Does regeneration precede faith?

[percho]

I agree Robert William. The Bible even says it is not of a man's will when it states, "So then it is not of him that willeth, nor of him that runneth, but of God that sheweth mercy." (Romans 9:16) Man's will is only free to choose according to his nature which before being reborn is totally depraved.

I would say Adam was created, carnal, sold under sin, needing from the moment of his creation, redemption and rebirth as a new creation. Otherwise why was the Lamb slain before the man was created? It wasn't as if by his free will he would subject himself to futility. Rom 8:20 For the creature was made subject to vanity (futility), not willingly, but by reason of him who hath subjected the same in hope,

IMO. It wasn't about God and man but about God and the adversary, Satan.

He that committeth sin is of the devil; for the devil sinneth from the beginning. For this purpose the Son of God was manifested, that he might destroy the works of the devil. 1 John 3:8
Forasmuch then as the children (of Adam) are partakers of flesh and blood, he (the Lamb) also himself likewise took part of the same; that through death he might destroy him that had the power of death, that is, the devil; Heb 2:14

Man from his creation would need to be: conformed to the image of his Son, that he might be the firstborn (Regenerated) among many brethren. from Rom 8:29

 

[percho]

We won't dispute that. But what should be agreed on is that the point that Jesus was making was that there was still a necessity of the new birth as far as Nicodemus was concerned. Otherwise Jesus went into a very detailed conversation with Nicodemus about the new birth for no reason at all. It was all in vain. What was the reason for this discussion?
Why?
The reason: He needed regeneration!

Joh 3:6 That which is born of the flesh is flesh; and that which is born of the Spirit is spirit.
Joh 3:7 Marvel not that I said unto thee, Ye must be born again.

No mention of sin. He was created flesh and blood, carnal, sold under sin. The lust of the flesh was going to bring about being tempted and give birth to sin which would result in being dead in trespass and sin from the day he ate, Therefore Dying thou dost die. "מוֹת תָּמוּת:"

To enter, see or inherit the kingdom of God he would need to be a new creation, born from above, regenerated as something that contained life apart from the blood.


Lev 17:11 For the life ( nephesh) of the flesh is in the blood:

The soul of the flesh in the blood. The first man Adam a living soul?

Forasmuch then as the children are partakers of flesh and blood, he also himself likewise took part of the same. Jesus born of Mary was a living soul.

Jesus, the living soul of his flesh in the blood. Just like the first man Adam. He poured out his soul unto death. He shed his blood that contained the only life of him. He gave his life a ransom. Christ died for our sins.

the last Adam was made a quickening spirit. Howbeit that was not first which is spiritual, but that which is natural; and afterward that which is spiritual. from 1 Cor 15:45,46 After being regenerated from the dead, quickening Spirit no longer the soul of the flesh being in the blood.

Christ is truly the firstfruit.

Because of his regeneration our sins can be washed away is his blood, which at one time contained his life's soul.

And if Christ be not raised, (from the dead) your faith is vain; ye are yet in your sins. 1 Cor 15:17 His blood would not have washed away anything except his life.

Just my opinion.

 

[steaver]

The fruit of the Spirit’s regenerating work is faith (Ephesians 2:8). There were men of faith in the Old Testament because Hebrews 11 names many of them. If faith is produced by the regenerating power of the Holy Spirit, then this must be the case for Old Testament saints who looked ahead to the cross, believing that what God had promised in regard to their redemption would come to pass. They saw the promises and “welcomed them from a distance” (Hebrews 11:13), accepting by faith that what God had promised, He would also bring to pass.

The Spirit’s work in the Old Testament is also indwelling, or filling, but the major difference between the Spirit’s roles in the Old and New Testaments is the New Testament teaches the permanent indwelling of the Holy Spirit in believers (1 Corinthians 3:16-17; 6:19-20). The Apostle Paul calls this permanent indwelling the “guarantee of our inheritance” (Ephesians 1:13-14). In contrast to this work in the New Testament, the indwelling in the Old Testament was selective and temporary. The Spirit “came upon” such Old Testament saints as Joshua (Numbers 27:18), David (1 Samuel 16:12-13) and Saul (1 Samuel 10:10). In the book of Judges, we see the Spirit “coming upon” the various judges whom God raised up to deliver Israel from their oppressors. The Holy Spirit came upon these individuals for specific tasks. The indwelling was a sign of God’s favor upon that individual (in the case of David), and if God’s favor left an individual, the Spirit would depart (e.g., in Saul’s case in 1 Samuel 16:14)

All of this misunderstanding of these scriptures above is a direct result of your faulty premise concerning regeneration.

John7:38-39 -
"He that believeth on me, as the scripture hath said, out of his belly shall flow rivers of living water. (But this spake he of the Spirit, which they that believe on him should receive: for the Holy Ghost was not yet given; because that Jesus was not yet glorified.)"

Crystal Clear!!!!

 

[steaver]

The Disciples did not have the Holy Ghost!!!!!

John 14:26 - "But the Comforter, which is the Holy Ghost, whom the Father will send in my name, he shall teach you all things, and bring all things to your remembrance, whatsoever I have said unto you."

John 20:22 - (AFTER Jesus' glorification) "And when he had said this, he breathed on them, and saith unto them, Receive ye the Holy Ghost".

Crystal clear!!!

 

[convicted1]

The Disciples did not have the Holy Ghost!!!!!

John 14:26 - "But the Comforter, which is the Holy Ghost, whom the Father will send in my name, he shall teach you all things, and bring all things to your remembrance, whatsoever I have said unto you."

John 20:22 - (AFTER Jesus' glorification) "And when he had said this, he breathed on them, and saith unto them, Receive ye the Holy Ghost".

Crystal clear!!!

Some verses to chew on...


Dan. 6:1-3

--It pleased Darius to set over the kingdom an hundred and twenty princes, which should be over the whole kingdom; And over these three presidents; of whom Daniel was first: that the princes might give accounts unto them, and the king should have no damage. Then this Daniel was preferred above the presidents and princes, because an excellent spirit was in him; and the king thought to set him over the whole realm.


By your post here, you are saying they OT saints were saved w/o the regenerating power of the Spirit?

 

[Robert William]

:smilewinkgrin:

Uh no the word of God is.

Duh :smilewinkgrin: he means faith in the word, specifically the gospel, not a totem pole.:laugh:

I noticed you have Rev in front of your name, do you think you deserve to be Reverenced??

 

[The Archangel]

All of this misunderstanding of these scriptures above is a direct result of your faulty premise concerning regeneration.

John7:38-39 -
"He that believeth on me, as the scripture hath said, out of his belly shall flow rivers of living water. (But this spake he of the Spirit, which they that believe on him should receive: for the Holy Ghost was not yet given; because that Jesus was not yet glorified.)"

Crystal Clear!!!!

This is what happens when someone fails to have a cogent and cohesive whole-Bible theology. If you look at the entire story-line of Scripture, you'll see that Steaver does not have a leg to stand on...

How can it be said that "the Holy Ghost was not yet given" when we clearly read the following throughout the text of Scripture:

[11] Cast me not away from your presence,
and take not your Holy Spirit from me.
(Psalm 51:11 ESV)
​

Clearly David had the Holy Spirit. If he didn't how could it be taken from him?

Of course, Peter says that David had the Holy Spirit:

[16] “Brothers, the Scripture had to be fulfilled, which the Holy Spirit spoke beforehand by the mouth of David concerning Judas, who became a guide to those who arrested Jesus. (Acts 1:16 ESV)
​

Of course, the Holy Spirit is the "Author" of Scripture. So, He was present in many more people than David. Peter, again, writes:

[10] Concerning this salvation, the prophets who prophesied about the grace that was to be yours searched and inquired carefully, [11] inquiring what person or time the Spirit of Christ in them was indicating when he predicted the sufferings of Christ and the subsequent glories. [12] It was revealed to them that they were serving not themselves but you, in the things that have now been announced to you through those who preached the good news to you by the Holy Spirit sent from heaven, things into which angels long to look. (1 Peter 1:10-12 ESV)
​

The Spirit predicted the sufferings of Christ (and the glories). The sufferings and glories of Christ were revealed to the prophets by the Spirit as a service to all of us. Again, though, we have the Holy Spirit being present in the Prophets as Peter further explains:

[21] For no prophecy was ever produced by the will of man, but men spoke from God as they were carried along by the Holy Spirit. (2 Peter 1:21 ESV)
​

If the Holy Spirit was NOT present in the writers of the Old Testament (and the New, but that's not in view here), then we have NO doctrine of inspiration.

In fact, if you argue--as you are doing--that the Holy Spirit was not given until after the glorification of Christ, then you MUST throw out the entire Old Testament.

Of course, the error you are committing is what happens when one verse is cited without the larger biblical context. Surely John 7:39 says "for as yet the Spirit had not been http://www.esvbible.org/Jn3.34;Lk11.13/given, http://www.esvbible.org/Jn14.16-17;Jn16.7/because Jesus was not yet glorified." But it, of course, it does not mean what you think it means.

Since D. A. Carson says it so well, I'll cite him here:

Up to this point in Jesus’ ministry, the Spirit had not yet been given. This paraphrase has the meaning right, though the reading most likely original is, literally, ‘for the Spirit was not yet’. Of course John cannot possibly mean the Spirit was not yet in existence, or operative in the prophets. John himself has already spoken of the Spirit’s operation upon and in Jesus himself (1:32; 3:34). What the Evangelist means is that the Spirit of the dawning kingdom comes as the result—indeed, the entailment—of the Son’s completed work, and up to that point the Holy Spirit was not given in the full, Christian sense of the term (cf. also the notes on 3:1–15).

D. A. Carson, The Gospel according to John, The Pillar New Testament Commentary (Leicester, England; Grand Rapids, MI: Inter-Varsity Press; W.B. Eerdmans, 1991), 329. (Emphasis mine)
​

In reality, the Holy Spirit was active in the Old Testament, though the "doctrine" was not well developed in the text of the Old Testament. Many of the gaps are filled-in in the New Testament.

The Archangel

​

 

[savedbymercy]

percho

I would say Adam was created, carnal, sold under sin, needing from the moment of his creation, redemption and rebirth as a new creation.

Absolutely, Adam proved Rom 8:3

3 For what the law could not do, in that it was weak through the flesh, God sending his own Son in the likeness of sinful flesh, and for sin, condemned sin in the flesh:

Adam and Eve could not keep the simple Law of God given them in the beginning because of the weakness of the flesh, it was too carnal, the devil exploited it !

Yet this was all predetermined by God, for this world was created for an Redemptive Purpose in Christ !

It wasn't as if by his free will he would subject himself to futility. Rom 8:20 For the creature was made subject to vanity (futility), not willingly, but by reason of him who hath subjected the same in hope,

Thats correct ! Ps 90:3

Thou turnest man to destruction; and sayest, Return, ye children of men.

 

[BrotherJoseph]

This is what happens when someone fails to have a cogent and cohesive whole-Bible theology. If you look at the entire story-line of Scripture, you'll see that Steaver does not have a leg to stand on...

How can it be said that "the Holy Ghost was not yet given" when we clearly read the following throughout the text of Scripture:

[11] Cast me not away from your presence,
and take not your Holy Spirit from me.
(Psalm 51:11 ESV)
​

Clearly David had the Holy Spirit. If he didn't how could it be taken from him?

Of course, Peter says that David had the Holy Spirit:

[16] “Brothers, the Scripture had to be fulfilled, which the Holy Spirit spoke beforehand by the mouth of David concerning Judas, who became a guide to those who arrested Jesus. (Acts 1:16 ESV)
​

Of course, the Holy Spirit is the "Author" of Scripture. So, He was present in many more people than David. Peter, again, writes:

[10] Concerning this salvation, the prophets who prophesied about the grace that was to be yours searched and inquired carefully, [11] inquiring what person or time the Spirit of Christ in them was indicating when he predicted the sufferings of Christ and the subsequent glories. [12] It was revealed to them that they were serving not themselves but you, in the things that have now been announced to you through those who preached the good news to you by the Holy Spirit sent from heaven, things into which angels long to look. (1 Peter 1:10-12 ESV)
​

The Spirit predicted the sufferings of Christ (and the glories). The sufferings and glories of Christ were revealed to the prophets by the Spirit as a service to all of us. Again, though, we have the Holy Spirit being present in the Prophets as Peter further explains:

[21] For no prophecy was ever produced by the will of man, but men spoke from God as they were carried along by the Holy Spirit. (2 Peter 1:21 ESV)
​

If the Holy Spirit was NOT present in the writers of the Old Testament (and the New, but that's not in view here), then we have NO doctrine of inspiration.

In fact, if you argue--as you are doing--that the Holy Spirit was not given until after the glorification of Christ, then you MUST throw out the entire Old Testament.

Of course, the error you are committing is what happens when one verse is cited without the larger biblical context. Surely John 7:39 says "for as yet the Spirit had not been http://www.esvbible.org/Jn3.34;Lk11.13/given, http://www.esvbible.org/Jn14.16-17;Jn16.7/because Jesus was not yet glorified." But it, of course, it does not mean what you think it means.

Since D. A. Carson says it so well, I'll cite him here:

Up to this point in Jesus’ ministry, the Spirit had not yet been given. This paraphrase has the meaning right, though the reading most likely original is, literally, ‘for the Spirit was not yet’. Of course John cannot possibly mean the Spirit was not yet in existence, or operative in the prophets. John himself has already spoken of the Spirit’s operation upon and in Jesus himself (1:32; 3:34). What the Evangelist means is that the Spirit of the dawning kingdom comes as the result—indeed, the entailment—of the Son’s completed work, and up to that point the Holy Spirit was not given in the full, Christian sense of the term (cf. also the notes on 3:1–15).

D. A. Carson, The Gospel according to John, The Pillar New Testament Commentary (Leicester, England; Grand Rapids, MI: Inter-Varsity Press; W.B. Eerdmans, 1991), 329. (Emphasis mine)
​

In reality, the Holy Spirit was active in the Old Testament, though the "doctrine" was not well developed in the text of the Old Testament. Many of the gaps are filled-in in the New Testament.

The Archangel

​

Good post! I just thought of a few scriptures that support what we are saying
"For David himself said by the Holy Ghost, The Lord said to my Lord, Sit thou on my right hand, till I make thine enemies thy footstool." (Mark 12:36)
"For he shall be great in the sight of the Lord, and shall drink neither wine nor strong drink; and he shall be filled with the Holy Ghost, even from his mother's womb." (Luke 1:15)
"And it came to pass, that, when Elisabeth heard the salutation of Mary, the babe leaped in her womb; and Elisabeth was filled with the Holy Ghost:" (Luke 1:41)
"And his father Zacharias was filled with the Holy Ghost, and prophesied, saying" (Luke 1:67)
"25 And, behold, there was a man in Jerusalem, whose name was Simeon; and the same man was just and devout, waiting for the consolation of Israel: and the Holy Ghost was upon him.

26 And it was revealed unto him by the Holy Ghost, that he should not see death, before he had seen the Lord's Christ." (Luke 2:25-26)

 

[The Archangel]

Good post! I just thought of a few scriptures that support what we are saying
"For David himself said by the Holy Ghost, The Lord said to my Lord, Sit thou on my right hand, till I make thine enemies thy footstool." (Mark 12:36)
"For he shall be great in the sight of the Lord, and shall drink neither wine nor strong drink; and he shall be filled with the Holy Ghost, even from his mother's womb." (Luke 1:15)
"And it came to pass, that, when Elisabeth heard the salutation of Mary, the babe leaped in her womb; and Elisabeth was filled with the Holy Ghost:" (Luke 1:41)
"And his father Zacharias was filled with the Holy Ghost, and prophesied, saying" (Luke 1:67)
"25 And, behold, there was a man in Jerusalem, whose name was Simeon; and the same man was just and devout, waiting for the consolation of Israel: and the Holy Ghost was upon him.

26 And it was revealed unto him by the Holy Ghost, that he should not see death, before he had seen the Lord's Christ." (Luke 2:25-26)

Yes, indeed!

The Archangel

 

[Iconoclast]

percho

I would say Adam was created, carnal, sold under sin, needing from the moment of his creation, redemption and rebirth as a new creation

.

No...Adam was created with original righteousness....pre fall...had not sinned gen1:31

Otherwise why was the Lamb slain before the man was created?

The Lamb was slain for the seed of Abraham

Forasmuch then as the children (of Adam) are partakers of flesh and blood, he (the Lamb) also himself likewise took part of the same; that through death he might destroy him that had the power of death, that is, the devil; Heb 2:14

It was not for the seed of Adam...whoever added this opposes truth...

It was only for the seed of Abraham;

16 For verily he took not on him the nature of angels; but he took on him the seed of Abraham.

Man from his creation would need to be: conformed to the image of his Son, that he might be the firstborn (Regenerated) among many brethren. from Rom 8:29

[/QUOTE]

This only happens for the elect seed of Abraham...Jesus dies for them alone.

 

[Protestant]

It does indeed [say seek and ye shall find] so you believe Jesus was telling them to do something they could not do. This is the problem with Calvinism, all throughout the bible we find God commanding folks to seek God, repent and believe, while the Calvinist believes it is all in vain, God speaking in vain.

Was the Lord speaking in vain when He commanded Adam:

Of every tree of the garden thou mayest freely eat:
17 But of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil, thou shalt not eat of it: for in the day that thou eatest thereof thou shalt surely die.

Was the Lord speaking in vain when He gave Israel the Ten Commandments?

Answer: He was not.

God does not speak in vain when He declares man’s rightful duty before his Creator.

Man’s primary duty in the New Testament is to repent and believe on the Lord Jesus Christ.

By so doing, man proves His love for the Lord his God which, in turn, will lead to man loving his neighbor; thereby fulfilling the spirit of the whole Law.

The testimony of both Testaments is consistent.

Man’s will is naturally contrary to God’s will.

The fault lies in man. His inherent sin nature fights tooth and nail against God’s holy nature.

Because sinful man will always resist God’s holy truth, our Lord has purposed to reverse that resistance in some men of His sovereign choosing.

Jesus Christ is the Mediator chosen to reconcile those Elected sinners to the Father.

Those Elected are saved from the righteous punishment their sins deserved.

They are saved by God’s grace in Jesus Christ.

They do not deserve God’s grace. All sinners deserve God’s wrathful judgment.

It is God’s sovereign decision as to which sinners are to be the recipients of saving grace.

It is God who gives or withholds saving grace at the good pleasure of His all-wise, righteous and holy will.

This divine truth was stated to Moses when declaring His glory.

Paul simply restates this truth for his New Testament readers in Romans 9.

For he saith to Moses, I will have mercy on whom I will have mercy, and I will have compassion on whom I will have compassion.

16 So then it is not of him that willeth, nor of him that runneth, but of God that sheweth mercy.

Our Pelagian, Arminian, non-Cal, Synergist brethren dislike this attribute of God’s glory.

But God cannot deny Himself.

Why do our opponents insist otherwise?

 

[percho]

percho
.

No...Adam was created with original righteousness....pre fall...had not sinned gen1:31



The Lamb was slain for the seed of Abraham




It was not for the seed of Adam...whoever added this opposes truth...

It was only for the seed of Abraham;

16 For verily he took not on him the nature of angels; but he took on him the seed of Abraham.

This only happens for the elect seed of Abraham...Jesus dies for them alone.[/QUOTE]

I don't mind inserting Abraham where I inserted Adam however; Was the Lamb not slain for anyone from Adam to Abraham?

The next day John seeth Jesus coming unto him, and saith, Behold the Lamb of God, which taketh away the sin of the world. John 1:29

Was the Lamb being slain relative to the removal of the above sin, singular? What would you say was that singular sin?

 

[Iconoclast]

He dies an exact death for all of the sins of t hose he came to save....worldwide.Those sins alone are cleansed and forgiven.

 

[DHK]

He dies an exact death for all of the sins of t hose he came to save....worldwide.Those sins alone are cleansed and forgiven.

That is easily refuted by Scripture.

2Pe 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.

There are false prophets and false teachers among you.
They bring in and teach damnable heresies.
There is one damnable heresies out of them all that is mentioned.
They deny the Lord that bought them
Peter says the Lord purchased or paid the price of even these false teachers.
And this damnable heresy that they are teaching is that they deny the Lord that paid the price of redemption, that purchased them, that is the belief of Limited Atonement.

Peter calls the belief in Limited Atonement
1. A belief of false teachers and false prophets.
2. A damnable heresy.
3. a heresy that brings upon those that teach it swift destruction.

At least that is what this verse teaches as far as I understand it.

 

[Robert William]

All of this misunderstanding of these scriptures above is a direct result of your faulty premise concerning regeneration.

John7:38-39 -
"He that believeth on me, as the scripture hath said, out of his belly shall flow rivers of living water. (But this spake he of the Spirit, which they that believe on him should receive: for the Holy Ghost was not yet given; because that Jesus was not yet glorified.)"

Crystal Clear!!!!

Not crystal clear but crystal stupid!

What about all the Old Covenant Saints, was the Holy Spirit gone then?:BangHead:

 

[Yeshua1]

It is often claimed that regeneration is a gift of God that comes directly from God to man and that man is passive in his faith of the things of God with regard to salvation. Let's take a look at that claim.


Scripture makes it clear that faith comes from the hearing of the word of God. Romans 10:17

Scripture says we have been born through the word of God. 1 Peter 1:23

Scripture tells us that God chose to give us salvation though His word. James 1:18

Scripture tells us that salvation is a gift that is provided because of the faith of man. Ephesians 2:8 Further Abraham's salvation was a direct response by God to his faith in God. Romans 4:3

There is no scripture that tells us that we are first regenerated and then we believe and then are saved. The use of the word regenerated is translated in scripture as born. Scripture makes is clear that we can be born of the flesh or born of the spirit. (John 3:6)

Scripture is clear that man is not passive in this birth. Man must receive Christ.(John 1:12) Man is justified after his belief. (Romans 3:26) Belief and confession are the responsibility of man (Romans 10:9-10) Calling on God is required of man (Romans 10:13)

The further question is often reasonably asked does the response of man toward God and is available grace in salvation require that any such response is a work that would cause man to be able to claim any amount of credit for the salvation God has provided?

The answer to this would be no. That which is considered works in scripture is always a reference to the Law. This was made clear when Romans chapter three where Paul is addressing Jews. He said "Rom 3:28 Therefore we conclude that a man is justified by faith without the deeds of the law." Then in chapter four Paul states of Abraham that he was not justified world (the law) but because of his belief in God it was counted to him for righteousness. Abraham's active participation and response to God was not a work (the law) it was simply him responding to God with no mention of prior regeneration.

Trying to turn any active participation by man toward God into a work is contrary to scripture and fails to see the bigger picture. That is that no matter what response God requires of man without the work of the cross, without the authority to give salvation, without the power to provide salvation, the response of man can have no effect. Therefore because of this no action or active response on the part of man can ever be considered a work or something to claim credit for with regard to our salvation. A biblical work is following the OT law and not active participation by man. God says I will accept your response toward me and will apply my atonement to your life as He did with Abraham.

Would say that the scriptures though do teach us that NONE of us if left to our own device would even want to get saved by God, much less "come to Jesus:, so we must have God do the work first on us to enable us to actual be in the state even able to 'freely respond" to Jesus and get saved by him!

Would also see the truth being that those whom God has chosen to save will hear the Gospel message, that at the "right time" the Holy Spirit indeed quickens/enables them to be able to place faith in Jesus, and they will!

Do not see the bible teaching that God regenerates a sinner, and that person could take years even to place faith in Jesus, see it as happening at same time from our perspective!

 

[BrotherJoseph]

That is easily refuted by Scripture.

2Pe 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.

There are false prophets and false teachers among you.
They bring in and teach damnable heresies.
There is one damnable heresies out of them all that is mentioned.
They deny the Lord that bought them
Peter says the Lord purchased or paid the price of even these false teachers.
And this damnable heresy that they are teaching is that they deny the Lord that paid the price of redemption, that purchased them, that is the belief of Limited Atonement.

Peter calls the belief in Limited Atonement
1. A belief of false teachers and false prophets.
2. A damnable heresy.
3. a heresy that brings upon those that teach it swift destruction.

At least that is what this verse teaches as far as I understand it.

DHK, I take it from your interpretation above of this passage that you believe those who believe in the doctrine of limited atonement are unregenerate?

 

[BrotherJoseph]

That is easily refuted by Scripture.

2Pe 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.

There are false prophets and false teachers among you.
They bring in and teach damnable heresies.
There is one damnable heresies out of them all that is mentioned.
They deny the Lord that bought them
Peter says the Lord purchased or paid the price of even these false teachers.
And this damnable heresy that they are teaching is that they deny the Lord that paid the price of redemption, that purchased them, that is the belief of Limited Atonement.

This passage is not the death nail to limited atonement. The following is from a commentary article on this verse titled "2 Peter 2:1 and Universal Redemption" by Simon Escobedo III. If interested, the whole article can be found here http://vintage.aomin.org/2PE21.html

"To summarize this argument, then: in the thirty New Testament occurrences, where the Greek term agorazo is used (this is the greek word for the word "bought" in the verse), only five texts are clearly and indisputably redemptive (2 Peter 2:1 being the lone exception). Furthermore, in these five instances, there are seemingly three undeniable contingencies or features that strengthen the redemptive contexts. Namely, a) the purchase price or its equivalent is stated in the text (i.e., the blood, the Lamb; cf., 1 Cor. 6:20; 7:23; and Rev. 5:9), or the purchase price is implicit in the immediate context (Rev. 14:3, 4); b) redemptive markers or language is used, and b) in every case the context is restrictive to believers (cf. 1 Cor. 6:20; 7:23; 5:9; and 14:3, 4). None of these features or contingencies are to be found in 2 Peter 2:1.

It has been demonstrated that the term “Master” (despotes) refers to an owner in a master- slave relationship. The meaning here is not of Christ as Savior or Mediator (despotes is never used as a redemptive title), but to Christ (or the Father) as Sovereign. It has also been demonstrated that the term “bought” (agorazo) in the New Testament is most frequently used in non-redemptive contexts. When used redemptively there are specific pointers that are conspicuously absent in 2 Peter 2:1 (such as the purchase price, believers as the lone object, or the presence of other mediatorial or redemptive features). Since this is so, it of necessity eliminates the assumed non-Reformed interpretation, at the very least, as the only viable interpretation of 2 Peter 2:1

In Conclusion

We are left then with two possible understandings to the text:

1. The term is being used redemptively. Hence these were men who were bought by Christ (purchased, redeemed) but lost their salvation when they became apostate.

2. The term is being used non-redemptively; hence Peter is not addressing the extent of the atonement, but is providing an OT example (similar to Deut. 32:5-6) of a sovereign master (despot) who had purchased slaves and on that basis commanded their allegiance. "

 

[savedbymercy]

That is easily refuted by Scripture.

2Pe 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.

There are false prophets and false teachers among you.
They bring in and teach damnable heresies.
There is one damnable heresies out of them all that is mentioned.
They deny the Lord that bought them
Peter says the Lord purchased or paid the price of even these false teachers.
And this damnable heresy that they are teaching is that they deny the Lord that paid the price of redemption, that purchased them, that is the belief of Limited Atonement.

Peter calls the belief in Limited Atonement
1. A belief of false teachers and false prophets.
2. A damnable heresy.
3. a heresy that brings upon those that teach it swift destruction.

At least that is what this verse teaches as far as I understand it.

If they are false teachers then they were false brethren and never saved!