Circle_Master Posted December 29, 2003 Share Posted December 29, 2003 What is the Catholic interpretation of 2 Peter 2:1? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
p0lar_bear Posted December 29, 2003 Share Posted December 29, 2003 What is the Catholic interpretation of 2 Peter 2:1? Ummm...I don't get how this applies to the conversation.... There were also false prophets among the people, just as there will be false teachers among you, who will introduce destructive heresies and even deny the Master who ransomed them, bringing swift destruction on themselves (2 Peter 2:1). My guess is that there is no "official interpretation" (the Church has given definitive pronouncements on the meaning of relatively few verses in Scripture). One would figure that it means pretty much what it says; there will be false teachers who will teach heresies and deny Christ.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Circle_Master Posted December 29, 2003 Share Posted December 29, 2003 Well it says that these false prophets were 'agorazo' in the greek. (ransomed in your translation) I.E., they were bought. The common illustration of this term is of a slave market and agorazo would be the act of buying a slave. exagorazo is the act of buying a slave and then setting him free. Both are terms used frequently in the NT for someone bought by Christ. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
p0lar_bear Posted December 29, 2003 Share Posted December 29, 2003 Analogies limp and illustrations fall short. Holding on to one illustration or image, in this case that of ransom, to the exclusion of all others will lead one into error. Maintaining that man has free will in regard to his salvation is not denying that Christ paid the price, i.e. the ransom. Salvation is a gift that is offered, we must accept it. Using the slave illustration (though I am uncertain that the Greek word referred exclusively to this situation)...if a person buys a slave and sets him free, the slave can still refuse to leave his new master and refuse payment of services (making them, in effect, still a slave), or the slave can offer himself as a slave to the first person he comes across....the slave does not have to accept the gift of freedom. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Circle_Master Posted December 29, 2003 Share Posted December 29, 2003 the illustration was just on the definition of the word. I think you misunderstood one part. The word used in this passage is only for 'buying' the slave. An example of it's use would be 1 Corinthians 6:20 and 1 Corinthians 7:23 which say ...you have been bought with a price: therefore glorify God... and ..You were bought with a price; do not become slaves of men. ... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Circle_Master Posted December 29, 2003 Share Posted December 29, 2003 (edited) The other side of this, If all men were bought, Then since man has a 'heart of stone' and must become a 'heart of flesh' and that before salvation was 'hostile to God' and 'unable to please God' 'blinded by the God of this world', then while all this was true, God bought all mankind, and offered His Son to whomever would accept. None accepted because of our love of sin and hate of God, and God's mercy in not sending all to hell is revealed by Him opening our eyes and setting us free from sin so we may see the greatness that He is. That would be an interpretation from unlimited atonement. Edited December 29, 2003 by Circle_Master Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Circle_Master Posted December 31, 2003 Share Posted December 31, 2003 bump for Catholic response to 2 Peter 2:1 and argument provided. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Circle_Master Posted December 31, 2003 Share Posted December 31, 2003 bump for Catholic response to 2 Peter 2:1 and argument provided. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Aloysius Posted December 31, 2003 Share Posted December 31, 2003 There were also false prophets among the people, just as there will be false teachers among you, who will introduce destructive heresies and even deny the Master who ransomed them, bringing swift destruction on themselves (2 Peter 2:1). so you're focusing on "the Master who ransomed them"? aight, let's see... from limited atonement, doesn't that mean that the Master bought the Christian, yet the Merciful Master would not buy slaves against their will. He buys those who will come. Those who wish to stay with their previous master, sin, He allows to stay simply because He will not force one to consider Him their master if they do not want to, because having a slave that hates you really doesn't help you, really doesn't please you too much, cuz He'll try to escape at every oppurtunity and stuff. does this have anything to do with your argument? i'm just tryin to provide my view on the Scripture. i could always be wrong though, i'm not really a pillar of fire or truth, just try to share in the fire and the truth. :cool: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Circle_Master Posted December 31, 2003 Share Posted December 31, 2003 Yeah, it does imply that they were bought, and they choose to lovein sin still. I agree completely with that. Let me narrow it down to where this leads though- By using agorazo here Paul is saying that his sins were paid for, which is unlimited atonement. Limited atonement says that only those who are saved have been paid for. If they were bought, then limited atonement can't be true. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Circle_Master Posted December 31, 2003 Share Posted December 31, 2003 I have a worksheet for you as well. If you want to try something out this just goes through some Scripture. Read it, think about it, and consider. I. The time of election When did election take place (Ephesians 1:4)? II. The agent of election Who did the electing (Ephesians 1:3-4; 1 Thessalonians 1:1-4; 2 Thessalonians 2:13)? III. The threefold basis of election A. According to Romans 9:11, 16 – 1. What is the basis of election? 2. What is not the basis of election? B. According to Romans 11:5-6 – 1. What is the basis of election? 2. What is not the basis of election? C. According to 1 Peter 1:1-2, what is the basis of election? In order to understand the meaning of God’s foreknowledge that is a basis of election, examine the following passages, and answer their related questions: 1. Colossians 3:12; 1 Thessalonians 1:4; 2 Thessalonians 2:13 – In all three of these passages the word translated “beloved” is a perfect tense, passive voice participle that has the meaning “having been loved.” It refers to an action that was completed in the past, but the results of that action continue on. Thus, all three passages relate election to “having been loved” in the past. Compare Jeremiah 31:3 – Upon what basis did God draw this person to Himself? 2. Deuteronomy 4:37; 7:6-8; 10:15 – Upon what basis did God choose (elect) the people of Israel for a unique relationship with Him? 3. Romans 8:29; 11:2 – According to these passages, which of the following is correct? a. God foreknew “people.” b. God foreknew “what” people would do (their actions). 4. Romans 8:29-30 – a. How many of those people whom God “foreknew” did He “predestine?” b. How many of those people whom God “predestined” did He also “call?” c. How many of those people whom God “called” did he also “justify?” d. In light of these three steps, how many of those people whom God “foreknew” does He “justify” (save)? e. In light of this last answer, can the divine foreknowledge referred to in Romans 8:29 be the kind that knows ahead of time “what” each person will or will not do? If not, why not? In light of Romans 8:29-30 and the Colossians, Thessalonians, Jeremiah and Romans 11:2 passages examined in this section, which of the following two options is the meaning of God’s foreknowledge that is a basis of election: a. God’s knowing ahead of time “what” each person will or will not do? b. God’s “foreloving” of people? IV. The goals or purposes of election The things to which God elected people: A. Salvation – 2 Thessalonians 2:13; 1 Peter 1:1-2 1. According to Acts 13:48 who were the Gentiles who believed the message of salvation at Pisidian Antioch? 2. According to Acts 16:14 what prompted Lydia to respond to Paul’s message? 3. John 6:37, 44, 65 – According to Jesus, who are the only people who come to Him? B. According to Ephesians 1:4 what is another goal or purpose of election? C. According to 1 Peter 2:9 what is another goal or purpose for which people are chosen? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
freegrace Posted December 31, 2003 Share Posted December 31, 2003 the 2 peter 2:1 verse is easily answered by the context. These people claim to be christians yet deny christianity itself. Peter says sarcastically that they deny the person who they claim bought them. I think (emphasis on think) that peter may be refering to gnosticism (which thank God the catholic church condemned). These people claimed to be christians but denied the Jesus came and was actually in physical body. On this limited atonement talk... John 9 is actually specifically adressing it. Also an good understanding of the old testament sacrifice (which is a type and a shadow of the ultimate sacrifice) should answer many of your questions. For example the passover lamb was not for everyone but it was specificly for those who were part of the covenant. Also the scapegoat which people laid there hands on it and then sent it out to be remissed of their sins was specific or particular. Those whom christ dies for he also intercedes for and those he intercedes for are also saved. Someone also said we have to accept the blood. I would remind you to choose your terminology carefully, Jesus said only belief was necessary. "whoever believes in me will be saved." Never have I heard of this acceptance stuff, especially in scripture. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Circle_Master Posted December 31, 2003 Share Posted December 31, 2003 the 2 peter 2:1 verse is easily answered by the context. These people claim to be christians yet deny christianity itself. Peter says sarcastically that they deny the person who they claim bought them. I think (emphasis on think) that peter may be refering to gnosticism (which thank God the catholic church condemned). These people claimed to be christians but denied the Jesus came and was actually in physical body. a) it doesn't sound sarcastic to me, read it again But false prophets also arose among the people, just as there will be false teachers among you, who will secretly bring in destructive heresies, even denying the Master who bought them, bringing upon themselves swift destruction. b) even denying the Master who bought them - sounds incredulous to me actually. Like, why the heck would they do that. c) if "denying the Master" is one of their heresies, then it stands to reason they don't claim to be Christians. Just false teachers who will attempt to lead Christians away from the truth faith. The ironic part is the Master has still bought them despite their heresies. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Circle_Master Posted January 1, 2004 Share Posted January 1, 2004 By using agorazo here Paul is saying that his sins were paid for, which is unlimited atonement. Limited atonement says that only those who are saved have been paid for. If they were bought, then limited atonement can't be true. But false prophets also arose among the people, just as there will be false teachers among you, who will secretly bring in destructive heresies, even denying the Master who bought them, bringing upon themselves swift destruction. still waiting for a Catholic interpretation. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Circle_Master Posted January 2, 2004 Share Posted January 2, 2004 still waiting............................ it's on 3 days now. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now