# II Peter 2



## Barnpreacher (May 25, 2005)

I'm studying II Peter 2 at the moment. I've read it a ton of times before, but it's never hit me like this. Especially verse 1 where it says that the false teachers deny the Lord that bought them. I've studied dispensationalists all my Christian life that would simply say that Peter is a book to the Jews. It doesn't apply to the church age. I don't buy that now, but here's what I'm trying to get at.

The verse says what it says. It says that some people were bought by the Lord and then they die and go into the mist of darkness forever according to verse 17. This is a bit of a problem for dispensationalists and Calvinists alike isn't it? For the dispensationalists that say this is only applicable to the Jew matters very little. They were still "bought" by the Lord and then die and go to the mist of darkness forever. Doesn't matter if it's Jew or Gentile somebody who had been bought isn't making it to heaven. 

For the Calvinist it goes against the perseverance of the saints doesn't it? Those that are truly elect will persevere. If someone claims to be born again, but then goes away from Jesus then they were never really of him. But the verse in Peter makes it clear that they were bought by the Lord. Sounds like they were elect because only the elect are the ones that Christ died to redeem. But how can this verse refer to the elect in light of John 17, Romans 8 etc.??

Gill makes the point that the Greek word for Lord here in Peter is despotes and not kurios. Despotes is never used in Scripture to refer to Jesus as kurios is used when Jesus is referred to as Lord. So he's trying to say that the buying in II Peter 2:1 is not actually the redemption that the cross purchased. I'd like to be able to buy that, but if that is true then what is the "bought" referring to in that verse?

Here's an interesting verse in Deuteronomy 32:6, "Do ye thus requite the Lord, O foolish people and unwise? is not he thy father that hath bought thee?" That's an obvious reference to Israel. Does anybody have any idea what that purchase is in Deuteronomy 32? Obviously it's before the cross, so it doesn't seem to be referring to the redemption of Christ's Blood. Any idea what it could be referring to and does the purchase in Deuteronomy 32 hold the key to the purchase in II Peter 2:1???

One last thing and I'll hang up and listen as they say on talk radio. Gill seems to believe that the word "bought" in Deuteronomy and Peter are referring to the same purchase (not the purchase of redemption on the cross). He doesn't really go into detail as to what he believes that purchase is. But he says since God was talking to the Jew in Deuteronomy 32 and he is talking to the Jew in II Peter 2 that it is referring to the same thing. My only problem with this is that II Peter 2 is after Christ purchased our redemption at Calvary. According to Ephesians 2 the middle wall of partition has been torn down between Jew and Gentile. So to say that Peter is talking only to the Jew in II Peter 2 about the same thing that God was talking to the Jew in Deuteronomy 32 seems to be a grievous error in my estimation (which isn't worth a thing).

[Edited on 5-25-2005 by Barnpreacher]


----------



## Poimen (May 25, 2005)

Take a look at Matt's (administrator) website:

http://www.apuritansmind.com/Arminianism/McMahon2Peter2_1.htm


----------



## Robin (May 25, 2005)

Matt's article is great:

....."So to summarize the point here: false teachers are "saying" they are Christians, and "saying" they have been bought, but in fact are not bought at all. "Denying the sovereign Lord who bought them" is what they are saying about their lifestyle, though it is not true from the rest of the immediate context of the passage. The word "bought" means they are either saved (which we know false teachers are not saved so that cannot be the meaning of the passage) or they are "saying" they "œthey believe themselves to be saved" and ultimately are self-deceived. But it cannot mean that Christ bought them with His blood, and they reject that "œoffer" to eternal life."

I could only add, though....something self-evident....like Judas Iscariot, false teachers can be a member of the "covenant community" - i.e., even be a pastor of a Reformed church, Etc....they can look and sound regenerate; can enjoy the covenant blessings....but, as John says, "they were not from us".

I think sometimes we totally forget that Scripture warns us of the wolves inside the ranks of the Church - visible - which means our own local body.



Robin


----------



## Barnpreacher (May 26, 2005)

Some very good points in the article that I agree with. I just don't want to make the verse say something it doesn't say which is perhaps what the author of the article is doing. Although as he did say in light of all the other passages in the N.T. we know that a person cannot be "bought" by the Blood of Jesus Christ and then lose their redemption. That much I'm sure about.


----------



## ChristianScientist (Jun 6, 2005)

I'm no Greek scholar, so couldn't parse the sentence for you.
But from the context of the book, it seems clear that the false teaching Peter is trying to combat involves a strong practical antinomian element- the false teachers do not live holy lives; they "follow their sensuality" and "indulge the flesh in its corrupt desires". 
Could Peter be commenting on their false teaching?
Is it that "even denying the Master who bought them" could mean "denying that the Master bought them"- meaning that the false teachers deny that Christians are bought with a price, deny that they have an obligation to God to keep his law, deny that they owe obedience to Christ?

Just a random (and probably erroneous) idea.

James


----------



## PuritanCovenanter (Jun 18, 2005)

Read John Gill....


who privily shall bring in damnable heresies: errors in the fundamental doctrines of the Gospel; such as relate to a trinity of persons in the Godhead; and to the person of Christ, to his proper deity, distinct personality, eternal sonship, and real humanity; and to his office as Mediator, rejecting him as the true Messiah, and as the only Saviour of sinners; denying his sacrifice and satisfaction, and the imputation of his righteousness; and to the Holy Spirit, his deity, personality, and divine influences and operations: these are "damnable", or "destructive", or "heresies of destruction"; which lead to eternal destruction both those that introduce and propagate them, and those that embrace and profess them; for they remove, or attempt to remove, the foundation of eternal life and happiness: the manner in which these are usually introduced is "privily"; at unawares, secretly, under a disguise, and gradually, by little and little, and not at once, and openly; and which is the constant character and practice of such men, who lie in wait to deceive, creep into churches at unawares, and into houses privately; and insinuate their principles under specious pretences and appearances of truth, using the hidden things of dishonesty, walking in craftiness, handling the word of God deceitfully, and colouring things with false glosses and feigned words: and even denying the Lord that bought them; not the Lord Jesus Christ, but God the Father; for the word ÎºÏ…ÏÎ¹Î¿Ï‚ is not here used, which always is where Christ is spoken of as the Lord, but Î´ÎµÏƒÏ€Î¿Ï„Î·Ï‚; and which is expressive of the power which masters have over their servants (i), and which God has over all mankind; and wherever this word is elsewhere used, it is spoken of God the Father, whenever applied to a divine person, as in Luk_2:29 and especially this appears to be the sense, from the parallel text in Jud_1:4 where the Lord God denied by those men is manifestly distinguished from our Lord Jesus Christ, and by whom these persons are said to be bought: the meaning is not that they were redeemed by the blood of Christ, for Christ is not intended; and besides, whenever redemption by Christ is spoken of, the price is usually mentioned, or some circumstance or another which fully determines the sense; see Act_20:28 whereas here is not the least hint of anything of this kind: add to this, that such who are redeemed by Christ are the elect of God only, the people of Christ, his sheep and friends, and church, and who are never left to deny him so as to perish eternally; for could such be lost, or deceive, or be deceived finally and totally by damnable heresies, and bring on themselves swift destruction, Christ's purchase would be in vain, and the ransom price be paid for nought; but the word "bought" regards temporal mercies and deliverance, which these men enjoyed, and is used as an aggravation of their sin in denying the Lord; both by words, delivering out such tenets as are derogatory to the glory of the divine perfections, and which deny one or other of them, and of his purposes, providence, promises, and truths; and by works, turning the doctrine of the grace of God into lasciviousness, being disobedient and reprobate to every good work; that they should act this part against the Lord who had made them, and upheld them in their beings and took care of them in his providence, and had followed them with goodness and mercy all the days of their lives; just as Moses aggravates the ingratitude of the Jews in Deu_32:6 from whence this phrase is borrowed, and to which it manifestly refers: "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?" nor is this the only place the apostle refers to in this chapter, see 2Pe_2:12 compared with Deu_32:5 and it is to be observed, that the persons he writes to were Jews, who were called the people the Lord had redeemed and purchased, Exo_15:13 and so were the first false teachers that rose up among them; and therefore this phrase is very applicable to them:


----------

