2 Peter 2:1 and Limited Atonement

Hi JohnP;

If you do JohnP Check to see if it isn't an illusion.
May Christ Shine His Light On Us All;
Mike

 

All three in the hole not bad 'a'?

johnp.

 

johnp,

You said,

Yes, we Arminians have the faggots red, hot for your feet. Pray God takes you quickly. Just don't call the Lord Despot, on your way out.

 

We all know that it is not God's will for all sinners to hear it and respond. That doesn't depend on limited atonement or not. But we don't preach with individuals in mind. We preach with a clear call to all to obey the gospel in repentant faith.

The atonement is limited to those who believe for both Calvinists and Arminians. All but universalists limit the atonement.

Actually God will bring in his elect through men and women and the preahcing of the gospel, but this really has nothing to do with the topic.

Just as every Calvinist believes.

Should I assume Ray, that you haven't listened to that section yet?

[ February 15, 2005, 04:17 PM: Message edited by: Pastor Larry ]

 

It is only senseless and pointless if you don't read the entire passage. The current "longsuffering" which si being questioned is for the purpose of salvation of the elect. In other words, Peter may be teaching what Paul does in Romans 9, that God will endure the wickedness of the wicked so that those whom he chose beforehand for glory may be saved. NO problem there ... The only problem is when you don't read the actual context.

However, the Calvinist does not have to take that view. I personally beleive this is similar to the Ezekiel verse, that God does not desire the perishing of the wicked. That is what the word can also mean. He takes no great pleasure in it. It is the consequence of their sin.

This is the type of statement that is unfortunate, and you know better. You know this isn't true.

Learn what you are trying to refute. Don't make it up as you go.

 

Unless you believe that all men are saved, then you limit the atonement of Christ. This is so simple. God does not sene people to hell if they are covered by the atonement.</font>[/QUOTE]Is that supposed to be an apology for your false accusation? Or are you intending to let your false accusation stand? [/b]</font>[/QUOTE]I made no false accusation. You are not a universalist. You therefore limit the atonement to those who believe. You have a false view of the atonement and its function. You need to get that straightened out. But don't accuse me of false accusations. I didn't make any.

 

That is the word that Peter used in 2 Peter 2:1. But as a general rule, I don't edit content anyway. I edit for personal demeanor and breaking the rules.

 

You always like to boast in your knowledge of Greek. Look up the word used in 2 Peter 2:1. It is as plain as day ... to those who actually know Greek ...

 

Unless you believe that all men are saved, then you limit the atonement of Christ. This is so simple. God does not sene people to hell if they are covered by the atonement.</font>[/QUOTE]Is that supposed to be an apology for your false accusation? Or are you intending to let your false accusation stand? </font>[/QUOTE]I made no false accusation. You are not a universalist. You therefore limit the atonement to those who believe. You have a false view of the atonement and its function. You need to get that straightened out. But don't accuse me of false accusations. I didn't make any. [/b]</font>[/QUOTE]What ever!

 

What do you mean we can't obey ALL the law we can't obey any of it? The sinful mind is hostile to God. It does not submit to God's law, nor can it do so.
By the way unbelief is a sin. Did Jesus die for the sins that the angels committed?

johnp. </font>[/QUOTE]UNTRUE johnp, If man could not follow any of the law, Disease, and or mayhem would have wiped out the human race millenniums ago! So, Yes, man does follow some and even most of the law of God.

The problem comes with "break the least of the laws and you're guilty of all of them." (a paraphrase from scripture)


Are the angels "of the world" like the sin that Jesus atoned for?

 

Wes.

Is this code for something? Do I fail some test if I ask you what the 'angels of the world' are?
I'll ask you the same question and see if I can understand from your answer.
Are the angels "of the world" like the sin that Jesus atoned for?

Ok but following laws of nature would only be from selfish self-preservation motives and not very conducive in promoting matters of a spiritual nature.

That would be foolhardy nonsense.

And you know that. Dt 6:5 Love the LORD your God with all your heart and with all your soul and with all your strength.
But we don't do that any of the time do we so we are always sinners. We do not break the least but the most important so we break them all all the time.

johnp.

 

Is this code for something? Do I fail some test if I ask you what the 'angels of the world' are?
I'll ask you the same question and see if I can understand from your answer.
Are the angels "of the world" like the sin that Jesus atoned for?</font>[/QUOTE]No sir, it is POOR PHRASEOLOGY on my part! That should read "Are the angels, "of the world", like the sin that Jesus atoned for? Or should I have asked you, "Are you equating the angels with the sins of the world that Jesus atoned for?"

Ok but following laws of nature would only be from selfish self-preservation motives and not very conducive in promoting matters of a spiritual nature.</font>[/QUOTE]Are you saying that the Laws given by God through Moses, are spiritual laws? Are you saying that your prior thought on the matter of 'NNE can keep the law', deals with spiritual law only? Isn't infraction of civil law also spoken of in Scripture?

 

Ya know, Johnp, I don't think we do break that law ALL The time. Many of us observe that law in the same manner that we Love our wives. We don't stop loving them when they are not in our presence, we love them all the time. And I believe that once we have that love of God, we love God the same way. He permits us to do what we "must do" in our daily lives, but that does not mean that while we are doing those things we don't love God with all our hearts.

When you do something that you know would displease your wife, don't you almost instantaneously feel some level of remorse or guilt for having done that? Where do you think that remorse comes from? It is not from direct confrontation with your wife, it is from your love for her. Your love for you wife convicts you when you do what you know would displease her. When you are so convicted by your love, you feel compelled to repent from doing it. If you repent, and never do it again, you'll never be "convicted" by that deed by your love for your wife again.

It is our love for God, spawned by His love for us, that causes us to be responsive to our infractions of His law. Yes, the Holy Spirit is most defininately a factor, but your own love for God will convict you of your sins, once you have that kind of love for God, and God freely and willfully encourages and entices us even seduces us to love him with that kind of Love, because it is that kind of love that He has for us. How many times in scripture does the bible speak of God repenting from doing something to man? Just think for a moment about the love that God has for us, that he would gave his only begotten Son, to die in atonement for our sins so that we can have everlasting life with him. When He does things to man, and to his creation, it does not necessarily please God because he knows what it does to us. Just look at the rainbow of God's promise, a sign of His repentance at destroying mankind except for the eight He saved in the Ark. Even so, I think He might have taken some Joy at destroying Sodom and Gomorrah!

 

Wes.

Forgive old chap but;

Is this code for something? Do I fail some test if I ask you what the 'angels of the world' are?

"Are you equating the angels with the sins of the world that Jesus atoned for?"
Yes. The world can mean creation. Or did He just love the world?
One is up for grabs. No love for the fallen angels or love for them. Which one? He is not a God of love or He has saved the fallen angels! Is that right? I sense you are in trouble.
I do not equate sin with anything but disobedience to God's law.
You said that Jesus atoned for all sin! That the point. The angels sinned. Is this sin, the sin of the angels, included in the death of Christ or are you going to limit the atonement of sin, as you say, ALL sin, to human sin or does this include their sin because if you do why are they not saved because they believe in God more than I do. If you don't you have a limited atonement don't you?

Romans 13:1 Everyone must submit himself to the governing authorities, for there is no authority except that which God has established. The authorities that exist have been established by God.
It's spiritual. It's Adolf and Saddam and Bush and Blair. The Lord is not like us. Everything is spiritual. Everything. I deal with reality and that reality is God. God provides us with everything. Everything is spiritual the flesh counts for nothing. Flesh gives birth to flesh and it counts for nothing.
Jehovah Jireh.

johnp.

 

Wes&gt;

Forget that 'Forgive old chap but;' it does not belong any longer.

johnp.

 

aa0310,

We have among our number, as the Apostle Paul said, who are ‘Ever learning, and never able to come to the knowledge of the truth.’ [II Timothy 3:7]

Notice also, that in the English there are other definitions of 'despot' that simply mean a less violent and vindictive kind of a person. In this case, our Lord.

The original writer of the post did infer that the Lord was more like a tyrant. That's that Augustinianism coming through again for our mental consideration.

 

YOu guys can hash out the meaning of despot. But if I edited everyone who demeaned our Lord, I would have to edit every non-Calvinist here. I don't like it when people attack our Lord and his justice and mercy, his knowledge and love ... but I let the posts by Wes and Ray and aa stand anyway so that people can interact with it.

The job of a moderator is not to police content, no matter how offensive it might be to me or others. It is to police conduct. When you make personal attacks or break the rules, I will edit you. When you have errant doctrinal opinions, you will have to stand on your own ... and that goes for both sides.

Any other discussion of this can be directed to me through PM.

 

The offense.
The Despot reigns. He owns all things. He is the Lord Jesus Christ. Here in this passage we see the Despot not the Mediator. The verse, 2 Peter 2:1, is talking about ownership not redemption.
The charge.
The original writer of the post did infer that the Lord was more like a tyrant.
The original writer? Is this what you mean Ray? The Despot reigns. He owns all things. He is the Lord Jesus Christ. Here in this passage we see the Despot not the Mediator.
Show me how what you say is true and how that is unscriptural or you could always simply apologise. A kindly Christian threw you a rope but you did not use it. Instead you want to dig yourselfs deeper. Fine by me I'll get you a bigger shovel if you want, one or two?

That'll be two shovels then!

What a strange twist you have on life. The attack I made against the Lord is what? Using His own description of Himself to answer your question.

The Despot reigns. He owns all things. He is the Lord Jesus Christ. Here in this passage we see the Despot not the Mediator. The verse, 2 Peter 2:1, is talking about ownership not redemption. What meaning did I put on it that offends you? I put no meaning on the word you are chasing shadows.

Now you mean but that was not so yesterday. You have learnt something.

Under the circumstances of reading 2 Peter 2:1 surely! What excuse do you give for not using it? Goes against the grain does it? Messes up your picture of Sweet Jesus?
RO 9:16 It does not, therefore, depend on man's desire or effort, but on God's mercy. 17 For the Scripture says to Pharaoh: "I raised you up for this very purpose, that I might display my power in you and that my name might be proclaimed in all the earth." 18 Therefore God has mercy on whom he wants to have mercy, and he hardens whom he wants to harden.
DA 4:35 All the peoples of the earth are regarded as nothing. He does as he pleases with the powers of heaven and the peoples of the earth. No one can hold back his hand or say to him: "What have you done?"
Do you want more? Do you not see that this incident was for your good and a way was opened to soften your heart but it has had the opposite effect. You are being hardened by the Lord beware.
My post posted 14 February, 2005 20:28 in answer to 2 Peter 2:1 is restrained and concise. It answers your error and destroys it don't you think?
My post posted 14 February, 2005 22:05 in answer to 2 Peter 3:9 in refuting your error is also restained and also destroys your case. Deal with these and show us what kind of men you are. You are not doing very well at the moment in my opinion.
The Despot reigns. He owns all things. He is the Lord Jesus Christ. Here in this passage we see the Despot not the Mediator. The verse, 2 Peter 2:1, is talking about ownership not redemption.
Where is the offence but that I destroyed your argument. That's what all your noise is about because if I had made a mistake in the scripture you would have pounced on me without mercy would you not? Not that I would blame you for that because that is what I do also. But there is no scriptural argument brought against my explaination at all. Just a load of smoke meant to detract and confuse.
Take a look at yourselfs and judge yourselves in the light. MT 5:14 "You are the light of the world. A city on a hill cannot be hidden. 15 Neither do people light a lamp and put it under a bowl. Instead they put it on its stand, and it gives light to everyone in the house. 16 In the same way, let your light shine before men, that they may see your good deeds and praise your Father in heaven.
MT 6:22 "The eye is the lamp of the body. If your eyes are good, your whole body will be full of light. 23 But if your eyes are bad, your whole body will be full of darkness. If then the light within you is darkness, how great is that darkness!
Your post aa0310 posted 16 February, 2005 01:47 and your one Ray posted 16 February, 2005 06:09 are oppotunities missed. This is a shame and does not bode well for the future. PR 11:2 When pride comes, then comes disgrace, but with humility comes wisdom. PR 15:33 The fear of the LORD teaches a man wisdom, and humility comes before honor. Php 2:3 Do nothing out of selfish ambition or vain conceit, but in humility consider others better than yourselves. 4 Each of you should look not only to your own interests, but also to the interests of others.

That's all.
Now respond to my posts on your proof texts or cede me the points.

johnp.

 

God reigns. He is not a tyrant, but He does mete out His sovereign righteous judgment against evil people in this life and will also in the future Great White Throne Judgment as noted in Revelation 20:11.