Results 1 - 5 of 5
|
|
|||||
Results from: Answered Bible Questions, Answers, Unanswered Bible Questions, Notes Ordered by Verse | ||||||
Results | Verse | Author | ID# | |||
1 | The error addressed in 2 Peter | Bible general Archive 4 | Beja | 224771 | ||
Am I wrong to think that the driving concern/error being addressed in 2 Peter is anitnomianism? To me it seems to absolutely be so yet I have not seen any commentators view it as such yet. Here are verses to notice throughout the book. Especially note 2Pet 3:17,18 where the final exhortation is not to be carried away by the error of lawless people. 2Peter 1:3,4,9,12 2:2,9,10,13,14,15,18,19,20-22 3:11,14,17 In Christ, Beja |
||||||
2 | The error addressed in 2 Peter | Bible general Archive 4 | DocTrinsograce | 224809 | ||
Dear Pastor Beja, I haven't read through all the threads, but here are a couple of thoughts. I am not a Greek scholar, but I am blessed with having elders in my church who are, and who teach Biblical Greek at the local universities and seminaries. How is that for cool? It is interesting that you ask that question, since we we wrapped up an exegetical study of Peter's epistles this year. (It was followed by a study of Jude, that took about six weeks, and now we have begun Deuteronomy. I think we'll be there quite a while!) Let me see if I can remember what was discussed: The professor who wrote the lessons and taught them, commented more than once on the difficulty of working with Peter in the Greek. Conceptually, Peter sounds very reminiscent of other NT writers. Linguistically, though, he stands apart. Indeed, more than once in his epistles, Peter uses Greek words that we do not find elsewhere in the NT. That is the problem with the word translated by the ESV as "lawless" in 2 Peter 3:17. As you know, we get the word "antinomian" from the Greek roots "anti" (against) and "nomos" (law). Peter does use the word "anomos" in 2 Peter 2:8, but he uses "athesmos" in 2:7 and 3:17. (Note the ESV translates the word as "wicked" in v2:7, but "lawless" in v2:8). An aside: As has been pointed out, Jewish teachers will, indeed, call Gentiles lawless. However there are these senses in which lawlessness is used: (1) peoples who do not abide by the Law; (2) peoples who have not yet heard the Law; (3) people who live lives in violation to the Law; (4) peoples who are not subject to the Law. (Remember, in Judaic thinking, Gentiles are not subject to the Mosaic Law, only to the Nohaic Law.) Now, we would have to say that in vv2:7-8, Peter is not speaking about the false teaching of antinomianism. Instead, he is using the word "anomos" in the 3rd sense as descriptive of the environment in which Lot lived. Had he been addressing antinomianism, he certainly would have used "anomos" more specifically... wouldn't he? 2 Peter 3:17, on the other hand, is making use of this other word, "athesmos." Although we do see "athesmos" and "anomos" paired in the same thought in chapter 2, this word is contrasting the recipients of grace (vv1:1-4, 3:14). Of course, any reference to antinomianism as we understand it -- J. I. Packer, in his Concise Theology, identifies six distinct forms -- would be something only in its embryonic form. (Ignatius of Antioch mentions it scant decades after Peter wrote his epistles.) Certainly antinomianism would be something that the "unlearned and unstable" would fasten upon; certainly antinomianism is/was promulgated by false teachers; and certainly Peter would have us eschew it. Nevertheless, I think that Peter was painting with a much broader brush. So, I would not agree that "the driving concern/error being addressed in 2 Peter is anitnomianism" (sic). However, I would affirm that antinomianism would certainly be one of the various errors that Peter warned about. Filter through the above... hold to what you find of value, and feel free to dispense with the rest. :-) In Him, Doc |
||||||
3 | The error addressed in 2 Peter | Bible general Archive 4 | Beja | 224811 | ||
Doc, Two things: 1.) You said, "Remember, in Judaic thinking, Gentiles are not subject to the Mosaic Law, only to the Nohaic Law." Can you elaborate on that? I've never heard anybody say such a thing and would love to better understand what you are saying. 2.) The reason I suspect antinomianism is a big error in Peter's mind isn't based on the use of any given greek word. Rather it seems to be the cumulative sum of the book. First, it seems clear that the people he are rebuking are actually in the Church. So they are professing Christians. Second, he repeatedly focuses on how they eagerly sin. He focuses on it so much in fact, that it begins to feel like that is actually the error he is rebuking and not simply that the main error is accompanied by this rampant sin. I actually begin to feel like the error of the teaching is that it allows that. Also, in the first chapter when he is giving positive advice rather than rebuking, it still seems he is speaking against a Christian life that continues in sin. Then I see its close parallels to Jude, who seems to focus on the same three major errors that 2 Peter does, and I read in Jude 4, "For certain people have crept in unnoticed who long ago were designated for this condemnation, ungodly people, who pervert the grace of our God into sensuality and deny our only Master and Lord, Jesus Christ." Now turning grace into licentousness really sounds like their teaching turned the grace of God into license to sin. This is why I ask the question. Though to be clear, I would not and do not suggest that antinomianism is the only error being addressed in the book. In Christ, Beja |
||||||
4 | The error addressed in 2 Peter | Bible general Archive 4 | DocTrinsograce | 224819 | ||
Dear Beja, Regarding your question #1: Rabbinical teaching asserts that the truth of Torah is for all men. However, the Mosaic Law is for Jews, although they will readily admit that benefits accrue to anyone complying with them. Briefly, the thinking runs along these lines: God gave six laws through Adam, all are descended from Adam, therefore those laws apply to all men. God gave seven laws through Noah -- reiterating the six and adding another. (These are referred to as the "Noachide Law".) Since all men are descended from Noah, those laws apply to everyone. In the Siniac revelation, God gave laws through Moses to the sons of Israel (Leviticus 26:46) -- reiterating the seven, and adding others. It is taught that Gentiles who faithfully follow the seven laws, will achieve a place in heaven. (Such Gentiles are called B'nai Noach. There are even Rabbis who have outreach to non-Jews, instructing them on how to live compliantly with the seven laws.) (By the way, this may also help you understand why Jews do not find proselytizing important. They deem that, after all, if you were really one of God's chosen, you would have been born that way.) I can dig up references if you want them. This question has been debated since the time of Moses, and I have heard Rabbis discuss it as recently as a few months ago. :-) Disclaimer: Although I am Jewish, as a Christian, I do not hold to these auto-soteriological teachings, nor do I believe that they are in harmony with Scripture. I am simply reporting them as you requested. In Him, Doc |
||||||
5 | The error addressed in 2 Peter | Bible general Archive 4 | Beja | 224820 | ||
Doc, Acts 15 had immediately come to my mind and compelled me to ask! In Christ, Beja |
||||||