clerk
Of course, the finite godists like Clark Pinnock et al would have no problems with #1, but most Arminians will not out and out admit that. At that point, counter with texts from Isaiah 46-48 showing the ultimate will of God.
Calvin via Van Til did a marvelous job explaining the ultimate and proximate wills of God. That area needs to be further explored.
C. Matthew McMahon
Christian Preacher
2 Peter 3:9 is definitely pointing to God's forebearence in waiting on all His elect to come into the fold.
Puritanhead
Puritan Board Professor
Puritanhead
Puritan Board Professor
Since we know what these verses that supposedly give creedence to universal atonement really mean, us Reformed guys shouldn't be afraid of them or shy away from them-- when confronted by universalists/Arminians.
- Status
