2 Peter 2:1

[Van]

The meaning of the word “bought” in 2 Peter 2:1 is arguably quite ambiguous. When we look at the context of the verse, it seems likely that the word “bought” does not refer to Jesus purchasing salvation, but rather to a general deliverance from the idolatry of the world.

This is supported by Peter’s later statement in verse 20 that these people who were “bought” have “escaped the defilements of the world through the knowledge of our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ.” It is certainly possible to escape “the defilements of the world” through the knowledge of the gospel without actually being saved.

Some professing Christians are baptized and serve in the church as if they were truly regenerate, but they eventually apostatize and demonstrate that they were in actuality never truly regenerated. It is entirely possible that these are the kinds of people Peter is referring to in 2 Peter 2:1.

There are other passages in Scripture that are very clear that Jesus actually saves those for whom He died. 2 Peter 2:1 does not speak directly about this topic, and, taken by itself, it is unclear exactly what the phrase, “even denying the Master who bought them,” really means. Because of this, it is important to interpret 2 Peter 2:1 in light of other, clearer, more foundational passages, rather than seeking to interpret it in isolation.

Calvinism and 2 Peter 2:1 – “denying the Master”

Sometimes when we study a verse or passage, the study notes or commentaries offer very different understandings of the text. Thus the need for our own individual study to discern, as best we can, what God intended we gleam from His word.

In the above quote, we see an agenda driven effort to make a verse mean something other than what it seems to mean. Could this still be a valid effort. Unlikely, but yes.

So let us see if we can unravel the effort to say Jesus did not purchase those heading for swift destruction.

Is the meaning of the Greek word "agorazo" (G59) quite ambiguous? The KJV translates the word as buy, bougtht or buyeth 28 times and as "redeemed" three times (Rev. 5:9, 14:3 and 14:4.) But "redeemed" is a miss translation, as the word means purchase without addressing the purpose. Thus the NASB translates "agoraze" as purchased in all three of these verses. Thus every time you see "redeemed" as a translation of G59, the translators are assuming His purchase resulted in redemption in every case, but that view ignores 2 Peter 2:1.

Is the meaning Christ purchased salvation? Nope. He purchased the means of salvation in that He became the means of salvation for the whole of humanity, those to be saved and those, as in 2 Peter 2:1, never to be saved.

Does 2 Peter 2:20 indicate the means of purchase was knowledge of the gospel, rather than the shedding of His blood? Nope Let us take a close look at Revelation 5:9:

And they sang a new song... They refers to the four beasts and 24 Elders present around God's throne.
worthy you are to have taken the scroll and and opened its seals... referring to the Lamb's action
because you were slain and bought us for God... here the means of purchase was Christ's death
with your blood out of every tribe and language and people and nation. Here we must be careful not to assume that Christ's death only purchased those redeemed just because the purchase with His blood included those actually redeemed.

Clearly and thus not ambiguously, Christ purchase was by means of shedding His blood.

Is Paul referring to professing Christians who are tares (not actually saved)? The fact those heading for swift destruction are not saved is not in dispute. What is being disputed is the fact Christ bought those heading for swift destruction. And again, the key is to recognize His purchase did not equate with automatic redemption, but rather with providing (by His purchase) the means of reconciliation.

 

[Van]

"because you were slain and bought us for God..." from post #1. According to the NET footnote, the "us" does not appear in the best witnesses and appears to be an addition to provide an object of the purchase. However some witnesses include the "us." But whether or not the "us" is inspired, or an addition to clarify the assumed meaning, "us" seems to be spot on. The reason is that those purchased refers to those redeemed in this context. Thus in this context the purchase is out of every kind of person, rather than every person.

 

[AustinC]

But false prophets also arose among the people, just as there will also be false teachers among you, who will secretly introduce destructive heresies, even denying the Master who bought them, bringing swift destruction upon themselves.

While this is a difficult text, it is actually quite ambiguous. The case against limited atonement from this verse is not as great as it seems.

First, it is unclear exactly what Peter means when he says the false teachers were "bought." It is true that that 1 Corinthians 6:20 and other verses use "bought" as a reference to what Christ did at His death. But that does not mean that the word is used in this way everywhere it appears in Scripture.

As John Owen points out in The Death of Death in the Death of Christ, the word used to say the false teachers were "bought" can be used to denote any kind of deliverance, and so does not necessarily indicate that they had been purchased by the blood of Christ. Based on the context, it may be best to understand the statement that the false teachers had been "bought" not as a reference to the death of Christ, but a reference to some other act of deliverance--such as deliverance by God's goodness from the idolatry of the world. Notice how later on Peter refers to the false teachers as having had a form of "deliverance" in that they "escape[ed] the pollution of the world" by the knowledge of the gospel (v. 20). This verse is not referring to salvation, but outward reformation with no ultimate inward reality. These people did not have their natures changed and so returned to the mud like a pig. We all know of many unsaved people who for a time reform their lives, but soon go back to their old way. In 2:20 Peter is saying that the false teachers are like that; and so in 2:1 it is possible that the "deliverance" or "purchase" of these teachers refers to their outward escape from the pollution of the world and thus does not imply anything about whether Christ had bought them by His death.

There is also another possibility. Wayne Grudem makes a good case that Peter is referring to the Exodus in 2:1. For Peter compares the false prophets that would arise in the church to the false prophets that arose in Israel: "False prophets also arose among the people, just as there will be false teachers among you." In the Old Testament the whole nation of Israel, and thus even the false teachers in it, was considered to have been "bought" by God in the Exodus from Egypt. Through this deliverance, God "bought" the nation of Israel and thus Israel rightfully belonged to God as His peculiar people. We see this in Deuteronomy 32:6, which is the passage that Peter is probably alluding to: "Do you thus repay the Lord, O foolish and unwise people? Is not He your Father who has bought you? He has made you and established you." God "bought" Israel not by the death of Christ but, as this text says, by forming the nation. This is evident from Exodus 15:16 as well, which speaks of the Exodus as the act of God whereby He "bought" Israel: "Terror and dread fall upon them; by the greatness of Thine arm they are motionless as stone; until they people pass over, O Lord, until the people pass over whom thou hast purchased."

So the nation of Israel was considered "bought" by God because of the Exodus. Since 2 Peter 2:1 is comparing the false teachers who arise in the church with the false prophets who arose in Israel, could it not be that Peter is saying that these false prophets will be from the nation of Israel--that is, those who were "bought" in the Exodus? Or, perhaps could he not be saying that these false teachers will be church attenders in a position analogous to those in Israel who had been "bought" at the Exodus?

Regardless, we see that there are many different things Peter could mean when he says the false teachers were "bought" by the Lord. Because of this ambiguity, it would not be wise to take this as a passage denying limited atonement. In fact, in light of the clear teaching elsewhere in Scripture that limited atonement is true, it would be best to interpret this ambiguous passage in light of those.

Second, it is also ambiguous whether Peter is referring to God the Father or Christ as the Lord who bought them when he says that they will "even deny the sovereign Lord who bought them." In fact, it is likely that the "sovereign Lord" who Peter says had bought these false teachers is a reference to God the Father, not Christ. This is because in the following verses God the Father is spoken of and the Greek word for Lord used here is never used of Christ, but only of the Father (see John Owen's The Death of Death in the Death of Christ). This understanding is also most in line with the allusion to Deuteronomy 32:6, where God the Father is in view and is said to have "bought" Israel.

If Peter is saying that God the Father bought these false teachers, it cannot be a reference to the atonement. Why? Because the atonement was made by Jesus, not the Father. Thus, here is another reason that it is likely that the purchase spoken of here is not a reference to the death of Christ.

Third, it is ambiguous whether Peter is speaking of the reality of a purchase, or according to the appearance of a purchase--that is, their outward appearance and profession. In other words, the verse may mean, "denying the Master who [they say] bought them [but really didn't]," or it may be intended to confirm that these false teachers would come from within the visible church. To speak of them as "bought," then, wouldn't mean that Christ had died to save them, but that they occupied a position that is supposed to be occupied only by those who have been bought.

So we have seen that there are three large ambiguities in 2 Peter 2:1. First, it is unclear whether the purchase of these false teachers is a reference to the death of Christ or not. Second, it is unclear whether the one who "bought" them is even Christ or simply the Father. Third, it is unclear whether Peter is speaking according to reality or appearance.

Because of these huge ambiguities in 2 Peter 2:1, it is not a solid text against limited atonement. There are many things it could legitimately mean, and so it would not be wise to stand on it as an argument against limited atonement.

Does 2 Peter 2:1 Deny Effectual Atonement?

 

[Van]

Is it unclear what Christ bought with His blood? Nope He bought the means of reconciliation for all mankind. If we let scripture explain scripture, then the use of "bought" refers to what Christ accomplished with His death. If we take a look at the verses where Jesus bought or purchased individuals (1 Corinthians 6:20, 7:23, 2 Peter 2:1, Revelation 5:9, 14:3 and 14:4) only the means of reconciliation fits the purpose of every purchase.

Thus it would be wise to take 2 Peter 2:1 as precluding Limited Atonement, and validating the fact Christ died as a ransom for all.

Next, who is in view in 2 Peter 2:1, God the Father or God the Son? Just who were the people that would have false teachers among them. See 2 Peter 1:1. The answer obviously, not ambiguously, are believers in our God and Savior Jesus Christ.

Lastly "bought" is said not to refer to reality. Really! Jesus really lived and died on a cross, purchasing the means of reconciliation for all humanity. Scripture means what it says!

 

[AustinC]

Is it unclear what Christ bought with His blood? Nope He bought the means of reconciliation for all mankind. If we let scripture explain scripture, then the use of "bought" refers to what Christ accomplished with His death. If we take a look at the verses where Jesus bought or purchased individuals (1 Corinthians 6:20, 7:23, 2 Peter 2:1, Revelation 5:9, 14:3 and 14:4) only the means of reconciliation fits the purpose of every purchase.

Thus it would be wise to take 2 Peter 2:1 as precluding Limited Atonement, and validating the fact Christ died as a ransom for all.

Next, who is in view in 2 Peter 2:1, God the Father or God the Son? Just who were the people that would have false teachers among them. See 2 Peter 1:1. The answer obviously, not ambiguously, are believers in our God and Savior Jesus Christ.

Lastly "bought" is said not to refer to reality. Really! Jesus really lived and died on a cross, purchasing the means of reconciliation for all humanity. Scripture means what it says!

Van, I know you want to hone in on one sentence and build your theology off it while ignoring all other verses that muddy up your world, but I won't do that. The whole of scripture must be brought to the table when reviewing the sentence that you think defines the issue. The article I shared is much more scholarly than you are and thus I encourage the readers of this thread to go beyond your weak assertions to review the more scholarly opinions.

 

[Van]

Van, I know you want to hone in on one sentence and build your theology off it while ignoring all other verses that muddy up your world, but I won't do that. The whole of scripture must be brought to the table when reviewing the sentence that you think defines the issue. The article I shared is much more scholarly than you are and thus I encourage the readers of this thread to go beyond your weak assertions to review the more scholarly opinions.

You want push obviously false teachings, even denying the Master bought those heading for swift destruction. The view found in post #1 is supported by each and every verse of the Bible. It is your bogus view that ignores verse after verse. The article you posted is not scholarly at all, it is absurd nonsense.

Heb 2:9
But we do see Him who was made for a little while lower than the angels, namely, Jesus, because of His suffering death crowned with glory and honor, so that by the grace of God He might taste death for everyone.

1Jo 2:2
and He Himself is the propitiation [means of reconciliation] for our sins; and not for ours only, but also for the whole world.

1Ti 2:6
who gave Himself as a ransom for all, the testimony given at the proper time.

What was purchased? Do these verse say everyone was redeemed? Nope. Did Christ become the means of reconciliation? Yes. So it is lack of understanding of just what Christ purchased that drives these absurd efforts to nullify God' word.

 

[Van]

Consider an oil lease, where a Master purchases the right to extract all the barrels of oil, but can choose to only extract the barrels He deems to believe in Christ. So everyone was purchased, but not everyone was redeemed. So simple a child could understand it.

 

[AustinC]

You want push obviously false teachings, even denying the Master bought those heading for swift destruction. The view found in post #1 is supported by each and every verse of the Bible. It is your bogus view that ignores verse after verse. The article you posted is not scholarly at all, it is absurd nonsense.

Heb 2:9
But we do see Him who was made for a little while lower than the angels, namely, Jesus, because of His suffering death crowned with glory and honor, so that by the grace of God He might taste death for everyone.

1Jo 2:2
and He Himself is the propitiation [means of reconciliation] for our sins; and not for ours only, but also for the whole world.

1Ti 2:6
who gave Himself as a ransom for all, the testimony given at the proper time.

What was purchased? Do these verse say everyone was redeemed? Nope. Did Christ become the means of reconciliation? Yes. So it is lack of understanding of just what Christ purchased that drives these absurd efforts to nullify God' word.

You prove my point, Van. In two of your quotes, you don't even share the whole sentence let alone the context. Those passages don't teach what you claim from them, but you don't care. You have a personal philosophy you have built and you will openly abuse God's Word to build your philosophy. You show us this pattern with the post I have quoted from you here.

Van, you simply don't know what you are talking about.

 

[Reformed1689]

Consider an oil lease, where a Master purchases the right to extract all the barrels of oil, but can choose to only extract the barrels He deems to believe in Christ. So everyone was purchased, but not everyone was redeemed. So simple a child could understand it.

Yeah the Bible doesn't say that.

 

[Van]

You prove my point, Van. In two of your quotes, you don't even share the whole sentence let alone the context. Those passages don't teach what you claim from them, but you don't care. You have a personal philosophy you have built and you will openly abuse God's Word to build your philosophy. You show us this pattern with the post I have quoted from you here.

Van, you simply don't know what you are talking about.

Once again the copy and paste guy offers personal attacks because he must use fallacious argumentation rather than admit defeat.

You want push obviously false teachings, even denying the Master bought those heading for swift destruction. The view found in post #1 is supported by each and every verse of the Bible. It is your bogus view that ignores verse after verse. The article you posted is not scholarly at all, it is absurd nonsense.

Heb 2:9
But we do see Him who was made for a little while lower than the angels, namely, Jesus, because of His suffering death crowned with glory and honor, so that by the grace of God He might taste death for everyone.

1Jo 2:2
and He Himself is the propitiation [means of reconciliation] for our sins; and not for ours only, but also for the whole world.

1Ti 2:6
who gave Himself as a ransom for all, the testimony given at the proper time.

What was purchased? Do these verse say everyone was redeemed? Nope. Did Christ become the means of reconciliation? Yes. So it is lack of understanding of just what Christ purchased that drives these absurd efforts to nullify God' word.

 

[Van]

Yeah the Bible doesn't say that.

Consider an oil lease, where a Master purchases the right to extract all the barrels of oil, but can choose to only extract the barrels He deems to believe in Christ. So everyone was purchased, but not everyone was redeemed. So simple a child could understand it. Yeah, that is what the Bible actually says!

 

[Van]

Sometimes when we study a verse or passage, the study notes or commentaries offer very different understandings of the text. Thus the need for our own individual study to discern, as best we can, what God intended we gleam from His word.

In the above quote, we see an agenda driven effort to make a verse mean something other than what it seems to mean. Could this still be a valid effort. Unlikely, but yes.

So let us see if we can unravel the effort to say Jesus did not purchase those heading for swift destruction.

Is the meaning of the Greek word "agorazo" (G59) quite ambiguous? The KJV translates the word as buy, bought or buyeth 28 times and as "redeemed" three times (Rev. 5:9, 14:3 and 14:4.) But "redeemed" is a mistranslation, as the word means purchase without addressing the purpose. Thus the NASB translates "agoraze" as purchased in all three of these verses. Therefore, every time you see "redeemed" as a translation of G59, the translators are assuming His purchase resulted in redemption in every case, but that view ignores 2 Peter 2:1.

Is the meaning Christ purchased salvation? Nope. He purchased the means of salvation in that He became the means of salvation for the whole of humanity, those to be saved and those, as in 2 Peter 2:1, never to be saved.

Does 2 Peter 2:20 indicate the means of purchase was knowledge of the gospel, rather than the shedding of His blood? Nope Let us take a close look at Revelation 5:9:

And they sang a new song... They refers to the four beasts and 24 Elders present around God's throne.
worthy you are to have taken the scroll and and opened its seals... referring to the Lamb's action
because you were slain and bought us for God... here the means of purchase was Christ's death
with your blood out of every tribe and language and people and nation. Here we must be careful not to assume that Christ's death only purchased those redeemed just because the purchase with His blood included those actually redeemed.

Clearly and thus not ambiguously, Christ purchase was by means of shedding His blood.

Is Paul referring to professing Christians who are tares (not actually saved)? The fact those heading for swift destruction are not saved is not in dispute. What is being disputed is the fact Christ bought those heading for swift destruction. And again, the key is to recognize His purchase did not equate with automatic redemption, but rather with providing (by His purchase) the means of reconciliation.

 

[Van]

Sometimes agenda driven commentaries say Jesus did not just provide the opportunity for salvation. But no one said that is all He provides. Note that every single individual given to Christ (John 6:37) is put within Christ's spiritual body and will not be cast out.

So Christ provides the opportunity for salvation to all and actual salvation to those God places within Him.

 

[37818]

Key cross reference to the correct common meaning.
2 Peter 2:1, ". . . But there were false prophets also among the people, even as there shall be false teachers among you, who privily shall bring in damnable heresies, even denying the Lord that bought them, and bring upon themselves swift destruction. . . ."
Jude 1:4, ". . . For there are certain men crept in unawares, who were before of old ordained to this condemnation, ungodly men, turning the grace of our God into lasciviousness, and denying the only Lord God, and our Lord Jesus Christ. . . ."

 

[Van]

Since Jude 1:4 does not include "that bought them" it does not provide additional information bearing on the issue. It does address one of the efforts to nullify 2 Peter 2:1, by claiming "master" refers to God the Father. The CT version of Jude 1:4 reads "deny our only Master and Lord, Jesus Christ." (NASB) So the common idea is that false teachers deny some aspects of Christ's gospel.

 

[Reformed1689]

Consider an oil lease, where a Master purchases the right to extract all the barrels of oil, but can choose to only extract the barrels He deems to believe in Christ. So everyone was purchased, but not everyone was redeemed. So simple a child could understand it. Yeah, that is what the Bible actually says!

LOL no it isn't.

 

[Van]

LOL no it isn't.

Yet another mindless "taint so" post denying the Lord bought those heading for swift destruction with His blood, providing the means of salvation for all humanity, those to be saved, and those, as in 2 Peter 2:1, never to be saved.

Note that certain posters are long on what is not according to what they believe, but short on what they believe. Go figure...

 

[Reformed1689]

Yet another mindless "taint so" post denying the Lord bought those heading for swift destruction with His blood, providing the means of salvation for all humanity, those to be saved, and those, as in 2 Peter 2:1, never to be saved.

Note that certain posters are long on what is not according to what they believe, but short on what they believe. Go figure...

I deny it because it isn't true. Bible says he laid down his life for the sheep.

 

[AustinC]

Once again the copy and paste guy offers personal attacks because he must use fallacious argumentation rather than admit defeat.

You want push obviously false teachings, even denying the Master bought those heading for swift destruction. The view found in post #1 is supported by each and every verse of the Bible. It is your bogus view that ignores verse after verse. The article you posted is not scholarly at all, it is absurd nonsense.

Heb 2:9
But we do see Him who was made for a little while lower than the angels, namely, Jesus, because of His suffering death crowned with glory and honor, so that by the grace of God He might taste death for everyone.

1Jo 2:2
and He Himself is the propitiation [means of reconciliation] for our sins; and not for ours only, but also for the whole world.

1Ti 2:6
who gave Himself as a ransom for all, the testimony given at the proper time.

What was purchased? Do these verse say everyone was redeemed? Nope. Did Christ become the means of reconciliation? Yes. So it is lack of understanding of just what Christ purchased that drives these absurd efforts to nullify God' word.

Once again, the copy and paste part of a sentence as a prooftext guy attacks those who point out his empty arguments.
You want to push obvious false teachings by ignoring content and chopping up the Bible like a tv editor chops up sound bytes in order to change the narrative. What you do with God's Word is shameful.

 

[Van]

I deny it because it isn't true. Bible says he laid down his life for the sheep.

Yet another Falselogy advocate denying the Lord bought those heading for swift destruction with His blood, providing the means of salvation for all humanity, those to be saved, and those, as in 2 Peter 2:1, never to be saved.