The Work of Repentance Versus Faith Only

[Danus]

No doubt only God through Jesus does the saving, but if this gift of faith is given by Gods Grace, and salvation is an automatic result of faith, and God is not a respecter of person:

Romans 2:11 KJV
For there is no respect of persons with God.

Then why are not ALL men automatically saved by doing nothing at all? what is it that one man must "do" to be saved, that another has not "done"?

That my friend, is a fantastic question. ;)

It's also a difficult one to hear the answer, but there is an answer. The short answer is, for HIS own glory that he does not save all.

There is a verse that speaks to this.

"What if God, although willing to demonstrate His wrath and to make His power known, endured with much patience vessels of wrath prepared for destruction? 23 And He did so in order that He might make known the riches of His glory upon vessels of mercy, which He prepared beforehand for glory, 24 even us, whom He also called, not from among Jews only, but also from among Gentiles," (Rom. 9:22-24).

But also, consider more of Romans 9, prior to verse 22.

6 It is not as though God’s word had failed. For not all who are descended from Israel are Israel.7 Nor because they are his descendants are they all Abraham’s children. On the contrary, “It is through Isaac that your offspring will be reckoned.” 8 In other words, it is not the children by physical descent who are God’s children, but it is the children of the promise who are regarded as Abraham’s offspring.9 For this was how the promise was stated: “At the appointed time I will return, and Sarah will have a son.”
10 Not only that, but Rebekah’s children were conceived at the same time by our father Isaac. 11 Yet, before the twins were born or had done anything good or bad—in order that God’s purpose in election might stand: 12 not by works but by him who calls—she was told, “The older will serve the younger.” 13 Just as it is written: “Jacob I loved, but Esau I hated.”
14 What then shall we say? Is God unjust? Not at all! 15 For he says to Moses,
“I will have mercy on whom I have mercy,
and I will have compassion on whom I have compassion.”

16 It does not, therefore, depend on human desire or effort, but on God’s mercy.17 For Scripture says to Pharaoh: “I raised you up for this very purpose, that I might display my power in you and that my name might be proclaimed in all the earth.” 18 Therefore God has mercy on whom he wants to have mercy, and he hardens whom he wants to harden.
19 One of you will say to me: “Then why does God still blame us? For who is able to resist his will?” 20 But who are you, a human being, to talk back to God? “Shall what is formed say to the one who formed it,‘Why did you make me like this?’” 21 Does not the potter have the right to make out of the same lump of clay some pottery for special purposes and some for common use?

Some are destined to be saved, and some are destined to be judged....for the sin of the world, and in this we all are deserving, because all are sin, but some are saved. If that does not strike fear and trembling in us about the power of God, I don't know what does, but I do know that those who have rejected God, seem not to have a care in the world about their fiat, and perhaps it's just as well.

 

[rrowell]

That my friend, is a fantastic question. ;)

It's also a difficult one to hear the answer, but there is an answer. The short answer is, for HIS own glory that he does not save all.

How can if be of his glory that he does not save all when Paul said it is Gods will to have all men saved?

1 Timothy 2:3-4 KJV
For this is good and acceptable in the sight of God our Saviour; Who will have all men to be saved, and to come unto the knowledge of the truth.

 

[BobE]

But returning the stolen goods is a work. Therefore if the Christian does not do this work then he will be lost (1 Cor 6:9,10) and that has the faith only crowd (and those that believe in eternal security) up in arms.

Ah, ok I see what you mean. Even so, the faith only folks I chat with often might view this differently. They'd likely say that the thief could return to his home (cave, hide-out etc.) with his ill-gotten gain, have an encounter with the Spirit of God, turn to Christ in faith, be saved, and then as one of his first acts as a new Christian return the stolen goods.

The restitution, in this case, would not be a work that earns salvation. This is still received by "faith alone" if you will. However, if the former thief was trusting God for forgiveness and transformation, perhaps one of the first examples that this process had begun would be returning what he had stolen.

How does that sound?

 

[BobE]

It becomes meritorious if it is the reason why you get saved and another does not who does not do them !

I think the original context of Paul's letter is significant when consider the "faith/works" dilemna.

Paul was writing actual letters to real persons dealing with specific situations. One situation was a debate among Jewish Christians regarding how Gentiles were to come to God. When Paul talks about "works" in this context, he is referring to keeping the Torah and the oral traditions that accompanied it at the time of Jesus' ministry. The belief was, for example, that Gentiles must be circumcised.

Paul's point is that following the Torah and keeping all of the oral traditions is not what results in salvation. He was discussing outward behaviours that included "law-keeping" and cleansing rituals (e.g. washing up to the elbow).

In contrast to outward behaviour and rituals (e.g. circumcision), Paul says that one's heart must be circumcised. This places the focus on inward transformation rather than outward appearance and ritual. Remember Jesus found fault with the religious leaders of the day because their outward behaviour was acceptable, but inwardly their hearts were unclean. Paul picks up on this theme.

Did Jesus take upon himself the sins of the whole world? Yes, he did. Is the whole world then "saved?" Well, the New Testament indicates that some experience the salvation that Jesus accomplished, whereas others do not. Those that do, respond to what God has done in Christ with faith. There is a looking to God's work in Christ with faith that it will be effective: that it cleanses, forgives, transforms and gives eternal life.

One of my favourite verses from 2 Cor. is that "God was in Christ reconciling the world to himself." Placing faith in this may be a response on the part of the sinner, but it is not an outward act of righteousness or ritual that earns God's favour. We are also told that this inward response is enabled in some way by the ministry of the Holy Spirit, so no one can claim to have accomplished even this by his/her own effort. This is the context of many of Paul's letters, as I understand it.

 

[Danus]

How can if be of his glory that he does not save all when Paul said it is Gods will to have all men saved?

1 Timothy 2:3-4 KJV
For this is good and acceptable in the sight of God our Saviour; Who will have all men to be saved, and to come unto the knowledge of the truth.

God can desire one thing and bring about another -- and no, this is not a contradiction. Consider how God desires all people to be saved,as you point out (1 Tim. 2:3-4), But, Jesus spoke in parables so that people would not repent and be forgiven (Mark 4:10-12).

Also, God has mercy on whom He desires and He hardens whom He desires as we've seen (Romans 9:18). As a judge may desire to set a person free, the law requires he execute judgment.

God can lovingly desire all to be saved, but He must also execute righteous judgement on them, and all who have not trusted in Christ will be lost. He certainly has the ability to cause everyone to be born-again. After all, He causes people to be born-again (1 Peter 1:3, ) and He can move the heart of the King where He wishes it to go (Proverbs 21:1). If He can do this, why does He not move the hearts of all people so they get saved? After all, doesn't the Bible tell us that God does not want any to perish (2 Pet. 3:9)?.....and so we go back to his will

Though this is a difficult theological topic and it is worth a lot more discussion, the quick and easy answer again, is that God has not designed the course of history so that all people will be saved, even though he has expressed the desire, he still has his own higher coarse of righteous judgment on an unrighteous world, and he is not to blame for the worlds unrighteousness, for he warned man beforehand, and his desire is to have a loving relationship.

But we should not be confused about this. God is not arbitrary in this way. He is infinite and His ways are not ours. He has reasons for doing what He does, and he alone upholds what is higher to the cause.

For many, this begs the question: "I'M I SAVED?" The lost do not ask this question. The lost look at us as a joke, as weak, as crazy. True?

Our Trust for the promise in pursing God whom we want and love, our trust of salvation,,,is in Jesus Christ, and we can rest assured in that. If not, we should only contemplate our trust, not our salvation,

 

[dadof10]

It can be confusing, but I think I can lay it out better.

All I said was "We respond to God" Your taking it to mean by effort we do this, but I'm describing it by self evident means.

I used an analogy liking faith to a drug where ones response is indicative of the substance.

Does that help?

Yep. As I am a devout Catholic, you are a devout Reformer. I follow the teachings of the Catholic Church and you follow Reformed theology. From a couple of your posts, I thought you held a variation of orthodox Reformed theology, but I see now, you don't.

I understand you see it as a cooperative effort between you and God. The question I used in this way is; "Is it essential for salvation?" Does it matter if someone who is saved see's them self as cooperating with God? I'd say no if someone is saved, but yes if they are not, or thinking they are working towards salvation.

I think Paul considered himself saved. The difference between his view and Calvin's is that he viewed salvation as a lifetime process which involved cooperation with Grace, and Calvin viewed it as a one time event:

"For he will render to every man according to his works: 7 to those who by patience in well-doing seek for glory and honor and immortality, he will give eternal life; 8 but for those who are factious and do not obey the truth, but obey wickedness, there will be wrath and fury. 9 There will be tribulation and distress for every human being who does evil, the Jew first and also the Greek, 10 but glory and honor and peace for every one who does good, the Jew first and also the Greek." (Rom 2 6-10)

"For the word of the cross is folly to those who are perishing, but to us who are being saved it is the power of God." (1Cor. 1:18)

"For we are the aroma of Christ to God among those who are being saved and among those who are perishing, 16 to one a fragrance from death to death, to the other a fragrance from life to life." (2Cor 2:15-16)

"Therefore, my beloved, as you have always obeyed, so now, not only as in my presence but much more in my absence, work out your own salvation with fear and trembling; 13 for God is at work in you, both to will and to work for his good pleasure." (Phil. 2:12-13)

It is clear that cooperation is necessary for salvation, to Paul, anyway. It is also clear that salvation is a process, not a one-time event.

 

[felix]

The short answer is, for HIS own glory that he does not save all.

This is rubbish.

(2Pet 3:9) The Lord is not slack concerning [His] promise, as some count slackness, but is longsuffering toward us, not willing that any should perish but that all should come to repentance.

 

[BobE]

Yep. As I am a devout Catholic, you are a devout Reformer. I follow the teachings of the Catholic Church and you follow Reformed theology. From a couple of your posts, I thought you held a variation of orthodox Reformed theology, but I see now, you don't.



I think Paul considered himself saved. The difference between his view and Calvin's is that he viewed salvation as a lifetime process which involved cooperation with Grace, and Calvin viewed it as a one time event:

"For he will render to every manaccording to his works: 7 to those who by patience in well-doing seek for glory and honor and immortality, he will give eternal life; 8 but for those who are factious and do not obey the truth, but obey wickedness, there will be wrath and fury. 9 There will be tribulation and distress for every human being who does evil, the Jew first and also the Greek, 10 but glory and honor and peace for every one who does good, the Jew first and also the Greek." (Rom 2 6-10)

"For the word of the cross is folly to those who are perishing, but to us who are being saved it is the power of God." (1Cor. 1:18)

"For we are the aroma of Christ to God among those who are being saved and among those who are perishing, 16 to one a fragrance from death to death, to the other a fragrance from life to life." (2Cor 2:15-16)

"Therefore, my beloved, as you have always obeyed, so now, not only as in my presence but much more in my absence, work out your own salvation with fear and trembling; 13 for God is at work in you, both to will and to work for his good pleasure." (Phil. 2:12-13)

It is clear that cooperation is necessary for salvation, to Paul, anyway. It is also clear that salvation is a process, not a one-time event.

Thank you for this post! I found it eye-opening and encouraging. I especially like the balance portrayed in Phil. chapter 2 between God's work and our cooperation. I also really like how you highlighted Paul's depiction of salvation as a process. I think of it this way also.

 

[Danus]

Yep. As I am a devout Catholic, you are a devout Reformer. I follow the teachings of the Catholic Church and you follow Reformed theology. From a couple of your posts, I thought you held a variation of orthodox Reformed theology, but I see now, you don't.



I think Paul considered himself saved. The difference between his view and Calvin's is that he viewed salvation as a lifetime process which involved cooperation with Grace, and Calvin viewed it as a one time event:

"For he will render to every manaccording to his works: 7 to those who by patience in well-doing seek for glory and honor and immortality, he will give eternal life; 8 but for those who are factious and do not obey the truth, but obey wickedness, there will be wrath and fury. 9 There will be tribulation and distress for every human being who does evil, the Jew first and also the Greek, 10 but glory and honor and peace for every one who does good, the Jew first and also the Greek." (Rom 2 6-10)

"For the word of the cross is folly to those who are perishing, but to us who are being saved it is the power of God." (1Cor. 1:18)

"For we are the aroma of Christ to God among those who are being saved and among those who are perishing, 16 to one a fragrance from death to death, to the other a fragrance from life to life." (2Cor 2:15-16)

"Therefore, my beloved, as you have always obeyed, so now, not only as in my presence but much more in my absence, work out your own salvation with fear and trembling; 13 for God is at work in you, both to will and to work for his good pleasure." (Phil. 2:12-13)

It is clear that cooperation is necessary for salvation, to Paul, anyway. It is also clear that salvation is a process, not a one-time event.

One slight correction on me, I follow Christ, it just so happens that my understanding of the gospel mirrors that of the reformation. I did not find that out until years after becoming a Christian. My theological construct was born and developed out side the church, but was refined through the church to a large degree.

I can't speak for you, but I accept your catholic and really don't have a problem with your interpretation of "cooperation". Often when people speak or post stuff in here, I try to look for definition in their meanings; in the context of how they use words, and I see your use of the word cooperation to mean what I might say yield. Cooperate with God, yielding to God.

You might see this as a self effort, where as I see it as self evident. It may, or may not be that much of an effort for you, but in any case, I can't explain why some struggle with salvation and some don't, but I do not think it have anything to do with simply how they view it. It's more than that.

 

[Danus]

This is rubbish.

(2Pet 3:9) The Lord is not slack concerning [His] promise, as some count slackness, but is longsuffering toward us, not willing that any should perish but that all should come to repentance.

I'll give you a clue to help you answer this.

Define who the "ALL" are, being talked about in this verse. You'll either say ALL means all mankind, or you'll say ALL means all whom will be saved. It's one or the other.

 

[Ernest T. Bass]

Ah, ok I see what you mean. Even so, the faith only folks I chat with often might view this differently. They'd likely say that the thief could return to his home (cave, hide-out etc.) with his ill-gotten gain, have an encounter with the Spirit of God, turn to Christ in faith, be saved, and then as one of his first acts as a new Christian return the stolen goods.

The restitution, in this case, would not be a work that earns salvation. This is still received by "faith alone" if you will. However, if the former thief was trusting God for forgiveness and transformation, perhaps one of the first examples that this process had begun would be returning what he had stolen.

How does that sound?

It could have been when the thief was caught, the items he stole were recovered and returned to their rightful owners. In any case, he made resitution with his life.


In other cases, as you agreed to earlier, stolen items have to be returned. If you stole your neighbors horse, repented, the repentance demands you return the horse.

 

[Ernest T. Bass]

I'll give you a clue to help you answer this.

Define who the "ALL" are, being talked about in this verse. You'll either say ALL means all mankind, or you'll say ALL means all whom will be saved. It's one or the other.

All in this verse would be defined by its primary meaning, each and everyone, all mankind. All is being contrasted to "not any" or none, zero...all contrasted to none.


Calvinists, (I don't know if your one or not) hurt their eternal security theology by trying to limit 'all' to only the elect. According to Calvinism, the elect were chosen before the world began and they will for certain, guaranteed be saved. If that's the case, why would God be longsuffering towards the elect that not any should perish when perishing, according to eternal security, is not possible for the elect?


The last phrase of this verse says "not willing that any should perish but that all should come to repentance". Those that are of the elect have already come to repentance, no such thing as an unrepentant Christian for one can never be in a saved position without ever having first repented. So this last phrase is God's wish all mankind be saved.

 

[Danus]

All in this verse would be defined by its primary meaning, each and everyone, all mankind. All is being contrasted to "not any" or none, zero...all contrasted to none.


Calvinists, (I don't know if your one or not) hurt their eternal security theology by trying to limit 'all' to only the elect. According to Calvinism, the elect were chosen before the world began and they will for certain, guaranteed be saved. If that's the case, why would God be longsuffering towards the elect that not any should perish when perishing, according to eternal security, is not possible for the elect?


The last phrase of this verse says "not willing that any should perish but that all should come to repentance". Those that are of the elect have already come to repentance, no such thing as an unrepentant Christian for one can never be in a saved position without ever having first repented. So this last phrase is God's wish all mankind be saved.

Let's back up. The verse Felix laid out was (2Pet 3:9) The Lord is not slack concerning [His] promise, as some count slackness, but is longsuffering toward us, not willing that any should perish but that all should come to repentance.

I asked that he define who the "ALL" are. He has not answered that, but you have stated All- of mankind.

That correct?

 

[Ernest T. Bass]

Let's back up. The verse Felix laid out was (2Pet 3:9) The Lord is not slack concerning [His] promise, as some count slackness, but is longsuffering toward us, not willing that any should perish but that all should come to repentance.

I asked that he define who the "ALL" are. He has not answered that, but you have stated All- of mankind.

That correct?

Yes.

 

[Danus]

All in this verse would be defined by its primary meaning, each and everyone, all mankind. All is being contrasted to "not any" or none, zero...all contrasted to none.


Calvinists, (I don't know if your one or not) hurt their eternal security theology by trying to limit 'all' to only the elect. According to Calvinism, the elect were chosen before the world began and they will for certain, guaranteed be saved. If that's the case, why would God be longsuffering towards the elect that not any should perish when perishing, according to eternal security, is not possible for the elect?


The last phrase of this verse says "not willing that any should perish but that all should come to repentance". Those that are of the elect have already come to repentance, no such thing as an unrepentant Christian for one can never be in a saved position without ever having first repented. So this last phrase is God's wish all mankind be saved.

Let's back up. The verse Felix laid out was (2Pet 3:9) The Lord is not slack concerning [His] promise, as some count slackness, but is longsuffering toward us, not willing that any should perish but that all should come to repentance.

I asked that he define who the "ALL" are. He has not answered that, but you have stated All- of mankind.

That correct?

Yes.

2 Peter 3:9 is probably the single most popular verse used to dismiss the reformed doctrine of election.

Usually the meaning of the verse is assumed without taking any time to study it closely, which should be the very point of studying the bible for all it's worth.

Because people don't know how to read and study the bible properly, they lean on traditions, and traditions are so strong that many do not even see the need to study the verse because they believe there is no need to do so. And, Those most enslaved to their traditions are those who believe they do not have any.

So, lets read the verse in its full context.

2 Peter 3:1-9 - This is now the second letter that I am writing to you, beloved. In both of them I am stirring up your sincere mind by way of reminder, that you should remember the predictions of the holy prophets and the commandment of the Lord and Savior through your apostles, knowing this first of all, that scoffers will come in the last days with scoffing, following their own sinful desires. They will say, "Where is the promise of his coming? For ever since the fathers fell asleep, all things are continuing as they were from the beginning of creation." For they deliberately overlook this fact, that the heavens existed long ago, and the earth was formed out of water and through water by the word of God, and that by means of these the world that then existed was deluged with water and perished. But by the same word the heavens and earth that now exist are stored up for fire, being kept until the day of judgment and destruction of the ungodly. But do not overlook this one fact, beloved, that with the Lord one day is as a thousand years, and a thousand years as one day. The Lord is not slow to fulfill his promise as some count slowness, but is patient toward you, not wishing that any should perish, but that all should reach repentance.

A. The first thing we notice is that the subject of the passage is not salvation but the second coming of Christ. Peter is explaining the reason for the delay in Christ's second coming “ He is still coming, and will come unexpectedly, like a thief in the night"

B. The second thing to notice is the clear identity of the people he is addressing. He speaks of the mockers, but everywhere else he speaks to his audience as you and the beloved. This is very important because the assumption that is usually made is that the "you" and the "any" and the "all" of 2 Peter 3:9 refers to everyone on the planet. But surely "all" means all, right? Well usually, yes, but not always.

This has to be determined by the context in which the words are found. For example, when I have confreres calls at my office with the home office and all the branch offices are dialed in to a speaker phone, the VP will start off asking, "Are all here?" he is not asking if every last living person on planet earth is present on the call. Rather he is referring to all the people scheduled to be on the call from all the offices around the country. It is context that provides the basis for a sound interpretation.

So, the question in 2 Peter 3:9 is whether "all" refers to all human beings without distinction, or whether it refers to everyone within a certain group. The context indicates that Peter is writing to a specific group and not to all of mankind “to those who have obtained a faith of equal standing with ours 2 Peter 1:1. The audience is confirmed when Peter writes, This is now the second letter that I am writing to you, beloved. (2 Peter 3:1)

Can we be even more specific? Yes, because if this is the second letter addressed to them, the first makes it clear who he is writing to. 1 Peter 1:1 - Peter, an apostle of Jesus Christ, To those who are elect, So Peter is writing to the elect in 2 Peter 3, saying: This is now the second letter that I am writing to you, beloved.... But do not overlook this one fact, beloved, that with the Lord one day is as a thousand years, and a thousand years as one day. The Lord is not slow to fulfill his promise as some count slowness, but is patient toward you, not wishing that any should perish, but that all should reach repentance. (v. 1, 8, 9 - emphasis mine)

If the "any" or "all"Â here refers to everyone in human history, the verse would prove far more than Arminians would want to prove - it would prove universalism rather than Christianity. (Universalism is the false doctrine that teaches that everyone will ultimately be saved, with no one going to hell). If God is not willing that any person perish, then what? No one would ever perish! Yet, in context, the "any" that God wills not to perish must be limited to the same group he is writing to, the elect, and the "all" that are to come to repentance is the very same group. Christ's second coming has been delayed so that all the elect can be gathered in. God is not willing that any of the elect should perish, but that all of them come to repentance.



Rather than denying election, understood in its biblical context, it is one of the strongest verses in favor of it. ;)......unless your into Universalism?


References: for my answer to you are from the writings of Rev John Samsom, Charles R Briggs, John Hendrix, and Nathan Pitchford, for the wording, the points however are mine.

 

[Ernest T. Bass]

2 Peter 3:9 is probably the single most popular verse used to dismiss the reformed doctrine of election.

Usually the meaning of the verse is assumed without taking any time to study it closely, which should be the very point of studying the bible for all it's worth.

Because people don't know how to read and study the bible properly, they lean on traditions, and traditions are so strong that many do not even see the need to study the verse because they believe there is no need to do so. And, Those most enslaved to their traditions are those who believe they do not have any.

So, lets read the verse in its full context.

2 Peter 3:1-9 - This is now the second letter that I am writing to you, beloved. In both of them I am stirring up your sincere mind by way of reminder, that you should remember the predictions of the holy prophets and the commandment of the Lord and Savior through your apostles, knowing this first of all, that scoffers will come in the last days with scoffing, following their own sinful desires. They will say, "Where is the promise of his coming? For ever since the fathers fell asleep, all things are continuing as they were from the beginning of creation." For they deliberately overlook this fact, that the heavens existed long ago, and the earth was formed out of water and through water by the word of God, and that by means of these the world that then existed was deluged with water and perished. But by the same word the heavens and earth that now exist are stored up for fire, being kept until the day of judgment and destruction of the ungodly. But do not overlook this one fact, beloved, that with the Lord one day is as a thousand years, and a thousand years as one day. The Lord is not slow to fulfill his promise as some count slowness, but is patient toward you, not wishing that any should perish, but that all should reach repentance.

A. The first thing we notice is that the subject of the passage is not salvation but the second coming of Christ. Peter is explaining the reason for the delay in Christ's second coming “ He is still coming, and will come unexpectedly, like a thief in the night"

B. The second thing to notice is the clear identity of the people he is addressing. He speaks of the mockers, but everywhere else he speaks to his audience as you and the beloved. This is very important because the assumption that is usually made is that the "you" and the "any" and the "all" of 2 Peter 3:9 refers to everyone on the planet. But surely "all" means all, right? Well usually, yes, but not always.

This has to be determined by the context in which the words are found. For example, when I have confreres calls at my office with the home office and all the branch offices are dialed in to a speaker phone, the VP will start off asking, "Are all here?" he is not asking if every last living person on planet earth is present on the call. Rather he is referring to all the people scheduled to be on the call from all the offices around the country. It is context that provides the basis for a sound interpretation.

So, the question in 2 Peter 3:9 is whether "all" refers to all human beings without distinction, or whether it refers to everyone within a certain group. The context indicates that Peter is writing to a specific group and not to all of mankind “to those who have obtained a faith of equal standing with ours 2 Peter 1:1. The audience is confirmed when Peter writes, This is now the second letter that I am writing to you, beloved. (2 Peter 3:1)

Can we be even more specific? Yes, because if this is the second letter addressed to them, the first makes it clear who he is writing to. 1 Peter 1:1 - Peter, an apostle of Jesus Christ, To those who are elect, So Peter is writing to the elect in 2 Peter 3, saying: This is now the second letter that I am writing to you, beloved.... But do not overlook this one fact, beloved, that with the Lord one day is as a thousand years, and a thousand years as one day. The Lord is not slow to fulfill his promise as some count slowness, but is patient toward you, not wishing that any should perish, but that all should reach repentance. (v. 1, 8, 9 - emphasis mine)

If the "any" or "all"Â here refers to everyone in human history, the verse would prove far more than Arminians would want to prove - it would prove universalism rather than Christianity. (Universalism is the false doctrine that teaches that everyone will ultimately be saved, with no one going to hell). If God is not willing that any person perish, then what? No one would ever perish! Yet, in context, the "any" that God wills not to perish must be limited to the same group he is writing to, the elect, and the "all" that are to come to repentance is the very same group. Christ's second coming has been delayed so that all the elect can be gathered in. God is not willing that any of the elect should perish, but that all of them come to repentance.



Rather than denying election, understood in its biblical context, it is one of the strongest verses in favor of it. ;)......unless your into Universalism?


References: for my answer to you are from the writings of Rev John Samsom, Charles R Briggs, John Hendrix, and Nathan Pitchford, for the wording, the points however are mine.

The "last days" began at Pentecost and continue until Christ comes again. Peter is warning them that in this time period there would be false teachers, even false teachers among them, 2 Pet 2:1-3, who will make merchandise of some of them and these scoffers of 2 Pet 3:3 are those same false teachers that would come among them back in the preceding chapter, 2 Pet 2:1-3. These scoffers will mock them about Christ second coming, a long time has past and the Christ has not come, yet Peter shows time means nothing to the Lord.

Aside from this though, the immediate text, verse 9 reads "The Lord is not slack concerning his promise, as some men count slackness; but is longsuffering to us-ward, not willing that any should perish, but that all should come to repentance."

This verse itself is about salvation. It tells us God is longsuffering. What is the purpose of God's longsuffering? "And account [that] the longsuffering of our Lord [is] salvation; even as our beloved brother Paul also according to the wisdom given unto him hath written unto you;", 2 Pet 3:15.

So the purpsoe of God's longsuffering is salvation. And salvation is also the purpose of repentance. As I stated in a prior post, Christians are those who have already repented for one cannot be a Christian who has not repented. So "all" here must also include those who are not a Christian.

The pronoun 'any' is from the Greek root word 'tis' and is an indefinite pronoun. Gramatically, this indefinite pronoun does not have to refer to "us-ward", so it can refer to anyone, everyone. Therefore with "all" being set in contrast to 'not any', then 'all' would refer to anyone, everyone.

If someone argues that the pronoun 'any' must refer to the nearest antecedant "usward" then the indefinite pronoun 'some' (also from the Greek root 'tis') must also refer to 'us-ward'. Then they have Christians counting God's promises as being slack. But the truth of the matter is that the pronoun 'some' in v9 refers all the way back to the scoffers in the remote verse 3. So if the immediate indefinite pronoun 'some' in v9 does not have to refer to 'us-ward' then neither does the immediate pronoun "any' have to refer to us-ward'.


Lastly, God's "willing" in v9 is an expression of His preceptive will and not His decretive will. God's preceptive will has to do with His desire or wish that all men would use thier free will and choose to repent and be saved for God does not force salvation (or condemnation) upon people against their will.

For another example of preceptive will see Matt 23:37..."O Jerusalem, Jerusalem, [thou] that killest the prophets, and stonest them which are sent unto thee, how often would I have gathered thy children together, even as a hen gathereth her chickens under [her] wings, and ye would not! "

Here Jesus would/desired/wished the Jews be gathered under His protective 'wing' yet the Jews would not. So Jesus did not get what He would/desired/wished with the Jews just as all will not be saved as God wishes/desires. If God decreed all men be saved then we are talking about Universalism for what God decrees will happen yet 2 Pet 3:9 does not express God's decretive will but His preceptive will.


(Again, if you believe in the Calvinistic idea of eternal security, then viewing "all" to mean only Christians refutes that idea eternal security)

 

[Danus]

2 Peter 3:9 is probably the single most popular verse used to dismiss the reformed doctrine of election.

Usually the meaning of the verse is assumed without taking any time to study it closely, which should be the very point of studying the bible for all it's worth.

Because people don't know how to read and study the bible properly, they lean on traditions, and traditions are so strong that many do not even see the need to study the verse because they believe there is no need to do so. And, Those most enslaved to their traditions are those who believe they do not have any.

So, lets read the verse in its full context.

2 Peter 3:1-9 - This is now the second letter that I am writing to you, beloved. In both of them I am stirring up your sincere mind by way of reminder, that you should remember the predictions of the holy prophets and the commandment of the Lord and Savior through your apostles, knowing this first of all, that scoffers will come in the last days with scoffing, following their own sinful desires. They will say, "Where is the promise of his coming? For ever since the fathers fell asleep, all things are continuing as they were from the beginning of creation." For they deliberately overlook this fact, that the heavens existed long ago, and the earth was formed out of water and through water by the word of God, and that by means of these the world that then existed was deluged with water and perished. But by the same word the heavens and earth that now exist are stored up for fire, being kept until the day of judgment and destruction of the ungodly. But do not overlook this one fact, beloved, that with the Lord one day is as a thousand years, and a thousand years as one day. The Lord is not slow to fulfill his promise as some count slowness, but is patient toward you, not wishing that any should perish, but that all should reach repentance.

A. The first thing we notice is that the subject of the passage is not salvation but the second coming of Christ. Peter is explaining the reason for the delay in Christ's second coming “ He is still coming, and will come unexpectedly, like a thief in the night"

B. The second thing to notice is the clear identity of the people he is addressing. He speaks of the mockers, but everywhere else he speaks to his audience as you and the beloved. This is very important because the assumption that is usually made is that the "you" and the "any" and the "all" of 2 Peter 3:9 refers to everyone on the planet. But surely "all" means all, right? Well usually, yes, but not always.

This has to be determined by the context in which the words are found. For example, when I have confreres calls at my office with the home office and all the branch offices are dialed in to a speaker phone, the VP will start off asking, "Are all here?" he is not asking if every last living person on planet earth is present on the call. Rather he is referring to all the people scheduled to be on the call from all the offices around the country. It is context that provides the basis for a sound interpretation.

So, the question in 2 Peter 3:9 is whether "all" refers to all human beings without distinction, or whether it refers to everyone within a certain group. The context indicates that Peter is writing to a specific group and not to all of mankind “to those who have obtained a faith of equal standing with ours 2 Peter 1:1. The audience is confirmed when Peter writes, This is now the second letter that I am writing to you, beloved. (2 Peter 3:1)

Can we be even more specific? Yes, because if this is the second letter addressed to them, the first makes it clear who he is writing to. 1 Peter 1:1 - Peter, an apostle of Jesus Christ, To those who are elect, So Peter is writing to the elect in 2 Peter 3, saying: This is now the second letter that I am writing to you, beloved.... But do not overlook this one fact, beloved, that with the Lord one day is as a thousand years, and a thousand years as one day. The Lord is not slow to fulfill his promise as some count slowness, but is patient toward you, not wishing that any should perish, but that all should reach repentance. (v. 1, 8, 9 - emphasis mine)

If the "any" or "all"Â here refers to everyone in human history, the verse would prove far more than Arminians would want to prove - it would prove universalism rather than Christianity. (Universalism is the false doctrine that teaches that everyone will ultimately be saved, with no one going to hell). If God is not willing that any person perish, then what? No one would ever perish! Yet, in context, the "any" that God wills not to perish must be limited to the same group he is writing to, the elect, and the "all" that are to come to repentance is the very same group. Christ's second coming has been delayed so that all the elect can be gathered in. God is not willing that any of the elect should perish, but that all of them come to repentance.



Rather than denying election, understood in its biblical context, it is one of the strongest verses in favor of it. ;)......unless your into Universalism?


References: for my answer to you are from the writings of Rev John Samsom, Charles R Briggs, John Hendrix, and Nathan Pitchford, for the wording, the points however are mine.

The "last days" began at Pentecost and continue until Christ comes again. Peter is warning them that in this time period there would be false teachers, even false teachers among them, 2 Pet 2:1-3, who will make merchandise of some of them and these scoffers of 2 Pet 3:3 are those same false teachers that would come among them back in the preceding chapter, 2 Pet 2:1-3. These scoffers will mock them about Christ second coming, a long time has past and the Christ has not come, yet Peter shows time means nothing to the Lord.

Aside from this though, the immediate text, verse 9 reads "The Lord is not slack concerning his promise, as some men count slackness; but is longsuffering to us-ward, not willing that any should perish, but that all should come to repentance."

This verse itself is about salvation. It tells us God is longsuffering. What is the purpose of God's longsuffering? "And account [that] the longsuffering of our Lord [is] salvation; even as our beloved brother Paul also according to the wisdom given unto him hath written unto you;", 2 Pet 3:15.

So the purpsoe of God's longsuffering is salvation. And salvation is also the purpose of repentance. As I stated in a prior post, Christians are those who have already repented for one cannot be a Christian who has not repented. So "all" here must also include those who are not a Christian.

The pronoun 'any' is from the Greek root word 'tis' and is an indefinite pronoun. Gramatically, this indefinite pronoun does not have to refer to "us-ward", so it can refer to anyone, everyone. Therefore with "all" being set in contrast to 'not any', then 'all' would refer to anyone, everyone.

If someone argues that the pronoun 'any' must refer to the nearest antecedant "usward" then the indefinite pronoun 'some' (also from the Greek root 'tis') must also refer to 'us-ward'. Then they have Christians counting God's promises as being slack. But the truth of the matter is that the pronoun 'some' in v9 refers all the way back to the scoffers in the remote verse 3. So if the immediate indefinite pronoun 'some' in v9 does not have to refer to 'us-ward' then neither does the immediate pronoun "any' have to refer to us-ward'.


Lastly, God's "willing" in v9 is an expression of His preceptive will and not His decretive will. God's preceptive will has to do with His desire or wish that all men would use thier free will and choose to repent and be saved for God does not force salvation (or condemnation) upon people against their will.

For another example of preceptive will see Matt 23:37..."O Jerusalem, Jerusalem, [thou] that killest the prophets, and stonest them which are sent unto thee, how often would I have gathered thy children together, even as a hen gathereth her chickens under [her] wings, and ye would not! "

Here Jesus would/desired/wished the Jews be gathered under His protective 'wing' yet the Jews would not. So Jesus did not get what He would/desired/wished with the Jews just as all will not be saved as God wishes/desires. If God decreed all men be saved then we are talking about Universalism for what God decrees will happen yet 2 Pet 3:9 does not express God's decretive will but His preceptive will.


(Again, if you believe in the Calvinistic idea of eternal security, then viewing "all" to mean only Christians refutes that idea eternal security)

I've been meaning to mention that I like your profile picture and name, BTW.

 

[Ernest T. Bass]

I've been meaning to mention that I like your profile picture and name, BTW.

It's me, it's me, it's Ernest T!


http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=MJUmIuc1X5s


Can you see me?

Wanna hear me sing "Eatin' Goober Peas"?

 

[BobE]

It could have been when the thief was caught, the items he stole were recovered and returned to their rightful owners. In any case, he made resitution with his life.


In other cases, as you agreed to earlier, stolen items have to be returned. If you stole your neighbors horse, repented, the repentance demands you return the horse.

I agree with you, yes, repentance would require the return of the horse . It would be an abuse of grace to say, "I'm forgiven now, and I'm keeping your horse" :eeeekkk

 

[BobE]

The "last days" began at Pentecost and continue until Christ comes again. Peter is warning them that in this time period there would be false teachers, even false teachers among them, 2 Pet 2:1-3, who will make merchandise of some of them and these scoffers of 2 Pet 3:3 are those same false teachers that would come among them back in the preceding chapter, 2 Pet 2:1-3. These scoffers will mock them about Christ second coming, a long time has past and the Christ has not come, yet Peter shows time means nothing to the Lord.

Aside from this though, the immediate text, verse 9 reads "The Lord is not slack concerning his promise, as some men count slackness; but is longsuffering to us-ward, not willing that any should perish, but that all should come to repentance."

This verse itself is about salvation. It tells us God is longsuffering. What is the purpose of God's longsuffering? "And account [that] the longsuffering of our Lord [is] salvation; even as our beloved brother Paul also according to the wisdom given unto him hath written unto you;", 2 Pet 3:15.

So the purpsoe of God's longsuffering is salvation. And salvation is also the purpose of repentance. As I stated in a prior post, Christians are those who have already repented for one cannot be a Christian who has not repented. So "all" here must also include those who are not a Christian.

The pronoun 'any' is from the Greek root word 'tis' and is an indefinite pronoun. Gramatically, this indefinite pronoun does not have to refer to "us-ward", so it can refer to anyone, everyone. Therefore with "all" being set in contrast to 'not any', then 'all' would refer to anyone, everyone.

If someone argues that the pronoun 'any' must refer to the nearest antecedant "usward" then the indefinite pronoun 'some' (also from the Greek root 'tis') must also refer to 'us-ward'. Then they have Christians counting God's promises as being slack. But the truth of the matter is that the pronoun 'some' in v9 refers all the way back to the scoffers in the remote verse 3. So if the immediate indefinite pronoun 'some' in v9 does not have to refer to 'us-ward' then neither does the immediate pronoun "any' have to refer to us-ward'.


Lastly, God's "willing" in v9 is an expression of His preceptive will and not His decretive will. God's preceptive will has to do with His desire or wish that all men would use thier free will and choose to repent and be saved for God does not force salvation (or condemnation) upon people against their will.

For another example of preceptive will see Matt 23:37..."O Jerusalem, Jerusalem, [thou] that killest the prophets, and stonest them which are sent unto thee, how often would I have gathered thy children together, even as a hen gathereth her chickens under [her] wings, and ye would not! "

Here Jesus would/desired/wished the Jews be gathered under His protective 'wing' yet the Jews would not. So Jesus did not get what He would/desired/wished with the Jews just as all will not be saved as God wishes/desires. If God decreed all men be saved then we are talking about Universalism for what God decrees will happen yet 2 Pet 3:9 does not express God's decretive will but His preceptive will.


(Again, if you believe in the Calvinistic idea of eternal security, then viewing "all" to mean only Christians refutes that idea eternal security)

I have to say, this is really well put. Thanks for this excellent commentary on an important passage of Scripture.