Douglas Kennard on 2 Peter 2:1

II. The Extent Of Petrine Redemption
This is a difficult issue, based on the interpretation of 2 Pet 2:1. Two non-soteriological solutions are suggested: (1) God’s bringing Israel out of Egypt, and (2) God’s temporally delivering false teachers from sins. There are four soteriological solutions as well: (1) Peter’s charitably calling the false teachers by their own description, (2) hypothetical redemption, (3) loss of salvation, and (4) the apostatizing of previously nonsaved knowers of the truth. Instead of defending and critiquing each position I will attempt to show that contextually the most reasonable view of 2:1 maintains the apostatizing of previously non-saved knowers of the truth who have been soteriologically redeemed.¹²

The redemption is not that of bringing Israel out of Egypt because 2 Peter is written to a mixed group of Christians, some of whom have come from Gentile backgrounds. Most notably, in 2:1 “the people,” which should be understood as Israel,¹³ are distinguished from the recipients of Peter’s letter. That is, Israel had false prophets; the present recipients will have false teachers rise from among them. Furthermore, since 2 Peter is now Peter’s second letter, 2 Peter is written to the same group as 1 Peter (2 Pet 3:1). In this case the recipients of these letters include Gentiles along with Jews, as indicated by the Asia Minor church character and the previous manner of the lives of the recipients. For example, when Jews rejected the offer of salvation Gentiles in Asia Minor rejoiced at being included in salvation. Additionally Peter’s description of the ignorant, futile way of life in Gentile excesses is a strong indication that Gentiles are included (1 Pet 1:14, 18; 4:4). Since Peter writes to a group of Christians from mixed backgrounds it is inappropriate to claim that the exodus was accomplished for them.¹⁴

The context of 2 Peter develops soteriological concerns.¹⁵ For example, the recipients of the letter have the same kind of faith as Peter (2 Pet 1:1). Additionally the recipients have been granted everything pertaining to life and godliness through the true knowledge of Christ (1:3). Furthermore they are to be applying moral excellence, knowledge, self-control, perseverance and godliness in their lives as they pursue the kingdom (1:5–6, 11). Following this, Peter guarantees that kingdom salvation shall be fulfilled by appealing to earlier stages of the prophecy that have already occurred (1:16–19). Those who do not pursue such things, however, shall be severely judged and miss salvation (2:2–9). Some have escaped such defilement through this knowledge of Christ only to be reentangled, which results in being worse off than at first (2:20–22). That is, these scoffers shall be condemned while the beloved shall be saved (3:3–15). The temporal deliverances of Noah and Lot in the midst of temporal judgments of others are subsumed under the greater soteriological concerns (2:5, 7, 9). These deliverances are not developed to make the great day of judgment seem less. Rather, they reinforce the fact that since God has judged previously, he will certainly do so again in this greater future judgment when he also saves those who are his.

The buying (agorazō) is best seen as soteriological redemption. Even though agorazō does not translate OT words for soteriological redemption, the word always means soteriological redemption in the NT when it refers to people as the object of the purchase (1 Cor 6:20; 7:23; Rev 5:9; 14:3–4). The context clearly develops soteriological issues. Within this development there is a major emphasis on lifestyle, which is quite appropriate to Petrine redemption. For example, those who have knowledge of Christ are to abundantly appropriate in their lives faith, moral excellence, knowledge, self-control, perseverance, godliness, brotherly kindness and love (2 Pet 1:2–7). This meaningful way of life assures the believer that he shall bear fruit and enter into the eternal kingdom (1:8–11). This meaningful way of life is the reverse of the preredemptive, futile, sinful way of life (1 Pet 1:18; 2 Pet 1:9). So agorazō here is best seen as soteriological redemption. The lack of a mentioned price is no reason to overthrow this soteriological meaning since half of the NT soteriological meanings of this word omit any mention of a price (2 Pet 2:1; Rev 14:3–4). The master (despotēs) who is denied by the false teachers is Jesus Christ (2 Pet 2:1). First, since the redemption accomplished by the master is soteriological (2:1) and Peter describes only Christ as the one who soteriologically redeems people (1 Pet 1:18–19), then Christ is the master of whom Peter speaks in 2 Pet 2:1. Second, Christ is the master because the context emphasizes soteriological concerns. For example, Peter elsewhere uses despotēs of the sovereign creator (Acts 4:24). However, the sovereign creator is an unlikely reference in 2 Pet 2:1 since creator is only a minor element in 2 Peter, subservient to the greater concern of eschatological salvation and judgment (3:4–7). Additionally Peter elsewhere uses despotēs of earthly slave masters (1 Pet 2:18). However, there is no indication of earthly masters and their lying slaves in 2 Peter. In fact the false teachers are free with the human freedom to pursue a multitude of different actions inappropriate for slaves, most notably their own licentious living. Third, Jesus is the master since despotēs is broadly translated as ʾădōnāy in the LXX, and Peter understood ʾădōnāy (translated by kyrios) to be Christ in the only recorded time Peter referred to a passage as containing it (Acts 2:34, 36). Fourth, the parallel account in Jude 4 uses despotēs to refer to Christ. That is, within a context of the common salvation the false teachers are denying the Master (despotēs) and Lord (kyrios), Jesus Christ.

It is inappropriate to appeal to a hypothetical redemption in 2 Pet 2:1, patterned after Luke 14:15–24. A. Chang, for example, maintains such a hypothetical purchase.¹⁶ But Chang nullifies his position by arguing that the statements of purchase are outright lies. He argues for false statements of actual purchase rather than true statements of hypothetical purchase. Such an argument better supports the view of charity, calling someone something that they call themselves, even though it is false. I. H. Marshall, however, does develop the hypothetical nature of the purchase in Luke. In that case “the purchase may well have been arranged on the condition of a later inspection and approval” where the reference to necessity (anankē) “implies the legal obligation of the purchaser to complete the sale.”¹⁷ This Lukan example, however, is in the middle of an actual transaction and does not develop the effect of a rejection of a completed purchase such as Peter develops in 2 Pet 2:1. The meaning of Petrine redemption as actual or hypothetical is then not determined by an appeal to Luke but by the context of 2 Peter.

A contextual appeal to 2 Peter surfaces three groups who have actually experienced the change of life normally resulting from Petrine redemption. The first is that body of believers who are growing in the qualities of salvation (2 Pet 1:4–6). For example, this group escaped lusts through moral excellence and godliness. Second, the theoretical possibility of a second group is admitted by Peter in the context. They may have begun with these changed qualities and then left them, having forgotten their purification from their former sins (1:9–11). Peter condemns these apostates as doubly blind, unfruitful and in danger of missing the kingdom. Peter then develops this theoretical group as two actual groups: the false teachers, and those who barely escape lusts, only to be enticed back into their former lifestyles (2:18–22).¹⁸ These two groups experience the lifestyle change that the know]edge of Christ produces. For example, those who barely escape from the ones who live in error still actually escape for a time (2:18). The repetition of apophygontes in vv 18, 20 identifies the possibility of some people barely escaping, only to be overcome again. The context of v 20, however, primarily has to do with the false teachers, who are the third group. This is demonstrated contextually since the false teachers are those who entice by fleshly desires, promising freedom while they themselves are slaves overcome¹⁹ by judgment²⁰ (2:18–19). Furthermore the use of “for” (gar) in vv 19–20 connects this immediately preceding material with what follows, so that false teachers remain the primary subject.²¹ The false teachers are indicated as the subject through the repetition of”overcome” (hĕttōntai) in v 20, emphasizing the judgment that “overcomes” (hĕttetai) the false teachers in v 19. Since v 20 primarily has to do with the false teachers, they also had actually escaped the defilements of the world by the knowledge of Christ. They have experienced the change of life normally resulting from Petrine redemption (1 Pet 1:18; 2 Pet 2:20).

The false teachers have been redeemed soteriologically under Peter’s concept of redemption. (1) They have been redeemed soteriologically because Christ has bought (agorazō) them in a soteriological manner (2 Pet 2:1). (2) The soteriological redemption was not hypothetically applied but actually accomplished, since the false teachers have experienced the results of Petrine redemption: a changed life (2:20). Thus where the results of the work have been present one should consider the work of redemption as having been accomplished. (3) Redemption results were accomplished by the knowledge (oida) of Christ, which further identifies the redemption as having been soteriologically accomplished. For example, the divinely-given, true knowledge of Christ is within the precious and magnificent salvation promises (1:3–4). This soteriological know]edge is a commitment to truth that leads to salvation and the kingdom (1:8–11; 3:18). So the one who diligently continues in soteriological knowledge shall arrive at kingdom salvation. It is then best to see the false teachers as actually having begun by Petrine soteriological redemption, which resulted in their transformed lives through Christ’s death.

The false teachers have in turn, however, exchanged their knowledge and moral living for an ignorant life of rampant sin and certain condemnation. Having come to know (epiginōskō) the way of righteousness and experiencing (epiginōskō) it, they have then rejected it (2:21), which in turn has plunged them into an ignorant life (agnaeō, 1:12). Such ignorance is akin to the unbeliever’s condition of practicing sinful lust and persecuting Christ (Acts 3:17; 1 Pet 1:14; 2:15). These false teachers, however, are worse off than if they had remained unredeemed ignorant unbelievers (2 Pet 2:21). (1) They know the commandment that they must live righteously. In being overcome by the entanglements of the world they know judgment will follow their obedience. (2) Their true bent demonstrates clearly that they are fools (2:22). Proverbial statements such as a dog returning to its vomit and a washed sow returning to the mire recall the contextual use in Prov 26:11 signifying a fool returning to his folly. These false teachers cannot say they never knew better. They have committed high-handed sin, knowingly rejecting both Christ and the way they must live. Such an unrighteous life will be kept by the Lord under impending punishment for the day of judgment (2:9).

Such a concept renders Petrine redemption superabundant rather than impotent. First, the elect are redeemed, accomplishing for them a transformation of life that leads toward their guaranteed salvation (1 Pet 1:1–5, 18). In Peter’s terminology salvation is identified with the resurrection and the kingdom (1:5, 9, 10). Things can be considered presently soteriological, however, if they normally lead toward that salvation even if they do not fully accomplish it (3:21; 4:18; 2 Pet 3:15). Redemption as a soteriological work of Christ is effective in its transformation of the lives of the elect on their journey toward salvation. Second, redemption is no less effective where it accomplishes its full work of life transformation among some, like the false teachers who are not recipients of other soteriological works, which are needed if they would be saved. One should not fault a work of Christ that does more than is soteriologically necessary. A work of Christ may go beyond the limits of the elect to benefit others for a time. This redemption is not, however, hypothetical universalism because it is actually applied to all those who are transformed. Petrine redemption should then be conceived of as a limited redemption, which nevertheless extends beyond the limits of the elect. It also includes all who experience the transformation of life by means of Christ’s death, even for a time.
_______________
12. This view appears to be maintained by J. Calvin, Calvin’s Commentaries (Grand Rapids: Baker, 1979), 22. 393; R. Bauckham, Jude, 2 Peter (Waco: Word, 1983) 240–241,274–281.
13. TDNT 4 (1967) 50–57.
14. Such an appeal is usually made through either Deut 32:6 or 2 Sam 7:23. For a further defense of the Jewish and pagan background of these recipients see D. Kennard, The Doctrine of God in Petrine Theology (dissertation; Dallas Theological Seminary, 1986) 104–108.
15. Parallel to 2 Peter, Jude develops a similar common salvation (v 3), judgment (vv 5–16) and exhortations to guarantee salvation (vv 17–23) and the security from Christ the Savior (vv 24–25).
16. A. Chang, “Second Peter 2:1 and the Extent of the Atonement,” BSac 142 (1985) 55–56.
17. I. H. Marshall, Commentary on Luke (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1978) 589.
18. Two groups are indicated because the accusative of 2 Pet 2:18 cannot be identified with the subject, the false teachers who entice them; contra Jerome, Adv. Iovin 2 n. 3; Augustine, deFid. et Op. c. 45; Vg.
19. As in a battle, those overcome are slaves of their enemy; cf. Bauckham, Jude 277.
20. The use of phthoras, “corruption,” refers to divine judgment (2 Pet 2:12) and its morality (1:4). The word is not used by Peter for moral corruption; TDNT 9 (1974) 104, 275.
21. Perhaps in the focus on the false teachers the enticed ones who barely escape (apopheugontas, 2 Pet 2:18) are warned of a similar fate by the repetition of in 2:20. However, the conceptual relationship between v 18 (“enticed by fleshly desires”) and v 20. (“the defilements of the world”) is not significant because there is no verbal connection (as with the false teachers in 2:10). Since the context emphasizes the false teachers as the subject, any conceptual appeal should maintain this emphasis.

Douglas W. Kennard, “Petrine Redemption: Its Meaning and Extent,” Journal of the Evangelical Theological Society 30.4 (1987): 401–405. [Italics original; underlining mine; and footnote values original.]

Original post here (click).

John Calvin (1509–1564) on 2 Peter 2:1 and Jude 4

2 Peter 2:1

Baker edition:

Even denying the Lord that bought them. Though Christ may be denied in various ways, yet Peter, as I think, refers here to what is expressed by Jude, that is, when the grace of God is turned into lasciviousness; for Christ redeemed us, that he might have a people separated from all the pollutions of the world, and devoted to holiness and innocency. They, then, who throw off the bridle, and give themselves up to all kinds of licentiousness, are not unjustly said to deny Christ by whom they have been redeemed.

John Calvin, “Commentaries on the Catholic Epistles,” in Calvin’s Commentaries, ed. J. Owen, 22 vols. (Grand Rapids: Baker, 1984), 22:393; 2 Peter 2:1. Italics original.

Torrance edition:

Even the Master that bought them. Though Christ is denied in all kinds of ways, Peter is here referring (in my opinion) to that which is expressed by Jude when he refers to the grace of God being turned into lasciviousness. Christ redeemed us to have us as a people separated from all the iniquities of the world, devoted to holiness and purity. Those who throw over the traces and plunge themselves into every kind of licence are not unjustly said to deny Christ, by whom they were redeemed.

John Calvin, “The Epistle of Paul to the Hebrews and First and Second Epistles of St. Peter,” in Calvin’s New Testament Commentaries, trans. W. B. Johnston, ed. D. W. Torrance and T. F. Torrance, 12 vols. (Grand Rapids, MI: Eerdmans, 1994), 12:346; 2 Peter 2:1. Italics original.

Jude 4

Baker edition:

The only Lord God, or, God who alone is Lord. Some old copies have, “Christ, who alone is God and Lord.” And, indeed, in the Second Epistle of Peter, Christ alone is mentioned, and there he is called Lord. But he means that Christ is denied, when they who had been redeemed by his blood, become again the vassals of the Devil, and thus render void as far as they can that incomparable price.

Calvin, “Commentary on the Catholic Epistles,” in Calvin’s Commentaries, 22:433–34; Jude 4. Italics original.

Torrance edition:

God … the only Master [RV mg]. Some old texts read, ‘Christ, who is the only God and Master’. Certainly, in II Pet. 2.1, there is reference only to Christ, and He is called Master [RV, ‘Lord’] there. Denying … Christ, he says, of those who have been redeemed by His blood, and now enslave themselves again to the devil, frustrating (as best they may) that incomparable boon.

John Calvin, “A Harmony of the Gospels Matthew, Mark and Luke and The Epistles of James and Jude,” in Calvin’s New Testament Commentaries, trans. W. B. Johnston, ed. D. W. Torrance and T. F. Torrance, 12 vols. (Grand Rapids, MI: Eerdmans, 1995), 3:325. Italics original.

Original Post Here (click). Updated by Tony.

2 Peter 2:1 from the Matthew Henry Commentaries

Those who introduce destructive heresies deny the Lord that bought them. They reject and refuse to hear and learn of the great teacher sent from God, though he is the only Saviour and Redeemer of men, who paid a price sufficient to redeem as many worlds of sinners as there are sinners in the world.

Matthew Henry, Matthew Henry’s Commentary on the Whole Bible: Complete and Unabridged in One Volume (Peabody: Hendrickson, 1994), 2437; 2 Peter 2:1.

The preface to volume 6 of Matthew Henry’s Commentary on the Whole Bible said the following:

The following are the ministers by whom the Exposition on the Epistolary writings, and the Revelation, was completed, as given by J. B. Williams, Esq., LL.D.,F.S.A., in his Memoirs of the Life, Character, and Writings, of the Rev. Matthew Henry, 8vo. p. 308.

Romans … Mr. [afterwards Dr.] John Evans.
1 Corinthians … Mr. Simon Browne.
2 Corinthians … Mr. Daniel Mayo.
Galatians … Mr. Joshua Bayes.
Ephesians … Mr. Samuel Rosewell.
Philippians and Colossians … Mr. [afterwards Dr.] William Harris.
1, 2 Thessalonians … Mr. Daniel Mayo.
1, 2 Timothy … Mr. Benjamin Andrews Atkinson.
Titus and Philemon … Mr. Jeremiah Smith.
Hebrews … Mr. William Tong.
James … Dr. S. Wright.
1 Peter … Mr. Zec. Merrill.
2 Peter … Mr. Joseph Hill.
1, 2, and 3 John … Mr. John Reynolds, of Shrewsbury.
Jude … Mr. John Billingsley.
Revelation … Mr. William Tong.

Henry, Matthew Henry’s Commentary, xxi. John Evans gave the listing of authors who completed Henry’s commentary, according to Isaac Watts, in “To the Editor of the Protestant Dissenter’s Magazine,” in The Protestant Dissenter’s Magazine, vol. 4 (London: Printed for T. Knott, 1797), 472.

It is assumed, then, that the Joseph Hill referred to is the lexicographer and nonconformist clergyman who lived from 1625–1707, and may be read about at Wikipedia, or in the Dictionary of National Biography. Some of his writings are available at the Post-Reformation Digital Library, but a few others are on Early English Books Online (EBBO).

Original Post Here (click). Updated by Tony.

Thomas Adams (1583–1652) on 2 Peter 2:1

Thomas Adams said:

“That bought them.” This last aggravation is derived from the consideration of the unspeakable good which this Lord hath done them; in that they were delivered by the most excellent benefit that ever came to mankind, which is redemption by the blood of Christ. For howsoever it was a singular work and favour of God, to give us by creation a blessed being; yet was it no otherwise given us, than with a possibility to keep it or lose it: but redemption hath instated us to a blessedness never be lost. Here then is a doubt to be resolved: how they may perish from Christ if they were redeemed? how were they redeemed if they can perish?

First, we must lay this ground of truth, that no soul which Christ hath truly bought can perish eternally. “This is the Father’s will, that of all which he hath given me I should lose nothing,” John 6:39. But all they are given to Christ whom he hath purchased: “I give unto them eternal life; and they shall never perish, neither shall any man pluck them out of my hand,” John 10:28. If I give them eternal life, nothing shall bring them to eternal death; and to pluck them out of his hand that is Almighty, requires an adversary stronger than himself. And our Saviour there adds, “My Father, which gave them me, is greater than all; and no man is able to pluck them out of my Father’s hand,” ver. 29. Hereupon Paul makes a free challenge to all the actors, and pleaders, and powers that ever damnation had: “Neither death, nor life, nor angels, nor principalities, nor powers, nor things present, nor things to come, nor height, nor depth,” (and if all this be not enough,) “nor any other creature, shall be able to separate us from the love of God, which is in Christ Jesus,” Rom. 8:38: none can do it. And whether they be Romish or Arminian, that seek to weaken the grace of God, and permit the redeemed ones of the Lord to perish; let us know them for the brokers of Satan, the seminaries of despair, and deniers of Christ.

But against this doctrine is opposed, “Destroy not him with thy meat, for whom Christ died?” Rom. 14:15. “Through thy knowledge shall thy weak brother perish, for whom Christ died,” 1 Cor. 8:11. But those places may be understood not κατʼ ἀληθείαν: not that they can perish through thy default, but that thou dost what thou canst to make them perish. But here it seems most plain, that they may be lost in denying Christ, whom he bought. To clear this, we say that reprobates may be said to be redeemed in divers respects.

1. In regard of the all-sufficient price paid for them. So Christ is said to be that Lamb which taketh away the sins of the world. Though he meant not to save all, yet he died for all, performing his part. (Chrysost.) For he doth not really take away all sin from the world; and this himself declares by not praying for the world, “I pray not for the world,” John 17:9. Otherwise the two main parts or offices of his priesthood were disjoined, and he should sacrifice for them for whom he doth not supplicate. Now for his mediation, it concludes his own in it, excludes the world out of it; “I pray not for the world.”

Thomas Adams, An Exposition upon the Second Epistle General of St. Peter, ed. James Sherman (Edinburgh; London: James Nichol; James Nisbet & Co., 1862), 222. 

Adams continued, and said, (2) they were redeemed in outward appearance (p. 222); (3) they were redeemed with respect to their opinion (p. 223); and (4), they were redeemed with respect to the judgement of charity (p. 223). After this he engaged in homiletic pericope:

This truth then remains, that Christ only bought his church, and salvation for his church. “Feed the church of God, which he hath purchased with his own blood,” Acts 20:28. “Christ loved the church, and gave himself for it,” Eph. 5:25. His name is Jesus, yet he shall save only his own people, Matt. 1:21. For the rest, “they went out from us, but they were not of us,” 1 John 2:19; howsoever, the price was paid for them, and there was a sufficient ransom in the blood of Jesus, if their faithful apprehension had made it theirs. The king hath granted a pardon for all malefactors at the parliament; we say, they are all pardoned: yet perhaps some afterwards are condignly punished, because they never sued out this pardon, nor took the benefit of it. First, therefore, consider what God hath done for them, then what they have done against him: the height of his mercy adds to the weight of their iniquity.

God in his love redeemed us by the blood of his Son. Now there are four kinds of redemption: First, when a slave is freely released to liberty: we could not be so discharged; for, besides that God is just, and his debts must be paid, Satan would not so part with us. Secondly, when a man is set free by commutation or exchanging another into his room: we could exchange no creature to supply our servitude. Thirdly, when a man is rescued by a forcible surprisal; as Abraham redeemed Lot: but herein God was far too strong for us. Fourthly, by a price paid; and thus were we bought with a price, even the blood of that unspotted Lamb. His payment consisted in suffering for our delinquishments, and in performing a sufficient obedience to God for us.

Here admire we the infinite love of God. The Egyptians in their hieroglyphics, or expressions of morality by pictures, used to paint Love naked, Minerva veiled; to show that wisdom may be concealed, love cannot be smothered. The cherubims covered their faces, which is the seat of wisdom; but not their breasts, which is the seat of affection. David by his dissembled madness kept his wisdom unseen from Achish; but spying Bathsheba from the battlements of his palace, he could not smother his affection. God reserves his wisdom to himself, and the reason of his actions; but his love is visible, breaking forth, and read by every running eye. “Many waters cannot quench love,” Cant. 8:7. It is an unsuppressible fire; much water cannot quench it; water and blood could not put it out. Now whom did God thus love? The world: not the frame of heaven and earth, but the little world, man; the compendium and abridgement of all creatures: that whatsoever is imprinted with capital letters in that large volume, as in folio, is sweetly and harmoniously contracted in decimo-sexto, in the brief text of man, who includes all. Planets have being, not life; plants have life, not sense; beasts have sense, not reason; angels have being, life, reason, not sense: man hath all; being with planets, life with plants, sense with beasts, reason with angels. Therefore he is called the world. This world God loved, affective before all time, effective in time.

But what good could man do to him, to induce this love? None; our well-doing extendeth not unto him, Psal. 16:2. When we were made, we added nothing to God; if we were dissolved to nothing, we take nothing from God. That which the Lord saw in us, was apostacy and rebellion. Every creature obeys God, in running that course which he disposed to them. But how was this true, when the sun, being appointed to move his incessant race, did yet stand still in Gibeon? when the sea, being charged to keep within his bounds, doth yet burst out with inundations? I answer, God bade them do so, dispensing with his former command, and they obeyed him. Well, yet man, rebellious man, he loved: what did he give for him? Paradise, large kingdoms, or mines of gold? No, they are but a farthing token to the price of this purchase. He gave his only begotten Son: as he says, What could I do more for my vineyard? Isa. 5:4; so, what could I give more for my vineyard? This Son he gave for unthankful men, that offered not so much as a prayer for him; for unrighteous men, that denied Him that was not denied to them. Here was a sic dilexit; no man could ever find a sicut for it. Augustine supposeth that some great prince had a poor desertless subject, maimed in mind, without reason or honesty; leprous in body, without any soundness; yea, so full of stench that none could endure him; yea, more than all, so arrant a traitor to the same prince, that he would vex him, kill him. He hath one only son, a sweet and hopeful prince, the joy of his heart, the light and delight of his eyes, the singular heir of his kingdom; yet when nothing will cure this forlorn wretch of his leprosy, but only this young prince’s blood, he freely gives that to bathe and cleanse him. This is much, and such as never was found, yet still short of this precedent. For if the life of a prince was given for a gnat, it is not so much as for God’s Son to be given for man. He is worth ten thousands of us, more worth than all: O unspeakable love, gift, price!

St. Peter tells us what was the price of this purchase, the precious blood of Christ, a Lamb without blemish, 1 Pet. 1:19. Had he emptied the veins of the earth, and spoiled them of their richest ores; had he plucked the spangles from heaven, and impoverished the firmament of her sparkling beauties; had he given the whole inheritance of the world; yet all had been infinitely less. When David said to Mephibosheth, “Thou and Ziba divide the land;” he answered, “Yea, let him take all, forasmuch as my lord the king is come again in peace,” 2 Sam. 19:29, 30. This was much, yet Mephibosheth’s content was for David, a friend, a king: but God parts not with an inheritance, but with his Son; and this for man, an enemy, a servant. Let death seize on my Son, that my servant may come again in peace. Oh never was so poor a purchase at so high a price! That he might show love to us, he forbore love to himself. Now see, O renegade, whom thou refusest; thou knowest not whom thou deniest, therefore thou deniest. If thou hast bought honour by thy valour, thou callest it thine; if endeared a friend by thy loyalty, thou callest him thine; if purchased a house with thy money, thou callest it thine: Christ hath bought thee with his blood, and yet thou deniest to be his. This ransom is paid, and now in a merciful offer he tenders it to thee; wilt thou in a peevish sullenness refuse it? Conceive this dialogue between the Redeemer and the denier. Red. Open to me. Den. No, I know not whence thou art. Red. Rise and see. Den. No, I am in my warm bed of pleasures and carnal satisfactions, I will not rise: who art thou? Red. I am Jesus, thy Redeemer: wilt thou still swear and forswear, I know none such? I bought thee, thou art mine: I come to embrace thee, deny me not. Den. Yes, take me, when all other delights forsake me; let me be thine when I am not mine own: till then keep thy cheer to thyself, I have married my pleasure, and I cannot come. Oh obstinate hearts, whom the King of heaven must buy with his blood, woo with his grace, wait upon with his patience, enrich with proffers of mercy, and yet at last be denied! Lord, turn to such as love thee; we deny not thee, deny not us, O good Lord Jesus. Amen.

This is the latitude and dimension of their wickedness; wherewith I will have done, when I have declared the penalty of it. Their punishment is proportioned to their fault: they denied him that bought them, and he that bought them will deny them; “If we deny him, he also will deny us,” 2 Tim. 2:12. How, where, and when will he deny them? They surfeit on pleasures, and enjoy the wish of their own hearts; how then doth he deny them? Doth not God bless whom he loves, and love whom he blesses? Alas, those blessings to such men prove curses; wealth is granted, but mercy is withholden. The earth seems their own, the world applauds them; and is not the voice of the people the voice of God? No, for the whole world lieth in wickedness. But here they are honoured, where then shall they be denied? The echo answers, Here: even where Saul would be honoured, there was he denied, before the people. They spend their days in peace, their minds are not troubled, they sit not sighing and blubbering for their offences; sure God is not angry with them; when shall they be denied? Now; even in that they lament not, their case is most lamentable: their pulse hath left beating, this argues God’s direliction; that their life-breath is panted out, and they have given up the (Holy) Ghost. Will you hear how, where, and when? Take it from Christ’s own mouth: “Whosoever shall deny me before men, him will I also deny before my Father which is in heaven,” Matt. 10:33. For the manner how: I will deny him: not conceal him, nor excuse him, not hold my peace and silence it, but deny him. For the place where: before my Father, where my word will be taken; for I have the key of heaven, to let in and keep out whom I please. Before my Father, who hath committed all judgment to me, and set me to sentence every man according to his works. Before my Father: if it had been only before men where thou deniest me, they would approve my justice; if before the devils, they would be glad of thy company, and with a hasty rape hurry thee to perdition; if only before the angels, (which is also expressed, “He that denieth me before men shall be denied before the angels of God,” Luke 12:9,) they would witness how often I have sent them to guard thee, how little thou didst regard me. But what is the detestation of men, the rejection of angels, the derision of devils, to the loss of my Father’s love? This “before my Father” shall strike thee with horror. When the Father sent Christ, he said, “They will reverence my Son;” but they conspired, “This is the heir; come, let us kill him,” Matt. 21:37, 38. Reject them, O Father, for they rejected me. Away must their faces be turned, from joy, from light, from blessedness; to wander in horrid darkness, to lie bound in chains of torment; where unquenchable fire and unsatiable death shall not be denied them, that denied everlasting life. For the time when: in heaven. When they knock with hope to be let in at that gate, when they shall see millions of confessors enter in and be made welcome; in heaven I will deny them, that is, in the day of judgment. On earth they spake their pleasures, their tongues were their own, they denied me without control; but when I have denied them in heaven, and they have acknowledged me in hell, then shall they gnaw those tongues for pain, Rev. 16:10, and wish that they had been born dumb, never to have denied him that bought them.

This is a fearful plague, when God will suffer men to fall off from Christ, and to reject their Redeemer; alas, they do no less than split and sink that ship in the midst of the sea, which alone should save them. Whom shall they trust to make them righteous? none can do this but Christ, and they have denied him. Who shall condemn? it is Christ that justifieth, Rom. 8:33: so who shall justify, when Christ condemneth? They have sinned, and God is offended, who shall make an atonement for them? Only Christ can do this: if any man sin, he is our Advocate and propitiation, 1 John 2:1, 2; and this Advocate they have denied. Whom shall they call upon for love and favour? there is none to be had but in Christ, and him they have denied. “I have somewhat against thee, because thou hast left thy first love,” Rev. 2:4. He that hath once broken his faith, will not easily be trusted. Him that hath once vowed love to a virgin, and after fallen off with breach of covenant, no wise maid will ever admit within distance of liking. They “wax wanton against Christ, having damnation, because they have cast off their first faith,” 1 Tim. 5:11, 12. Whom shall they call upon in the day of trouble? the Lord. This was the voice of Elijah in his agony, of Jonah in his fury; “Lord, take away my life:” of the apostles in their fear; “Lord, save us; we perish,” Matt. 8:25: of the malefactor dying on the cross; “Lord, remember me in thy kingdom,” Luke 23:42: of Stephen under the stones; “Lord Jesus, receive my spirit,” Acts 7:59: of Saul cast down from his horse; “Lord, what wilt thou have me to do?” Acts 9:6. This is the echo of misery, the suppliant for mercy: but alas, how shall they call on this Lord, that have denied him? “How shall they call on him in whom they have not believed,” Rom. 10:14; yea, whom they have denied? What wonder is it, if God doth not hear, where he hath not been heard? if he shut against them, that would not open to him? Complainest thou, Why hast thou forsaken me, O Lord? he replies, Why hast thou denied me, O servant? There is grievous punishment for them that fear not God; Pour out thine indignation upon them that fear thee not, saith the prophet. Grievous, for them that seek him not; “The wicked will not seek after God,” Psal. 10:4, therefore are lost in the devices of error. Grievous, for them that call not on him; for he will be a stranger to their acquaintance. Grievous, for them that trust not on him; for they shall be left to themselves. Grievous, for them that love him not; for they shall be written in the dust. But most grievous for them that deny him here, for they shall be denied for ever hereafter.

Adams, An Exposition, 223–25. Italics original.

Bio:

Wiki

DNB

Original Post Here (click).

John Trapp (1601–1669) on 2 Peter 2:1

Trapp wrote:

Or, that bought them] viz. in laying down a sufficient price for all sinners, in taking upon him the common nature of all men, and in preaching to them in the Gospel that he died for sinners indefinitely, offering salvation and beseeching them to receive it.

John Trapp, A Commentary or Exposition Upon all the Books of the New Testament (London: Printed by R.W. and are to be sold by Nath. Ekins, at the Gun in Pauls Church-yard, 1656), 936.

Bio:

Wiki

DNB

Original Post Here (click).

John Mayer (1583–1664) on 2 Peter 2:1

Mayer wrote:

Touching that saying, “Denying the Lord that bought them;” none are properly said to be bought by the Lord, but the elect; yet in a large sense, all to whom the Gospel comes are said to be bought by him, yea all men, because the price he paid is sufficient to ransom all; neither is it by any defect therein that any perish, but through their own wickedness and unbelief.

John Mayer, A Commentary upon the New Testament: Representing the Divers Expositions thereof, out of the works of the most learned, both ancient Fathers and modern Writers, and hereby sifting out of the true sense of every passage, for the benefit of all that desire to read with understanding, The third Volume (London: Printed by Iohn Haviland, for Iohn Gismond, and are to be sold at his shop in Ivie Lane, at the sign of the Gun, 1631), 146.

Bio:

DNB

Original Post Here (click).

Andrew Symson (c.1526–c.1590/1) on 2 Peter 2:1

Symson wrote:

Concerning the 2, The study where about those false teachers were to employ themselves: who privily shall bring in damnable heresies, or, (according unto the Original) deadly heresies, even denying the Lord that hath bought them. In which words, we may both perceive the properties of false teachers, and the Nature of their Doctrine. Their properties; 1. diligence, and 2. subtlety in broaching their errors; diligence in that they bring them in, even into the Church of God, to which formerly where were unknown; subtlety in that they do privily bring them in. The nature of their Doctrine; being both dangerous: as being a damnable or deadly doctrine, and heretical doctrine, a doctrine contrary to the will of God, revealed in his Word, impious, the Authors thereof denying the Lord that bought them, Christ Jesus, by whom they were redeemed; which words are not to be understood absolutely, as if they had been indeed redeemed by Christ, or Christ had effectually died for them, for then one of these two absurdities would follow, that either the elect may totally and finally fall away, or, that Christ died for reprobates, both of which are false, but they are to be understood, either according to the judgment of those false teachers, who, no doubt thought and affirmed that they were redeemed by Christ, or, according to that opinion which others had of them, thinking that they were the children of God, or according to the rule of Charity, which should be in every one of us, even to esteeming every particular person to be redeemed by Christ, which embraces and profess the Christian faith, in whom we do not see absolute signs, and evident marks, that he has sinned that sin which is to death; because although for present they may walk otherwise than becometh the Gospel: yet we know now how soon God, which has the hearts of all men in his hand, will turn their hearts: the condition of God’s children before their conversion being the same with the wicked, all of us, being by nature, the children of wrath, or finally in regard that in a large sense, all to whom the Gospel comes may be said to be bought by him; yea all men because the price by him paid, is sufficient to ransom all; neither is it by any default therein, that any perish, but through their own wickedness and unbelief….

Touching the 3, false Teachers do in divers particulars manifest this their denial of Christ. 1. By broaching abroad doctrines contrary to the Doctrine of Christ. 2. By withstanding the means of that power of Christ, whereby he would sanctify their hearts unto obedience. The merit of his Redemption is welcome to them, but they will not have to do with its efficacy, which sanctifies and renews the inward man, subdues sin, and quickens the life of God in them….

He is Lord, let us not with false Teachers, deny him obedience. He is a perfect Mediator between God and Man, let us not with false Teachers, ascribe unto any other means, as to Angels, Saints, merits and the like. This glorious work, that honor which is his due; he is his God and Man in one person, Let us not with false Teachers, gain-say the same; he is the object of our faith, let us not deny him by continuing in infidelity what though others deny him, as too too many do; we must not follow their example. Oh let us not deny him any manner of as we have already done too too many times. Hast thou made a show of piety and goodness, but in hypocrisy? Has thou lived scandalously, notwithstanding of all thy profession to the contrary? Does thou now yield obedience unto the will of God? Does thou not daily grow in grace? Thou art a denier of Christ, repent therefore, be the servant of Christ, not of custom, but of conscience, deny not him, lest he deny you; deny not him who has been kind unto you, who has redeemed you by his own precious blood: oh bewail and lament the general apostasy and back-sliding in these our days…

Andrew Symson, An Exposition Upon the Second Epistle General of Saint Peter: Plainly and Pithily Handled (London: T. Cotes for I.B. and are to be sold by Benjamin Allen dwelling in Popes-head Alley, 1632), 233–234, 241–42, and 243. [italics original; some spelling updated.]

Bio:
Wiki
DNB

Original Post Here (click). The authors name has been corrected. It is Andrew (see DNB source), not Archibald.