The question that often is asked concerning 2nd Peter 2:1, is, "How can Particular Redemption be justified, when these men who were 'purchased' by the blood of Christ, are false prophets who denied the Lord?" In other words, doesn't this verse saying these were bought, deny limited atonement? It is a very good question. But considering all of scripture in it's proper context, the answer is an emphatic no. False prophets 'cannot' be those who were purchased by the shed blood of Christ. What we have here is both a misunderstanding of this term's application, and of the context in which it is used. The environment it is used is 'of them' (the Church) in the external Covenant sense, not as an illustration that those who will never be Saved were actually bought by the blood of Christ. Such an understanding of this verse is somewhat popular, but would be contrary to all other scriptures, and a violation of sound hermeneutics. For there can be no sin or transgression before God on behalf of those who have truly been washed clean in Christ's blood. On the other hand, false prophets who will never be Saved, still have their sin, and still belong to Satan's Kingdom 'precisely' because they were not bought by the death of Christ. They are still under condemnation of God 'not' having been bought.

Romans 8:1

• "There is therefore now No Condemnation to them which are in Christ Jesus, who walk not after the flesh, but after the Spirit."

1st John 3:9

• "Whosoever is born of God doth not commit sin; for his seed remaineth in him: and he cannot sin, because he is born of God."

2nd Peter 2:1

• "But there were false prophets also among the people, even as there shall be false teachers among you, who privily shall bring in damnable heresies, even denying the Lord that bought them, and bring upon themselves swift destruction."

The real question I see here is this. Does this verse of scripture teach that Jesus Christ went to the cross to die for all men without exception, and thus has in some way redeemed false prophets and teachers by purchasing them in His blood? Some Theologians say yes, but I give an unequivocal, No. Again, such an interpretation (no matter how scholarly it's presented) is a blatant denial of particular redemption (recovery, by payment), and is justifiable support for the heretical teaching of universal redemption. For any doctrine which says that we were all redeemed or bought by Christ's blood, is error. The question then is, 'what then does this passage mean?'

There are many faithful Reformed Christians who declare that it means that Christ, by virtue of his death and resurrection to reign, is the Sovereign Lord and absolute despot of all things. In other words, He has bought the right to rule 'all men' by death and ascension to the throne. While I certainly respect the opinions of these learned men, there are several inherent problems with this understanding. Not the least of which is, where does scripture say that Christ by His death, bought or purchased the right to be ruler of every single man? The fact is, God was Sovereign ruler of all things both before and after the cross. Nothing has changed there. He didn't come to earth 'in the flesh' to be Sovereign ruler of every single person, He came to earth 'in the flesh' to go the cross and be Sovereign ruler of His people. He came to buy or purchase 'them' to be subjects in the Kingdom that He established by His death and resurrection. He came particularly to redeem or buy Israel.

In point of fact, God already had right to reign, and was already the Sovereign Lord and absolute despot of all things. He hasn't 'bought' the right to rule all men by death and ascension to the throne, he already had that right. He bought or purchased the right to rule over 'all men' who were in bondage to Satan, and were Elect of God. That is a different, 'all men.' It's all men without distinction, not all men without exception. He bought the right to rule the nations who have now become part of 'His kingdom.' There are two kingdoms and rulers in this world. When Christ went to the cross, He ransomed the Elect of the nations from the hand of the strong, who held us captive in his kingdom (which was Satan), and delivered us into this Kingdom of God.

Jeremiah 31:11

• "For the Lord hath redeemed Jacob, and ransomed him from the hand of him that was stronger than he."

• "But if I cast out devils by the Spirit of God, then the kingdom of God is come unto you.
• Or else how can one enter into a strong man's house, and spoil his goods, except he first bind the strong man? and then he will spoil his house."

John 12:31

• "Now is the judgment of this world: now shall the Prince of this world be cast out."

Colossians 1:13

• "Who hath delivered us from the power of darkness, and hath translated us into the kingdom of his dear Son:"

1st Corinthians 6:20

• "For ye are bought with a price: therefore glorify God in your body, and in your spirit, which are God's."

One might say then, 'but the wording of 2nd Peter clearly says these false prophets are denying the Lord that bought them, and thus bring upon themselves swift destruction.' Am I contradicting these scriptures? Not at all. For God is speaking of 'them' coming in to be part of the Church which was purchased. Thus the 'them' is the Church they come into and are externally a part of. For example, the Church purchased used in this sense.

Acts 20:28

• "Take heed therefore unto yourselves, and to all the flock, over the which the Holy Ghost hath made you overseers, to feed the church of God, which he hath purchased with his own blood."

Looking at the context of 2nd Peter bears this out. You'll note that Peter urges the Church in the preceding chapter (verse 10) to make their calling and election sure, and then throughout chapter 2 speaks of those in the external Church who are professing Christians, but are not truly Saved.

2 Peter 2:20-22

• "For if after they have escaped the pollutions of the world through the knowledge of the Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ, they are again entangled therein, and overcome, the latter end is worse with them than the beginning.
• For it had been better for them not to have known the way of righteousness, than, after they have known it, to turn from the holy commandment delivered unto them.
• But it is happened unto them according to the true proverb, The dog is turned to his own vomit again; and the sow that was washed to her wallowing in the mire."

And just as verses 20-22 is not speaking of people who were really Saved and then lost their Salvation, neither is verse 2 speaking of people who were actually bought by the blood of Christ, and then became unbought. It is speaking of those who 'come in' to the Church which was bought, and deny Christ by their works. Because they have never become 'a new creature' in Christ, they return to just what they always were. In accord with verses 20-22, they were Sows (pigs) and Dogs. By contrast, when we become truly Saved, we are no longer sows, no longer dogs, but have become a new creature. These who come in, but are unregenerate, remained what they were, and so went back to doing what was their true nature to do. They behaved like the dogs and swine that they still were. These are spiritual pictures for us to learn from. Parables in which are manifest certain truths for the elect.

Indeed the whole context throughout the chapter of 2nd Peter 2 is of this external Church relationship. Anyone can call themselves the Church, bought of Christ, but it's what is internal that counts. Have they been given a new heart, and have they had their stony heart removed. A tree is known by it's fruits. Scripture interprets scripture.

Titus 1:16

• "They profess that they know God; but in works they deny him, being abominable, and disobedient, and unto every good work reprobate."

Romans 3:24

• "Being justified freely by his grace through the redemption that is in Christ Jesus:"

It's simple really. If false Prophets were washed clean in Christ's Blood, then they have no sin. And it's clear, the purchase was by blood. These have their sin remain because they call themselves the Church bought of Christ, when by their doctrines, heresies, and works, they deny the Christ that bought the Church (whom they claim to be). Not at all unlike that spoken of in Hebrews.

Hebrews 6:4-6

• "For it is impossible for those who were once enlightened, and have tasted of the heavenly gift, and were made partakers of the Holy Ghost,
• And have tasted the good word of God, and the powers of the world to come,
• If they shall fall away, to renew them again unto repentance; seeing they crucify to themselves the Son of God afresh, and put him to an open shame."

Matthew 1:21

• "And she shall bring forth a son, and thou shalt call his name JESUS: for he shall Save His people from their sins."

In doctrine they serve another Christ, a false or antichrist which is a substitute for the real Christ who bought them (Christians). Again, remember that this whole epistle of Peter is addressed to the Church, warning them of these Church members that will come in and who are really false teachers. This is why it says 'them' (meaning Christians, or the Church). Because they profess to be the Church, bought of Christ.

1st John 2:22

• "Who is a liar but he that denieth that Jesus is the Christ? He is antichrist, that denieth the Father and the Son."

• "For many deceivers are entered into the world, who confess not that Jesus Christ is come in the flesh. This is a deceiver and an antichrist."

As a side note, the Greek word bought is [agorazo] meaning something has been purchased by a price paid. There is no way (in my humble opinion) that we can look at this as Christ by the cross having shed His blood to 'pay the price' to redeem or buy the wicked of the world (except it be us, true Christians). Buy them for what? Why was payment required for them? There is no rational, logical or biblical answer, and it makes no sense to me. I believe it is really a stretch to conclude that. Show me where it says His blood was shed that every man (without exception) was bought by it in some way and I'll accept it. Otherwise it is mere speculation and assumptions based on a misunderstanding of these verses. Christ did not redeem or purchase false Prophets, of whom 2nd Peter is warning the Church about. He redeemed the Elect, of whom these false prophets claim to be.

It's a matter of comparing scripture with scripture (all of it) to understand just what God says was bought by the cross, and what God 'does not say' was bought by the cross of Christ. i.e., one doctrine is somewhat speculative, while the other is written clearly throughout scripture. We belong to Christ, bought as hired servants, we are not our own. Just as we previously saw in 1st Corinthians 6:20. Likewise we read in chapter 7:

1st Corinthians 7:22-23

• "For he that is called in the Lord, being a servant, is the Lord's freeman: likewise also he that is called, being free, is Christ's servant.
• Ye are bought with a price; be not ye the servants of men."

I would gladly change my view (as it doesn't matter to me which is correct, I just want to hold to the truth) if I found one verse which says Christ redeemed (bought) damnable heretical false prophets in any way. I don't see any such scripture. Or if such views didn't 'contradict' all of other scriptures, I would gladly consider the possibility of it being true. But again, where does it say Christ bought false prophets by His Cross? One might answer, 2nd Peter. But taking all scripture into consideration, and not looking at it through 'tunnel vision,' it seems clear what this means. They are part of the Church bought with a price, but in works deny the Lord that bought them.

It's not only what it says, it's what it doesn't say, and what it would contradict if we indeed were to interpret it that way. The word of God is like a gigantic spiritual picture puzzle, and when every piece is not in it's correct place, there is inconsistency, with the picture out of alignment 'alerting' us that something is not right.

Indeed it does speak of these false prophets 'coming in' bringing damnable heresies, denying Him that bought them. This is 'because' it is speaking of them as part of the external church (which represents those bought), and is warning the Church of these who come in TO BE PART OF THEM, to deceive, denying Christ who bought 'them.' Just as Judas was one of the twelve, one of the Apostles of Christ, one of the Chosen, and yet Christ said that he was the "ONE" among them who was 'not clean.'

John 13:10-11

• "Jesus saith to him, He that is washed needeth not save to wash his feet, but is clean every whit: and ye are clean, but not all.
• For he knew who should betray him; therefore said he, Ye are not all clean."

And this indeed addresses the Church of our day more than ever, as there are many who have entered in, trampling God's Word under foot with their heresies, and private interpretations, deceiving the Church, denying the Lord that bought them. When christians say universalism is in the Word, they are denying the Lord that bought them. When christians say that marriage is not till death do us part, and that we can divorce and separate what God hath joined together, they are denying the Lord that bought them. When christians say we are Saved by our own good works, they are denying the Lord that bought them. When Christians say Women can be the head of the men in the Churches, they are denying the Lord that bought them. When Christians deny the authority of the word, and place it in their leaders hands, they are denying the Lord that bought them. ..all because they profess to be the Church bought of the Lord, when in works they deny the Lord who bought that the Church. These indeed are the last days, when those of the Church profess Christ, but in works deny Him.

2nd Timothy 3:1-5

• "This know also, that in the last days perilous times shall come.
• For men shall be lovers of their own selves, covetous, boasters, proud, blasphemers, disobedient to parents, unthankful, unholy,
• Without natural affection, trucebreakers, false accusers, incontinent, fierce, despisers of those that are good,
• Traitors, heady, highminded, lovers of pleasures more than lovers of God;
• Having a form of godliness, but denying the power thereof: from such turn away."

When the Church is offended by truth, denies the Word of God, reviles those who are faithful, and in practice mocks God's authority, they have a form of Godliness, but deny the power thereof, which is the Spirit of truth. They are dishonest professing Him in words, but in works they deny Him, bringing in damnable heresies and private interpretations. In doing so, they deny the Lord who bought them.

May the Lord who is gracious above all, give us the wisdom and understanding to discern His most Holy Word, and endure in truth 'Til He Come.'

Amen!