Subject: The error addressed in 2 Peter |
Bible Note: 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 |