John Owen On 2 Peter 3:9

Yet another claim that my understanding is the problem. See the pattern. Generalized claims of mixed thoughts and confused positions. That is all they have folks, evade, change the subject and personal attack. Then claim the nonsense posted in the past but not referenced, was specific and logical. Horse feathers.

Why would God cause the previously chosen elect to be born over a long time rather than a short time, if the result in the delay did not alter the number saved, but only increased the number lost? The idea is nonsense, Calvinist nonsense.

2 Peter 3:9 says God is delaying coming in judgment in order to give believers time to help win more of the lost to God. This view is not confused, or mixed up or whatever baseless charge the next Calvinist will hurl to evade the obvious.

 

Yet the same evasion, the question does not question God but Calvinism. But the Calvinist posts as if it questions God. Evasion pure and simple. And why the evasion of the obvious? Calvinism is false doctrine springs to mind. Why would Calvinism claim to know that "God sprinkled all the elect over lots of generations" which would result in more of the lost perishing when God does not desire that any should perish. One nonsensical evasion after another is all they have folks. 2 Peter 3:9 says God is delaying to give believers time to help win more of the lost to God. Only if our choice is volitional does delay make sense. If our choice is a foregone conclusion, delay makes no sense. And since God is not a God of confusion, the answer must be Calvinism is wrong, and our choice is volitional.

 

God has His definite plans for this earth, and for his people though van...

He IS indeed long suffering, as he had the right to destroy ALL of us and allow ALL of us to get our "just rewards" into the lake of Fire...

Are you asking why jesus didn't justcome back and bring everything to pass in First century, sparing all lost souls since his ascension to heaven?

Again, you might want to read what the prophet Isaiah and Apostle paul said concerning that the Lord ways and thoughts are WAY above ours, and who are we, mere motes of dust, to try to play God in his place?

last one who tried to play God and second guess his reasons and ways was ole satan himself, and how did that work out for him?

 

Hi Jesusfan, do not put forth that I should accept nonsense because God's way is way beyond my way. God's revelation is put forth so that we can understand it, and since He is our creator, He knows how to reveal himself such that we can understand His divine attributes and attitudes. Like, Holy, Just and Merciful.

Calvinism makes no sense, and to say that is ok because it may be right because we are unable to understand it, is nonsense squared.

 

just curious to why it is not possible that God is indeed beyond us to understand?
The Bible is God "wriiten down" to our levels, but would you not agree that he still is literally beyond us fully understanding and knowing at least while here on earth?

what is the "main beef" that you have with Calvinism?

 

Hi Jesusfan, my main beef with Calvinism is it is unbiblical and hinders the ministry of Christ. It divides the body.

Here are a few examples. You took what I said and wrote why it is not possible that God is indeed beyond us to understand? This does not reflect what I said in the slightest. I said "God's way is way beyond my way." Therefore that is not in question, yet you questioned it wasting my time to refute your insinuation. What I said is there is not reason to accept Calvinism's nonsense on the basis that God is way beyond my way. Calvinism is making statements about God which are contrary to God's understandable revelation.

Calvinism takes biblical truth and goes too far, plunging into error.

 

Yes...it is confused humanistic philosophy,that accuses God of incorrect judgement.

Van....you will not come to truth this way.

 

Folks, post 89 simply repeats the personal attacks, saying there is something wrong with the person who says Calvinism is false doctrine. Note the absence of any substance, only the claim of substance posted in the unreferenced past. See the pattern?

2 Peter 3:9 says God is waiting to bring His judgment, which He has promised, to give us - believers - time to help win more of the lost to Christ. "God's seeming delay in bring about the consummation of all things is a result not of indifference but of patience in waiting for all who will come to repentance." So the "not wishing that any should perish" refers to the lost, not those He is being patient with.

Therefore 2 Peter 3:9 agrees with all the other verses that say God does not desire that any should perish, but that all should come to a knowledge of the truth. Thus Christ died for all men, which by logical necessity means the Calvinistic view of the work of the cross is false doctrine.

 

Absolutely right! Good post, Rip.

Steve

 

Reply to Rippon

In verse 9 where the Lord says He is 'patient toward you" do you think that refers to everyone? No, and I said so. So the question is absurd, a diversion from fruitful discussion.

Do you think that "not wishing any to perish" but "all to come to repentance" means anyone of the entire human race? Yes.

Peter has not changed his audience, and again no one is claiming he has, so yet more sand tossed in the air to hide the obvious.

Have the elect "reached repentance" or come to repentance? Of course they have. So the any must not refer to his audience of believers, but to future believers that have not yet come to repentance. So the idea that the same group of people are in view is a logical impossibility, yet Calvinism says accept it, cause although we understand it, it is way beyond your understanding. Horse feathers. Paul said much the same thing in 1 Timothy 2:4 which says God desires all men to be saved and come to a knowledge of the truth.

So the delay is to allow current believers time to help win more of the lost to God.

 

Can you explain why God would need to be patient with his elect since its all up to God to save them? Is He being patient with Himself or them?

 

Saying that Peter must remain strict only to his immediate audience is shallow thinking.

This is straining the context. Actually strangling it.

Obviously they've experienced repentance, and it's also obvious scoffers came around mocking the 2nd coming, and the promise thereof, and he is addressing this, and applying a principle. God was longsuffering to his immediate audience, until they themselves came to repentance. In addressing the scoffers (what they were saying) he explains via the Holy Spirit that God is yet doing the same thing He had done for them in His Grace: awaiting others also, as He had them, to come to repentance.

I give the Holy Spirit and Peter more freedom than having to stay only to this strict audience.

God awaits others to come to repentance. This is why it seems He has delayed His Son in coming.

 

So, your contention is that God is delaying His second coming to give himself enough time to effectually call all his elect? That means he is patient with himself, right? Doesn't the verse say he is patient with them?

 

Right on Skandelon, and in addition, if they were elect, they could not perish. Unless Rippon's position is the elect can perish. I mean if He had elected some folks who had not yet been born, and He came, why wouldn't those elect join those that died before birth, and be given faith, yet another Calvinist absurdity. You see how the whole premise unravels? The delay only makes sense if we volitionally choose to help win others for Christ, and those who are lost volitionally choose to trust in Christ. Then God would delay, being patient and longsuffering, because He does not desire that any should perish, but all should come to the knowledge of the truth.

 

Yep, the Book has been written, and the predeterminate counsel of Holy God is in motion.