“you will sin”

Download discussion questions:  2 Peter 2:10b-22
Jump to beginning of 2 Peter Discussion Group Blog
Jump to Introduction to 2 Peter

I encourage you to look at the passage in 2 Peter before you read this Blog entry.  What do you see in the text yourself?  What questions come to your mind?  How would you interpret what the writer says?  After even a few minutes examining and thinking about the text you will be much better prepared to evaluate the comments in the Blog.

What happens when your Bible study (alone or in a group) comes across an idea that doesn’t fit your theology?  Or maybe someone in a group discussion raises troubling questions about a verse you just skimmed over.  These circumstances are occasions to learn, to deepen (or correct) our theology or our understanding of the Bible, or both.

Back to “The Warning”

A member of our group raised such an issue a few weeks back.  As promised then, “This is an issue we will face again in this chapter…,”[1] and here we are.  The clause in question is in 2 Peter 2:1 where the apostle is describing the false teachers infiltrating the church and

… even denying the Master who bought them…

On closer consideration, how many questions do these words raise?

• • Who is the “Master”? Is it Jesus or God the Father?
  • Does “bought” mean redeemed and saved?
  • If the Master “bought” them, are they redeemed and saved?
  • If the Master bought them, could they still not be saved?
  • If they denied the Master, have they lost their salvation?

All those questions might seem academic and only for theological debate.  However, they ultimately lead to very important, personal, and practical questions.

• • If they lost their salvation, can I lose mine?
  • What effect does the redeeming work of Jesus have on my struggles to persevere in the faith?

The bigger theological question (that includes all the above and more) is the scope of the atonement.  Who did Jesus die for?  (This is assuming the “Master” is Jesus and that “bought” means “redeemed” from sin.)  Was His work for every person, even those who would deny Him?  Or did He die specifically for the elect, those chosen by God for salvation?  The technical terms for those views are, respectively, Universal Atonement and Limited Atonement.

The Plain Reading

Taken at face value, “denying the Master who bought them” seems clear enough.  Jesus purchased their redemption and yet, not only did they not believe, but they actively rejected and repudiated Him.  The conclusion would be that Jesus could die and be raised to save a person without accomplishing the intended result:  that person’s salvation.  Those who support that view point to this verse as conclusive based on the “plain reading.”

It’s also very dangerous to Christianity to abandon the plain reading of the text, in favor of something very subtle, and without contextual support.[2]

As that writer helpfully points out (and apparently ignores), “contextual support” is key.  Examining the context, especially of a controversial statement, is critical. Does the “plain reading” tell the whole story or does the context clarify a possible misunderstanding.  There are many statements in Scripture whose “plain reading” leads to error.  For example, think of James 2:24 (“justified by works”) without contextual clarification or 1 Corinthians 15:29 about “baptism for the dead.”  Careful, methodical Bible study always includes consideration of the context.  Otherwise, any text is vulnerable to any person who “is set upon making this text say exactly what it superficially states in our English Bibles.”[3]

Inductive study begins with a thorough evaluation of the context.  One of the most important principles of handling the Word properly and studying the Bible inductively is to interpret Scripture in the light of its context.  Why?  Because context always rules in interpretation.[4]

This essay is limited to question of the context of 2 Peter 2:1. Much more could be said about the broader Biblical teaching on the atonement and the coherent theological understanding of the work of Christ.  But those important topics are not covered here.

The Immediate Context

Naturally, the starting point is the immediate context.  What did Peter say leading up to this section, and what did he say after it?

The Context Before

As we saw in previous conversations, Peter begins his letter with powerful encouragements, reminding his readers of God’s gracious provision guaranteed by His divine power (1:3) and precious promises (1:4).  That lavish encouragement provides the momentum for his exhortation to continuing and growing faithful obedience (1:8) and confident hope in believers’ eternal future with Christ (1:11).

Then Peter provides repeated reminders (1:12-15) of the credibility, reliability, and stability of the gospel message he and the other apostles had delivered as preserved in the written Scripture.

The encouragements and exhortations combine in preparation for his main message

…about the dangerous and damnable practices and teachings of certain false teachers.[5]

The verse in question, 2 Peter 2:1, occurs as a warning passage.  In contrast to the valid and confirmed teaching of Scripture (1:16-21), Peter cautions

But false prophets also arose among the people, just as there will be false teachers among you, who will secretly bring in destructive heresies,

The entire remainder of the chapter (vv. 2-22, see below) consists of repeated and escalating descriptions of and accusations against those false teachers.  He also alludes to the calamitous consequences awaiting them.

Nothing he says in the preceding context is about the means of salvation or the extent of the atonement.  The phrase “denying the Master who bought them” falls in a very focused context: Peter’s consistent criticism of the false prophets – what they are like, what they are doing, where they are going.

The Context After

This week’s discussion of the passage (2 Peter 2:10b-22) focused on what Peter says after warning about the dangers of the false teachers in verse 1.  Our previous conversation covered his detailed logical demonstration and reassuring reminder that

the Lord knows how to rescue the godly from trials, and to keep the unrighteous under punishment until the day of judgment, (2 Peter 2:9)

Peter ensures his readers that the difficulties and conflicts they are facing do not escape God’s notice.

Now he returns to his condemnation of the false teachers (vv. 10b-22).  Peter’s string of descriptions and accusations against these “errorists”[6] comprises 20%[7] of his entire letter!  It is important for his readers to have a clear and comprehensive picture in order to recognize the false teachers by their behavior.  Note here again that Peter’s criticism is not doctrinal.  He is not lecturing about theology or redemption or the atonement.

But in fact in this passage our author never accuses these teachers of doctrinal error, but rather of behavioral aberrations.[8]

The context is not about the extent of the atonement or details about redemption.  Peter wants his readers to recognize the lifestyle of the false teachers as totally inconsistent with genuine faith.  To that end, he provides a long list of specific “red flags” that characterize the false teachers.

• • They blaspheme the glorious ones. (v 10)
  • They blaspheme about matters of which they are ignorant. (v 12)
  • They count it pleasure to revel in the daytime. (v 13)
  • They revel in their deceptions, while they feast with you. (v 13)
  • They have eyes full of adultery. (v 14)
  • They entice unsteady souls. (v 14)
  • They have hearts trained in greed. (v 14)
  • Forsaking the right way, they have gone astray. (v 15)
  • They have followed the way of Balaam, the son of Beor, who loved gain from wrongdoing. (v 15)
  • They speak loud boasts of folly. (v 18)
  • They entice by sensual passions of the flesh those who are barely escaping from those who live in error. (v 18)
  • They promise freedom. (v 19)

The observable actions describe the character of the false teachers, such as “blots and blemishes” (v. 13) and “waterless springs” (v. 17).  Peter also includes the ultimate consequences they will face, “destruction” (vv. 12, 13; cf. v. 3) and “gloom of utter darkness” (v. 17).  (For an outline of the descriptions, accusations, and consequences, see “False Teachers and Salvation.”[9])

The Context 2 Peter 2:1:  Conclusion

Peter’s theme in this central section of his letter is not redemption or soteriology or the atonement or any other topics directly related to salvation or the work of Christ.  His words about “the Master who bought them” are not explaining the atonement in an unrelated context.  Rather, the words are a “passing reference.”  Such an incidental comment cannot be interpreted while ignoring other Biblical teaching that is directly on point related to the atonement.

You have entire chapters in the book of Hebrews discussing the means of atonement, purpose of atonement, the connection of atonement to God’s grace and God’s purposes. You have entire chapters dedicated to a particular topic, and you ignore them for your preferred application of a passing reference in a text that’s not about the subject.[10]

From beginning to end in his letter, he is intent on “stirring up” (1:13; 3:1) his readers to remember the prophetic warnings (1:20,21; 3:2).  He wants to ensure that they would recognize and avoid the proponents of the “destructive heresies” mentioned in 2:1.

The Context of Peter’s Teaching

The statement is in Peter’s second letter, but we also have his first letter.  The context beyond 2 Peter includes what Peter wrote elsewhere.

Encouraging Assurance

The close context around 2 Peter 2:1 is not soteriological (that is, not dealing with the doctrine of salvation), but the apostle has plenty to say on the topic elsewhere in both his letters.  Consider these examples (with emphasis added).

• • Those who are elect 1 Peter 1:1
  • Inheritance imperishable, undefiled, unfading, kept in heaven for you, by God’s power being guarded 1 Peter 1:4-5
  • You were ransomed…with the precious blood of Christ 1 Peter 1:18-19
  • The God of all grace will himself restore, confirm, strengthen, and establish you 1 Peter 5:10
  • Be diligent to confirm your calling and election 2 Peter 1:10
  • There will be provided for you an entrance into the eternal kingdom 2 Peter 1:11

(These and numerous other references are included on the reverse side of the handout for the study.)

The highlighted affirmations assure genuine believers of the certainty and security of their salvation.

Vocabulary of Salvation

Peter also has a consistent vocabulary when he is writing about salvation and the redemption actually purchased for us.  When Peter intends to indicate the redemptive role of Jesus, he typically uses descriptions such as “Lord and Savior” (2 Peter 3:2) or “Lord and Savior Jesus Christ” (2 Peter 1:11, 3:18).

The consistency is even more evident in Peter’s first letter.  There he constantly uses the title “Christ” when associated with His redemptive work and the price He paid.

• • …obedience to Jesus Christ and for sprinkling with his blood (1 Peter 1:2)
  • …when he predicted the sufferings of Christ (1 Peter 1:11)
  • …with the precious blood of Christ, like that of a lamb (1 Peter 1:19)
  • …to this you have been called, because Christ also suffered for you (1 Peter 2:21)
  • For Christ also suffered once for sins (1 Peter 3:18)
  • Since therefore Christ suffered in the flesh (1 Peter 4:1)
  • But rejoice insofar as you share Christ’s sufferings (1 Peter 4:13)
  • … as a fellow elder and a witness of the sufferings of Christ (1 Peter 5:1)

However, in this one instance, Peter uses the word “Master” (δεσπότης, despotēs. where we get the English word “despot”) or “Sovereign Lord,” as in Acts 4:24:

And when they heard it, they lifted their voices together to God and said, “Sovereign Lord, who made the heaven and the earth and the sea and everything in them, …” (emphasis added)

The only place Peter uses the word despotēs is 2 Peter 2:1.  It would seem likely, if he was making a point about the atonement, that he would have kept to his persistent pattern using the title “Christ.”  Changing to a more unusual word here would only serve to confuse his readers.

In fact, no Biblical writer uses despotēs in a redemptive sense.

despotēs is used about thirty times in the whole of Scripture – twenty times in the Greek Septuagint translation of the Old Testament and ten times in the New Testament. But never does it refer to the Father or the Son as mediator, unless II Peter 2:1 be the exception…. despotēs is never used as a redemptive title for anyone, not even of Christ in Jude 4, the only other place where despotēs is used of Christ.  Rather the dominant use of despotēs in both the Old and New Testaments is of God as “absolute sovereign,” that is “sovereign Lord” and owner of each member of the human race.[11]

Like the assurance he provides in the verses cited above, Peter’s vocabulary in 2 Peter 2:1 does not support a general statement about salvation or the extent of the atoning work of Jesus.  Attempts to force the phrase “denying the Master who bought them” to define an important theological principle is misguided.

The Context of Peter’s Teaching:  Conclusion

Peter had very definite thinking about salvation, the atonement, perseverance, etc.  His aim in both letters is encouragement to genuine believers.  His first letter urges perseverance in the face of external persecution, the “fiery trial” of testing (1 Peter 4:12).  His second letter is more concerned with the dangers of internal threats, the “false teachers” (2 Peter 2:1).  External and internal threats both challenge believers’ faith.  Peter wants to strengthen his readers to endure both.

When he does write about salvation, he inspires confidence in believers.  He affirms their “entrance into the eternal kingdom” and “imperishable, undefiled, unfading, kept in heaven for you, by God’s power being guarded” and many other assertions of their security in Christ.  Interpreting 2 Peter 2:1 to mean that redeemed persons would face destruction is inconsistent with every other comment Peter makes about soteriology.

The wider context of Peter’s unconditional encouragement for believers is the basis for understanding his perspective on the work of Christ.  The “passing reference” about the false teachers’ denial cannot be used in isolation to contradict Peter’s clear teaching elsewhere.

Denying the “Having Bought Them” Master

The immediate context is not about the atonement.  The suggestion that redeemed persons can face destruction is inconsistent with the rest of Peter’s teaching in his letters.  What, then, is Peter saying about the false teachers “denying the Master who bought them”?

There are numerous suggestions in commentaries, on-line sermons, etc., that are beyond the scope of our group conversation or this essay.  However, one was mentioned in our discussion that I find helpful.

Albert Barnes (1798-1870) was a contemporary of Jonathan Edwards.  In his exhaustive Notes on the New Testament (7,206 pages!), Barnes comments on this passage:

Even denying the Lord that bought them – This must mean that they held doctrines which were in fact a denial of the Lord, or the tendency of which would be a denial of the Lord, for it cannot be supposed that, while they professed to be Christians, they would openly and avowedly deny him. To “deny the Lord” may be either to deny his existence, his claims, or his attributes; it is to withhold from him, in our belief and profession, anything which is essential to a proper conception of him. The particular thing, however, which is mentioned here as entering into that self-denial, is something connected with the fact that he had “bought” them. It was such a denial of the Lord “as having bought them,” as to be in fact a renunciation of the uniqueness of the Christian religion.[12]

Peter was not making an assertion about the scope of the atonement (limited or universal). The phrase “the Master who bought them” is not about what Jesus did but what the false teachers denied. (For more details about the original wording of the text, see 2 Peter 2:10b-22 – Syntax.[13])

They denied any redemptive value of His death, perhaps recognizing Him as a great prophet only.  Peter may be warning of the same danger that Jude recognized, “ungodly people, who pervert the grace of our God into sensuality and deny our only Master and Lord, Jesus Christ” (Jude 4).  A perverse interpretation of grace was twisted to mean licentiousness:  since grace forgives all, redemption wasn’t necessary.  Denying the need for redemption opens the way for “anything goes.”  That kind of teaching would support the lifestyle described in verses 10b-22.

Their apparent claim to be Christians would certainly have caused confusion in the congregation.  That might have affected Peter’s choice of language in describing the false teachers.

The best solution is to say that 2 Peter uses phenomenological language.  In other words, Peter uses the language of “Christians” to describe those who fell away because they gave every appearance of being Christians. They confessed Christ as Lord and Savior, were baptized, and joined the church. But the false teachers and some of those they seduced, though still present physically in the church, were no longer considered to be genuine believers by Peter. Nonetheless, he used “Christian” language to describe them, precisely because of their participation in the church, because they gave some evidence initially of genuine faith. ^[14]

Consider what Peter says about their “appearance of being Christians.”

• • They at least seemed to be on “the right way” (v. 15). They said the right things.
    But then they “went astray.”
  • They had “escaped defilements of the world” (v. 20a). Their behavior improved.
    But it didn’t last.  They became “again entangled and overcome.”
  • They had “knowledge of our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ” (v. 20b). They understood the gospel. As someone pointed out, the word used here for “knowledge” (ἐπίγνωσις, epignōsis)[15] is “intensive,”[16] indicating understanding and insight.
    But they denied what they knew about Him.
  • Likewise, they “had known the way of righteousness” (v. 21). They understood the lifestyle that was consistent with following Jesus.
    But their licentiousness and blasphemy and greed led others away from that lifestyle.

Their actions exposed their unredeemed hearts.

Those who had apostatized revealed that they were never truly part of the people of God since remaining true to the faith is one sign that one truly belongs to God. The words of I John apply well to what has happened in 2 Peter: “They went out from us, but they did not belong to us; for if they had belonged to us, they would have remained with us. However, they went out so that it might be made clear that none of them belongs to us” (1 John 2:19). Peter points in the same direction in the illustration of the dog and pig. In the final analysis, those who fell away never really changed their nature. They remained dogs and pigs inside.^[17]

Theology and Life

We need to pay attention to Peter’s warnings about false teachers.  The symptoms he describes are all too prevalent today.  Headlines regularly report Christians, or at least those who claim to follow Christ, who are promoting practices condemned by Him, by His Word, and by His historic church.  Celebrating same-sex relationships, promoting abortion, disconnecting gender from biology, and other degradations announced almost daily betray claims to orthodoxy as clearly as anything in Peter’s catalog of sins in this passage.

Is there any more personal, more immediate application in this passage?  Does Limited Atonement and a clearer understanding of Christ’s work affect our daily faith?

Our group discussion resulted in a resounding “Yes!”  Our discussion and this essay began with questions about the extent of the atonement.  Those questions can be reworded to, “Did the work of Christ accomplish our salvation?  Or did His work make our salvation a possibility?”

All who claim to be Christians would agree that belief is necessary and that perseverance is the sign of genuine faith.

Our questions focused on our failures.  As one person said simply, “You will sin.”  Then what?  Most of us respond to our sin with guilt, shame, and the always-popular “beating ourselves up.”  Of course, we know Jesus paid for our sin, He redeemed us.  But…

As Protestants we deny the official practice of penance, yet our self-condemnation accomplishes the same relief.  Our emotions add to the work of Christ.  We exhibit the practical denial of the sufficiency of the blood of Jesus on the cross.  There is more for us to do in our shame.

This study helps confirm the practical understanding of Limited Atonement.  Jesus didn’t die to make salvation possible as long as we do our part.  Jesus died to make salvation sure.  Period.  Even better, one writer suggests the preferable, positive label, “Definite Atonement.”

Regrettably, the term “limited atonement” has often been misunderstood to mean that Christ’s atonement was limited in its efficacy rather than in its intended design….  Due to the frequent misunderstanding of the term “limited atonement,” I prefer the [term] “definite atonement”[18].…

“Limited Atonement” may be a useful historical description to clarify the extent of Christ’s work.  That wording may be most useful in theological debates.  “Definite Atonement” is much more helpful and practical in our day-to-day reality.

We need to remind ourselves, and especially to remind one-another, that our atonement is “definite.”  Beating ourselves up indicates that we have not yet fully understood that glorious truth.  Guilt, shame, and other forms of “Protestant penance” should prompt those reminders.  The redeeming atonement that Jesus secured for us is definite.  Nothing more is needed.  May our definite atonement become a growing reality in our faith.

---

[1] Thomas R. Schreiner, 1 & 2 Peter and Jude, Christian Standard Commentary (Nashville:  Holman, 2020), 396.

[2] Examining Calvinism, http://www.examiningcalvinism.com/files/NT/2Pet2_1.html original emphasis.

[3] Dr. Matthew McMahon,” Exegesis of 2 Peter 2:1 – To Buy or Notto Buy,” https://www.apuritansmind.com/arminianism/exegesis-of-2-peter-21-dr-matthew-mcmahon/ emphasis added.

[4] Kay Arthur, How to Study Your Bible (Eugene, Oregon:  Harvest House Publishers,1994), 20, original emphasis.

[5] Douglas J. Moo, 2 Peter, Jude: The NIV Application Commentary (Grand Rapids, Michigan: Zondervan Academic, 1996), 15.

[6] J. N. D. Kelly, The Epistles of Peter and Jude, Black’s New Testament Commentary (Peabody, Massachusetts:  Hendrickson Publishers, 1969), 328.

[7] 330 of 1600 words in English; 229 of 1158 words in Greek.

[8] Peter H. Davids, The Letters of 2 Peter and Jude, The Pillar New Testament Commentary (Grand Rapids, Michigan:  William B. Eerdmans Publishing Company, 2006), 221.

[9] https://www.goodnotsafe.com/wp-content/uploads/2025/10/2-Peter-2_1-10b-22-False-Teachers-and-Salvation.pdf

[10] Dr. James White, “Faith on Fire,” video at approximately 4:42; note that the first two minutes of the video are comments by a critic of Calvinism;  Dr. White’s remarks are in response.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ffFgkdId_y8

[11] Gary D. Long, Definite Atonement (Troutdale, Oregon: CreateSpace Independent Publishing Platform, 2014), 85-86.

[12] Albert Barnes, Notes on the New Testament (Kindle Edition, 2015), Kindle location 126509-126515, emphasis added.

[13] https://www.goodnotsafe.com/wp-content/uploads/2025/10/2-Peter-2_1-Syntax.pdf

[14] Thomas R. Schreiner, 1 & 2 Peter and Jude, Christian Standard Commentary (Nashville:  Holman, 2020), 436-437.

[15] https://www.billmounce.com/greek-dictionary/epignosis

[16] Richard C. Trench, Synonyms of the New Testament (Grand Rapids, Michigan:  Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Company, 1975), 285.

[17] Thomas R. Schreiner, 1 & 2 Peter and Jude, Christian Standard Commentary (Nashville:  Holman, 2020), 436-437.

[18] Gary D. Long, Definite Atonement (Troutdale, Oregon: CreateSpace Independent Publishing Platform, 2014), 2-3.