2 Peter 3:16.
‘……Some things hard to understand…….’
On another thread,
@DNB wrote that there were certain texts which appear to contradict the teaching of Definite Atonement. I thought it might be good to look at some of these, so I am going to give two such texts and then open the discussion out for others.
The first text is 1 John 2:2.
1 John 2:2 (NIV).
‘He is the atoning sacrifice for our sins, and not only for ours but also for the sins of the whole world.’
1 John 2:2 (AV).
‘And he himself is the propitiation for our sins, and not for ours only but for the sins of the whole world.’
1 John 2:2 (NKJV).
‘And He Himself is the propitiation for our sins, and not for ours only but for the whole world.’
The argument of those who uphold a General Redemption is that since the Lord Jesus has died for the sins of ‘the whole world,’ He cannot have died for the Elect alone. They assume that the Greek word
kosmos, which has the basic meaning of ‘the created order,’ must mean here ‘all the people in the world.’ There is no firm evidence for that;
kosmos has a variety of meanings in the New Testament. But whatever it means here, it cannot mean ‘all the people in the world,’ since the Bible teaches very clearly that God is actually
not propitiated towards everyone in the world without exception.
‘He who believes is not condemned; but he who does not believe is condemned already, because he has not believed in the name of the only begotten Son of God’ (John 3:18). So God is not propitious towards unbelievers. Is it possible that our Lord Jesus would make a propitiation that would fail? One that would not propitiate the Father? Surely not!
‘For I always do the things that please Him’ (John 8:29).