(145) "God Is Not Willing That Any Should Perish," Who Is God Talking About In 2 Peter 3:9? All Or Some? - YouTube
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. But the day of the Lord will come like a thief, and then the heavens will pass away with a roar, and the heavenly bodies will be burned up and dissolved, and the earth and the works that are done on it will be exposed. (2 Peter 3:8-10).
* some manuscripts = on your account.
Rob Zins: "Does God arrive at knowledge? - or to explain the question, - Does God know all things that come to pass as a result of His willing them to be so, or must He wait for events to happen so that He can look ahead and gain knowledge of events?"
According to Zins, a consistent theme of Pelagian, Arminian-Evangelical and Roman Catholic theology is the idea that God looks down the tunnel of time to find out, or arrive at, knowledge. In other words, simply stated, "
God is unaware until He takes a look". Zins is describing
"open theism", a false doctrine that is supported by a relatively small number of Christians.
Zins seems to assume that all non-Calvinist Christians are "Evangelical-Arminians" - this is a false assumption. Furthermore, he has misrepresented the views of Arminians and Roman Catholics, and in doing so he has compromised his entire argument. There are differing views within the Arminian camp, but generally speaking, Arminians argue for the traditional view that God's foreknowledge is exhaustive and complete, and that the future is certain and is not contingent on human action.
Nathan Justice: "Arminianism argues for the traditional understanding of divine foreknowledge,
which says that God has 'complete and infallible knowledge of the future.'1 This definition
of divine foreknowledge is also called 'simple foreknowledge', because Molinists accept
God’s complete and infallible knowledge of the future while also affirming God’s middle
knowledge. In defending simple foreknowledge, Arminians represent the most common
view of divine foreknowledge throughout church history as well as the most common interpretation of the biblical data. In distinction from Calvinism, which holds that God
foreknows because He foreordains, Arminius argued that
God foreknows future things through the infinity of his essence, and through the
pre-eminent perfection of his understanding and prescience, not as he willed or
decreed that they should necessarily be done, though he would not foreknow them
except as they were future, and they would not be future unless God had decreed
either to perform or to permit them." {1}
I am certainly not an apologist for Roman Catholicism, but as far as I can ascertain, the RCC promotes God's infallible foreknowledge and has no idea of God "arriving at knowledge". {2}
Rob Zins: "It is our contention that God knows all things because He wills all things. God does not arrive at knowledge and He leaves nothing to chance."
The struggle to reconcile God's omniscience and human free will is extremely challenging. The scriptures are clear that God is omniscient i.e. He is all-knowing and He knows exactly what will happen. (Isaiah 14:24, 46:10; Psalm 33:11). In other words, God has complete and ultimate knowledge of every decision made by human beings past, present, and future, otherwise, how can we explain bible prophecy? Any philosophical attempt to explain God's omniscience is feeble and inevitably falls short. If the Apostle Paul was among us, I think he would tell us not to lean on our own understanding. (Proverbs 3:5). In one particular sense Zins is correct in that God does not arrive at knowledge and that He knows all things. However, the thorny question remains: What part does human free will play in salvation? Zins' statement"regeneration precedes salvation" is extremely problematic since a number of scriptures suggest that faith precedes salvation. (e.g. John 1:12, 3:15-16; Acts 2:38, 3:19, 21,11:18,16:31; Romans 10:9-10; 1 Corinthians 1:21).
It is impossible to deny the fact that God has created people with the capacity to choose from Eden, and yet there are those who persist in denying human free will. (Genesis 3:3). The appeal in the scriptures over and over again is for all people everywhere to repent. (Acts 17:30; Isaiah 45:22). The futile pursuit of attempting to reconcile God's sovereignty and human autonomy inevitably culminates in the formulation of distorted and divisive false doctrines. (1 Corinthians 1:19; Proverbs 3:5; 1 Timothy 6:20). Perhaps some should learn a lesson from Job! (Job 15:8). Oh, the depth of the riches and wisdom and knowledge of God! How unsearchable are his judgments and how inscrutable his ways! “For who has known the mind of the Lord, or who has been his counselor?” (Romans 11:33-34 cf. Isaiah 40:13; 1 Corinthians 13:12).
Zins gives the so-called "Arminian-Evangelical", or what he also refers to as the "inconsistent Evangelical Arminian" interpretation of 2 Peter 3:8-10. The Lord is not slow of the promise as some count slowness, but is patient toward you, not willing that any should perish, but that all should come to repentance. Zins: "Not willing (βουλόμενος) is God's eternal will or desire, and the any is everyone in the world, past present and future. It is all without exception, and the word here come into repentance (χωρῆσαι μετάνοιαν) is salvation." Zins doesn't accept the "Arminian Evangelical" interpretation of this passage, because, according to him "..they don't take into account the plural 'you'." Zins makes the assumption that the phrase "toward you" in verse 9, applies to believers "beloved" (αγαπητοι) in verse 8. Does "toward you" apply to the beloved, or does Peter change focus and apply it to a wider audience, i.e. everyone in the world which is also plural?
The other reason Zins doesn't like the "Arminian Evangelical" interpretation: "If Peter wanted us to believe that any, meaning each and every person in the whole wide world to come to repentance, which is salvation, he would have written something like: 'The Lord is not slow concerning his promise, but is longsuffering toward the world, or towards the cosmos, not willing for anyone to perish but for all to come into repentance.'" With words like any and all, non-Calvinist scholars have concluded that Peter does in fact mean every person in the world. Calvinists still do not accept that all humanity is referred to, even when the scriptures specifically identify the world/cosmos as in John 3:16.
Zins continues to describe what he considers to be a flawed Calvinist response to the "Arminian Evangelical" view: "The Lord is not slow of the promise as some count slowness, but is long-suffering toward you (beloved), not willing (βουλόμενος) for any (of you) to perish, but for all (of you) to come, or to enter into repentance (salvation). Zins doesn't like this interpretation because of the idea that the word βούλομαι is not God's secret eternal will, but rather it is His will of desire (will of command) which can be broken. In other words, βούλομαι is just God's desire. Zins notes that even Calvin takes the view in his commentary that Peter does not refer to the eternal secret will of God, but rather he teaches that it is not God's desire for anyone to perish but for all to come to repentance (salvation). In other words, God's open command (His desire) is that everyone in the world will come to repentance.
Zins goes on to describe what he views as a more acceptable interpretation of this passage from various strong Reformed theologians including AW Pink. "He {Peter} is writing only to the elect because of the word 'beloved'. 'But let not this one thing be concealed from you (elect).. He is long-suffering toward you (elect), not willing (the eternal will) for any (of the elect) to perish, but for all (of the elect) to come to repentance (salvation). The idea here is that the delay in Christ's return is so that all of the elect will come to salvation.."
Zins' own novel interpretation of 2 Peter 3:8-10: "This is not a salvation passage at all.. it is an experience in salvation, in other words, it refers to diligence and perseverance. 'but let not this one thing be concealed from you beloved (elect), that one day is as a thousand years and a thousand years one day. The Lord is not slow of His promise (regarding His coming, that's the theme), as some count slowness, but is long-suffering (patient in enduring) toward you (referring to the beloved), not willing (either will of desire or eternal will) for any of you (beloved) to perish (ἀπόλλυμι), but for all of you (beloved - his elect) to enter into or come into (chōrēsai) repentance (metanoia). Repentance here is not salvation, it is repenting from being involved in the sins that were so troubling to the reading audience." Zins cites 2 Peter 3:15 as his proof text for this interpretation.
If this passage refers to an experience in salvation rather than an experience of salvation, the false Calvinist belief in once saved always saved (OSAS) is compromised by the word perish (ἀπόλλυμι). Zins fails in two respects; firstly, he misrepresents the "Arminian Evangelical" and RC position regarding God's foreknowledge; and secondly, he suggests that the passage does not refer to salvation, which is completely at odds with the context and the word perish (ἀπόλλυμι).
Bible Hub:
"perish - ἀπόλλυμι = 622 /apóllymi ("violently/completely perish") implies permanent (absolute) destruction, i.e. to cancel out (remove); 'to die, with the implication of ruin and destruction' (L & N, 1, 23.106); cause to be lost (utterly perish) by experiencing a miserable end." {3}
Paul is addressing the "beloved" i.e. believers. When Paul says that God is "patient with you", he is referring to the apparent delay in Jesus' coming. He explains the reason for this in the next clause: not wishing that any should perish, but that all should reach repentance ~ The gospel invitation is inclusive and is extended to all people in the world/cosmos. (John 3:16). Jesus' apparent delay in coming is contingent upon the salvation of those who will respond to the gospel and put their faith in Him in the future. This is pertinent to "the beloved" of whom they will eventually become a part. The salvation of these future people will make the number of believers (the bride of Christ) complete in Him. (Matthew 22:9; Luke 21:24; Revelation 19:7).
After watching Larry Wessels' video on CAnswersTV:
(151) Unpopular Bible Doctrines #1: The Biblical God No One Wants To Know - YouTube I was absolutely horrified. What kind of
"God" do Calvinists believe in? Those who teach Calvinism malign Christ's teaching by denying the fullness of the gospel and limiting its application. In doing so they malign the very character of God Himself by denying His goodness and love toward
all people.
(John 3:16 ). These teachers grieve the Holy Spirit and inevitably cause pain and confusion to the body of Christ. (Ephesians 4:30; Proverbs 30:6). This teaching devastates churches and is very discouraging to unbelievers. How will these men be able to give an account to God for spreading this wicked doctrine? (Hebrews 4:13; James 3:1).
I have included a link to Mike Winger's video on this subject below because he makes some useful points. Where I disagree with Winger is that he claims that this is not a "gospel issue". Zins himself says that Arminianism is a different gospel. (2 Corinthians 11:4). I agree with Zins that traditional Christianity and Calvinism are different gospels, but of the two teachings, it is my view that Calvinism is the "different gospel".
1. viewcontent.cgi (liberty.edu)
2. CATHOLIC ENCYCLOPEDIA: Predestination (newadvent.org)
3. Strong's Greek: 622. ἀπόλλυμι (apollumi) -- to destroy, destroy utterly (biblehub.com)
