• Welcome to Baptist Board, a friendly forum to discuss the Baptist Faith in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to all the features that our community has to offer.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon and God Bless!

Faith? Where does it come from?

Status
Not open for further replies.

DHK

<b>Moderator</b>
Brother DHK,

One more final post on 2: Peter 2:1 to dispel your erroneous interpretation and commentary sources you have cited,

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
It is a Reformed website. Should expect anything less than a defense of what it doesn't teach??
"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. "
I disproved that by quoting from Vine.
In part he said:
In five out of the ten occurrences of the word in the New Testament it means master of the household. Originally, it indicates absolute, unrestricted authority, so that the Greeks refused the title to any but the gods. In the New Testament δεσπότης and κύριος are used interchangeably of God, and of masters of servants.

Furthermore, we learn from the book of Ruth that Boaz paid the purchase price, made the payment on behalf of both Ruth and Naomi.
In the book of Hosea, Hosea went down to the market and "bought back" his wife; paid the price, purchased her.
This is what these false teachers denied of Christ. They said: The price wasn't paid.
denying the Lord that bought them
The denied the Lord that paid the price that bought them.
 

DHK

<b>Moderator</b>
Brother DHK,

Is the source of the good fruit faith in God derived by a man from a good thing in a man or bad thing in a man, from where does this faith come if it is possessed by one prior to being born again, does it come from our flesh or our mind?
If I married my wife before I was saved, put confidence in her at that time, was it good or bad.
If my children put faith in us was it good or bad?

When Jesus said you must have faith as a little child what did he mean? Even children have faith--innate faith. God does not give some special sanctifying faith to the unregenerate. I believe this must be some carry over from the RCC where Calvinism originated from.
 

DHK

<b>Moderator</b>
Revelation 6:10 - not speaking of the Redemptive Lord/Master, but of the vengeful, wrathful Judge.

Luke 2:29 - not speaking of the Redemptive Lord/Master but the all powerful arbiter of death.

Acts 4:24 - not speaking of the Redemptive Lord/Master but the All Powerful God of Creation.
But that is not what he said concerning 2Pet.2:1
 

DHK

<b>Moderator</b>
Your failure to understand a rather simple concept is what is absurd. God makes an Apostle or a prophet by regenerating and gifting that person. Duh!
Of course! Who wouldn't believe that? When did these men in the first century receive their apostleship, their gift of teaching or prophecy? The day they were saved? No. Likewise God did not give them the "gift of faith" when they were regenerated either. No spiritual gift was given to an unregenerate person.
 

DHK

<b>Moderator</b>
And now this thread has reached 25 pages. It really should have been in the Cal/Arm forum. But it needs to be closed because of its length.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top