Results 1 - 3 of 3
|
|
|||||
Results from: Answered Bible Questions, Answers, Unanswered Bible Questions, Notes Ordered by Verse | ||||||
Results | Verse | Author | ID# | |||
1 | Praying for the 'World'. | Matt 5:44 | DocTrinsograce | 163658 | ||
Dear Atdcross, Your exegesis of 2 Peter 3:9 is quite confusing. This epistle was written by the apostle Peter to a group of believers (see 2 Peter 1:1). How could his continual use of the first person plural pronouns include anyone other than the writer and the recipients? Considering the reason the epistle was written, how could an affirmation of God's desire that not any should perish be any kind of encouragement if it meant some other bunch? There's an old adage that states, "When the plain sense of a passage makes perfect sense don't seek any other sense." "But it may be asked, If God wishes none to perish, why is it that so many do perish? To this my answer is, that no mention is here made of the hidden purpose of God, according to which the reprobate are doomed to their own ruin, but only of his will as made known to us in the gospel. For God there stretches forth His hand without a difference to all, but lays hold only of those, to lead them to Himself, whom He has chosen before the foundation of the world." --John Calvin on 2 Peter 3:9 "'...not willing that any should perish;' [is intended to mean] not any of the us, whom He has loved with an everlasting love, whom He has chosen in His Son, and given to Him, and for whom He has died, and who are brought to believe in Him." --John Gill (on 2 Peter 3:9) "The simplest (simplistic some would say) solution is to see these verses as applying only to the elect. This makes eminent sense and complies with the analogy of the Bible." --John Hendryx (on 2 Peter 3:9) "God is long-suffering towards the elect prior to their conversion." --Wilhelmus a Brekel, when discussing 2 Peter 3:9 "The true and satisfying reason of the delay of the second coming of Christ is the Lord’s long suffering toward His own elect" --Alexander Nesbit (on 2 Peter 3:9) John Owen, Thomas Peck, A. W. Pink, James H. Thornwell, Francis Turretin, are among the others saying very much the same thing regarding this verse. You posit a week argument and -- clearly -- an unpopular one among the learned of the church. I'm not certain what makes this verse have such appeal to the universalist and his ilk. In Him, Doc |
||||||
2 | Praying for the 'World'. | Matt 5:44 | atdcross | 163692 | ||
Hi Doc, I agree the letter is to believers but that does not demand “any” be understood as confined to them or a group called “the chosen”. It is not denied that the letter is encouragement to its readers but it is still no reason to confine “any” to the aforementioned group. In my initial comment, I attempted to show that if “any” is understood as having reference to only “the chosen,” then they must not have been saved at the time of reading, or else why would God need to have patience with them and desire their repentance and salvation (cf. v.15) if they are already saved? The plain sense of “any” seems to be “any”, not a specific group at the exclusion of another. John Calvin on 2 Peter 3:9: Maybe “no mention of the purposes of God” was hidden from Calvin but it is not a mystery to me why some are saved and others not since the Bible makes it clear (e.g. John 3:36; Mark 16:16). Furthermore, the last sentence quoted seems contradictory since “stretch[ing] forth His hand” with the intention of laying hold of some and not all is in itself making a difference between one and another. John Gill: I cannot see any warrant for Gill’s exclusion of those outside the community of the Church (cf. John 3:16; 1 John 2:2; Ezekiel 18:23,32; 33:11; Jonah 4:11). John Hendryx: Regarding the “simplest…solution”, I am unaware of this verse being hard to understand in the first place; that “any” means all men was a given, at least, to me. Wilhelmus a Brekel: No argument except to say that prior to salvation, the elect are not "elect" but sinners and God is patient with all sinners (Ps 145:8-9a; Nahum 1:3a; Matthew 5:45). Alexander Nesbit: If he is correct, then it must be because the readers were not yet saved; if saved, no delay for Jesus’ return was required for their sake. Most likely, if they had it their way, they wanted Jesus to come while they were reading the letter (cf. v.15a)! With all due respect to John Owen, Thomas Peck, A. W. Pink, James H. Thornwell, Francis Turretin, as well as the persons cited above, the Bible shows me they are mistaken. Just because my argument is weak does not necessarily mean my conclusion is faulty and “unpopular” as it may be “among the learned of the church” is no reason why I should go against what God has revealed to my conscience and agree with them. Not being universalistic, I am not certain why they would find it so appealing. I know why I do. I pray my comments have not “sounded” rude and that you have not been personally offended by my admission of disagreement. |
||||||
3 | Praying for the 'World'. | Matt 5:44 | DocTrinsograce | 163730 | ||
Dear Atdcross, You wrote, "...the intention of laying hold of some and not all is in itself making a difference between one and another." Then you must have a different spin on Matthew 22:14... and the doctrine of election in general. You wrote "I pray my comments have not 'sounded' rude and that you have not been personally offended..." Cordiality is the summum bonum of a lost and dying world. Real love is not simply being cordial and unoffending. Real love cares about the truth well and above over such temporal, social, trivialities. Believers tend to adopt the values of the world, but, I fear, in doing so they are abandoning the values of the Scripture. We are told that the truth will always offend. In other words, don't worry about it. :-) In Him, Doc |
||||||