Search

You searched for 'Church'

I've found 53 results!

1 Timothy 2:4 & Titus 2:11, 'desires all people to be saved'

Simon Wartanian | 20,739 views | 2,692 words | 0:14:11 hours | 07 September 2014 16:04

...aved (i.e., that God saves everyone). It may refer to God’s general benevolence in taking no delight in the death of the wicked, or to God’s desire that all types of people (v. 1 note) be saved (i.e., God does not choose His elect from any single group).

NLT Study Bible[5]

1 Timothy 2:1 all people: The prayers of the false teachers and their disciples were evidently not consonant with God’s will to save all kinds of people (2:3-4).

1 Timothy 2:2 all who are in authority: Those who had the power to persecute or to protect the Church (see also Rom 13:1-7; 1 Pet 2:13-17). • live peaceful and quiet lives: The point was not for Christians to blend in and be unnoticed, but to display the beauty of the Good News and allow the Church’s mission to proceed without unnecessary complications (cp. 2 Tim 3:12;1 Pet 3:13-17). • The word godliness and its cognates (also at 3:16; 4:7-8; 5:4; 6:3, 5-6, 11) sum up the beliefs, attitudes, and lifestyles that accord with right and reverential knowledge of God, obedience, and authentic worship.

1 Timothy 2:5-6 Compact teachings, as in this passage, occur throughout the letters to Timothy and Titus (see also 3:16; 2 Tim 1:9-10; 2:8, 11-13; Titus 3:4-7). They might be adapted bits of creeds, hymns, or prayers that were known to the Churches. The doctrines referenced probably relate to Paul’s trouble with the false teachers; it appears that their teaching undercut the universal appeal of the Good News and the effectiveness of the Gentile mission. The false teachers also had a deficient understanding of Jesus and his salvation.

Will of Desire

God’s will of desire: ESV MacArthur Study Bible:[6]

2:4 desires all people to be saved. The Greek word for “desires” is not that which normally expresses God’s will of decree (his eternal purpose), but God’s will of desire. There is a distinction between God’s desire and his eternal saving purpose, which must transcend his desires. God does not want men to sin. He hates sin with all his being (Ps 5:4; 45:7); thus, he hates its consequences – eternal wickedness in hell. God does not want people to remain wicked forever in eternal remorse and hatred of himself. Yet, God for his own glory, and to manifest that glory in wrath, chose to endure “vessels…prepared for destruction” for the supreme fulfillment of his will (Rom. 9:22). In his eternal purpose, he chose only the elect out of the world (John 17:6) and passed over the rest, leaving them to the consequences of their sin, unbelief, and rejection of Christ, (cf. Rom. 1:18-32). Ultimately, God’s choices are determined by his sovereign, eternal purpose, not his desires. See note on 2 Pet. 3:9 the knowledge of the truth. Meaning “to be saved.” See note on 2 Tim 3:7

2:5 there is one God. There is no other way of salvation (Acts 4:12); hence there is the need to pray for the lost to come to know the one true God (cf. Deut. 4:35, 39; 6:4; Isa. 43:10; 44:6; 45:5-6, 21, 22; 46:9; 1 Cor. 8:4,6). Mediator. This refers to someone who intervenes between two parties to resolve a conflict or ratify a covenant. Jesus Christ is the only “mediator” who can restore peace between God and sinners (Heb. 8:6; 9:15; 12:24). The man Christ Jesus. The absence of the article before “man” in the Greek suggest the translation, “Christ Jesus, himself a man.” Only the perfect God-Man could bring God and man together. Cf. Job 9:32-33

2:6 a ransom. This describes the result of Christ’s substitutionary death for be...

A Review of RC Sproul's Willing to Believe & Thoughts on Free Will

Simon Wartanian | 11,787 views | 3,709 words | 0:19:03 hours | 22 February 2015 00:23

RC Sproul Willing To Believe The Controversy Over Free Will Free Will Predestination Election Sovereignty Compatibilism Calvinism Arminianism Pelagianism Semi-Pelagianism Augustine Martin Luther John Calvin Jonathan Edwards Book Review

..."vneqd"[1] I’ve was motivated to get this work by watching RC Sproul’s teaching series on the book called Willing to Believe^[2]. It helped understand the issues surround the question of human freedom and sovereignty. I remember that it was not much later than that I was studying Jonathan Edwards’ The Freedom of the Will, which was somewhat difficult.

In this great work this master theologian gives a historical theological study of important theologians throughout the history of the Christian Church on the question of human freedom. He goes through some Christian heroes and giants of the faith like Augustine, Edwards, Luther and Calvin. Also some who were non-Christian and anti-Christian in their theology and thinking like Charles Finney and Pelagius. Lastly, theologians who belong more to the in house debate between Arminianism/Semi-Pelagianism and Calvinism, like Jacob Arminius himself.

The Pelagians

Pelagius was a British monk living in the fifth century and he is known to have a huge dispute with Augustine on the nature of man and free will. Pelagius reacted to a seemingly harmless prayer of Augustine which said: Grant what Thou commandest, and command what Thou dost desire. Harmless doesn’t it? Well, that’s not what Pelagius thought. He thought it outrages, because it showed man’s total dependence on God to graciously grant the ability to obey Him. Pelagius believed that commandment presupposes ability. What many nowadays believe. He said that God would never command something that man was not able to do. Therefore, everything that God commands man is able to do. So, away with Romans 8:7-8.

He further taught that Adam was in no sense the federal head of the human race. Adam was created mortal and would have died even if he didn’t sin. All men are born in the state that Adam was in. Adam gave man bad influence, not a sinful nature otherwise known as Original Sin.

He taught that the nature of man was basically good and that sinning didn’t effect that basic goodness of man.

Man has a free will to do good or evil and to obey God in all things.

Jesus’ death was not substitionary, but it was as an example for us.

People can live sinless lives, and in fact some have lived sinless lives.

The grace of God is important, but not essential. What I mean is that it would be awesome if one uses the grace of God for obedience, it will make things much easier, but it is even possible to obey without the grace of God.

This among other things are the things that he believed. I think, for any serious Bible student, they must conclude that this places him outside of Christian orthodoxy. Pelagius and his teachings were condemned in 418 and you would think that it will be the last thing heard of Pelagius, but then arises Charles Finney many centuries later in America.

Charles Finney

Charles Finney taught things very similar to Pelagius. In fact, he was more Pelagian than Pelagius.

He rejected the doctrine of justification by faith alone, which is the heart of the Gospel message.

He rejected the penal substitionary atonement of Christ in place of the believers. He posed the Governmental and Moral Influence theories of the atonement. He taught that all that was needed for conversion was good argumentation and persuasion. His influence is seen in the decisional evangelism/regeneration of our day, when people are told to make a “choice” for Christ. Or to make to choose Christ to be born again.

It is interesti...

A Short Review of Sam Waldron's Modern Exposition of 1689 Baptist Confession of Faith

Simon Wartanian | 7,013 views | 606 words | 0:03:08 hours | 23 February 2015 19:14

Review Book Review Sam Waldron Modern Exposition Of 1689 Baptist Confession Of Faith 1689 Reformed Baptist

...h he did a very good job.

Introduction to Covenant Theology

Before beginning my study of the confession, through a brother I got into the subject of Baptist Covenant Theology, I got the work of Pascal Denault The Distinctiveness of Baptist Covenant Theology and Waldron's A Reformed Baptist Manifesto. Sometime later I got the recent Recovering a Covenantal Heritage volume. I have been more and more interested in this stream of Reformed Theology.

Introduction to Baptistic Convictions & Calvinism

I first became baptistic simply through reading the New Testament and finding no evidence of any infant baptism. I was baptized in the Armenian Church as an infant and was attending a Baptist Church in Holland and was convinced that my baptism was no baptism. So on 14-06-2013^[1] I was baptized after a profession of faith. At that time I was in the process of studying the Doctrines of Grace. Sometime later, by the grace of God I came to embrace and glory in them.

The Confession

The first and foremost thing that I love about this Confession is it's high, high, high view of God's sovereign freedom. I love it and that is exactly how I believe that God is, the Sovereign King over every molecule.
I love the fact of the Baptists' deep commitment to the truth and the sole authority of the Bible and their appeal to the Bible. I could not really find any disagreements with the Confession, so I feel home in it and I'm not ashamed to identify myself as a Reformed Baptist.

What I loved about Dr Waldron's work is his way of explaining the Confession and going through the biblical evidence (as I have been reading Grudem, I would have loved it if Dr Waldron would cite portions of the passages that he was using as proof, rather most of the time, only references were given).

When I started studying the Confession I didn't realizes that a confession is actually a Systematic Theology! :)

Dr Waldron explained things very well, I especially liked his extensive treatment of chapters 29 (Of Baptism), 31 (of the state of man after death and of the resurrection of the dead) and 32 (Of the last judgment). There he interacted with the other side and provided some answers. With the explanations he went also through more detail.

During my study of the 1689 I left some comments about my thoughts on each paragraph that can be viewed here: https://www.thecalvinist.net/post/1689-Second-Baptist-Confession-Of-Faith-With-Commentary-And-Highlighting/922

Also I have opened a new section wherein I try to go in detail to explain why I agree with the formulation of doctrines in the 1689. The section is found here: https://www.thecalvinist.net/1689

Few minor problems with the book

One thing that was frustrating me, was the load of typos there. It's not that I'm a grammar nazi, but the quality of the work is so great that the multitude of the typos, wrong headings above pages (pages 103, 381), no spacing between words, wrong numeration really were the only downside, which could have been prevented. Hopefully, they will update it in the future, otherwise we'll just have to wait for James Renihan's exposition of the 1689 that is in progress!

Footnotes

^ Here is a picture of my baptism back when my hair was long.

...

1689 Baptist Confession Chapter 16: Of Good Works - Commentary

Simon Wartanian | 16,899 views | 8,785 words | 0:46:07 hours | 05 March 2015 18:58

The 1689 Second Baptist Confession Of Faith Confession Commentary Reformed Baptist Good Works Fruits Of Salvation

...a particular action is not mentioned in the Bible that it is therefore bad, but we look at the particular deed in light of all Scripture. We don’t demand an explicit text for everything. For example, helping an old lady cross the street is a good deed, but it is not mentioned in the Bible. Does that mean that it is therefore bad if it is not mentioned? No, not really. Because we know from the Bible that we should love our neighbor, and helping an old lady cross the street is such an expression of love and respect.

Commanded By God

Only what is commanded by God and what may be deduced from Holy Writ is binding upon the consciousness of men. Throughout history, various Churches and religions have added to the commandments of God in such a way as binding the consciences of man. The Lord Jesus quotes the words of Isaiah approvingly when he says, “‘This people honors me with their lips, but their heart is far from me; in vain do they worship me, teaching as doctrines the commandments of men’” (Matt. 15:8-9 from Isa. 29:13). From this passage, we learn that whenever we add things to the Lord’s commandments and teach them as if they were the Lord’s, we dishonor Him and worship Him falsely. Therefore, the Confession is explicit that “Good works are only such as God hath commanded in his Holy Word”, so that only God would be the Lord of the conscience (see also chapter 21 on the liberty of the conscious).

It is God Who teaches us through His will “what is good and acceptable and perfect” (Rom. 12:2). And it is God Who is and determines the criteria of what good works constitute. It is His holy character as revealed in His Word. It is also God Who works in us His good works. We cannot really do any good works which are pleasing in His sight without His will and direction. That’s why Paul tells us that “...it is God Who works in you, both to will and to work for his good pleasure” (Phil. 2:13). The Holy Spirit in Hebrews 13:21 tells us that it is God Who “equip[s] you with everything good that you may do his will, working in us that which is pleasing in his sight”. The glory of the New Covenant is the fact that we have God’s Law on our hearts and given the ability by the Spirit to obey God from the heart (Jer. 31:31-34; Ezek. 36:25-27). In fact, God has created us believers and predestined us from all eternity that we should walk in good works (Eph. 2:10).

Therefore, good works, first of all, are commanded by God and derived from His Law, and moreover, they are brought forth by God in us. It is God Who is the measure of what is good. Whatever reflects His holy character is good, and whatever does not, is evil. He is the standard. It is written, “...the LORD is a God of knowledge, and by him actions are weighed” (1 Sam. 2:3).

2 Tim. 3:6-17 All Scripture is breathed out by God and profitable for teaching, for reproof, for correction, and for training in righteousness, 17 that the man of God may be complete, equipped for every good work.

Performed In Faith

For works to be truly “good” in God’s sight, they have to be done in faith. Romans 14:23 tells us “But whoever has doubts is condemned if he eats, because the eating is not from faith. For whatever does not proceed from faith is sin.” Therefore, anything that is not done in and through faith in Jesus Christ the Lord, is sin and not really a “good work” in the sight of God. Even if a billionaire would donate all his money and give it to the poor, strictly in God’s eyes that would n...

1689 Baptist Confession Chapter 23: Of Lawful Oaths and Vows - Commentary

Simon Wartanian | 16,345 views | 5,299 words | 0:27:50 hours | 06 March 2015 19:34

The 1689 Second Baptist Confession Of Faith Confession Commentary Reformed Baptist Chapter 23 Oaths Vows Swearing Allegiance

...h we had confirmed it with a solemn oath. And if we do this, we trust that no one, not even the Magistracy itself, will have just reason to lay a greater burden on our mind and conscience. Matt. 5:34, 35; Jas. 5:12; II Cor. 1:17.^[3]

This means that the teaching of the Anabaptists on this point was still alive. Thus the Reformed confessions added a chapter addressing this issue. This is likewise important for our forefather to confess since they were falsely called Anabaptists, as the title of the First London Confession read: “The CONFESSION OF FAITH, Of those ChurchES which are commonly (though ) called ANABAPTISTS...” Since they confess the same as the Reformed on this subject, they distance themselves from the Anabaptists.

In paragraph 3, a passage from the Westminster and Savoy was omitted in the 1689, which said: “Yet it is a sin to refuse an oath touching any thing that is good and just, being lawfully imposed by authority.” Obviously, this is implied in what the Confession says that a lawful oath is and what is not. See the comparison here.

Thus, this chapter was added in the Reformed confessions in times of controversy and in order to clarify their stance upon oaths and vows made the government and the Church.

§1 Lawful Oaths

A lawful oath is a part of religious worship, wherein the person swearing in truth, righteousness, and judgement, solemnly calleth God to witness what he , and to judge him according to the truth or falseness thereof. 1
1. Deut. 10:20; Exod. 20:7; Lev. 19:12; 2 Chron. 6:22-23; 2 Cor. 1:23^[4]

Religious worship is that worship which is instituted by God and revealed by His Word (see chapter 22 especially paragraphs 1 and 5). A lawful oath is an element and a part of God’s holy religious worship. What is a lawful oath? It is wherein the person swearing in truth, righteousness, and judgement, solemnly calleth God to witness (2 Chron. 6:22-23; 2 Cor. 1:23). An oath is a call upon God to be the witness to something or a “transaction” between men. A most basic example of this is in marriage when God is called to be the witness along with the people present. The Confession speaks specifically of a lawful oath. This means that there are unlawful oaths, namely those which contradict the descriptions given here. A lawful oath is taken when a person realizes the solemnity of such an act. The Scriptures warn us against being rash with our words and oaths (Eccl. 5:2; Jas. 5:12). We call upon God with hearts purified and realizing what we are calling God to do in this situation. We are calling Him to be the knower of our heart and intentions. may deceive people, we can never deceive God. We are calling Him to judge us according to the truth or falseness (2 Chron. 6:22-23) of our oath. We are to something and calling God to be the arbiter of the truthfulness of what we ...

Review of Sam Waldron's To Be Continued?

Simon Wartanian | 5,648 views | 1,834 words | 0:09:39 hours | 20 April 2016 23:29

Sam Waldron Reformed Baptist Continuationism Cessationism Charismata Gifts Of The Holy Spirit Spiritual Gifts Book Review To Be Continued

..."line-height: 20.8px;"On 1Cor 14:13, 26-28 he argues that because Paul called for the tongues-speakers to seek to interpret this meant that these were human languages. I don't find that too persuasive. Why doesn't he say pray to translate or find someone who could understand this foreign language?

He also thinks that tongues was a sign of judgment on the Jews according to 1Cor 14:21. It seems very improbable to me that the Corinthians had in their congregation unbelieving Jews for whom this would have been a sign. But rather, tongues without interpretation is a sign of judgment to the unbelieving in general as it would drive them away from the Church and would give them the idea that these people are out of their minds. In this way it is a sign of judgment upon the unbelieving. It is a sign of judgment in its misuse, not in its proper use. How would tongues have functioned on the day of Pentecost? I don't find this “tongues was a judgment on Israel” line of thinking persuasive and he's not the only one who has used it.

He identifies tongues-speaking with prophecy by using two passages Acts 2:14-18 and 1Cor 14:5.

Acts 2 was interesting as the crowd is hearing the disciples speaking in foreign human languages which they understand their wondering what is happening. Then Peter says that "this is what was uttered through the prophet Joel" (v. 16). The question for me is does the "this" refer to the prophesying mentioned in verses 17-18 or does it only refer to "I will pour out my Spirit on all flesh"? If tongues was prophecy, what did they infallibly foretold? The crowd says that "we hear them telling in our own tongues the mighty works of God." (v. 11) There is here no mention of prophecy. But they were merely inspired by the speech to tell the mighty deeds of God in all kinds of languages.

As a side note, I was disappointed that this passage especially with the connection with "the last days" was not brought up in the discussion about prophecy. This is an important passage which many continuationists appeal to for the continuation of prophecy among other things in the days of the New Covenant.

The next passage he uses is 1Cor 14:5 where he claims that "1 Corinthians 14:5 asserts functional equivalence of tongues-speaking with prophecy--provided that someone interprets what is said." (p. 89)

I agree, but I don't agree with what he means by prophecy. Prophecy is specifically defined for us in verse 3. It is not about telling the future or infallibly speaking the very words of God, rather "the one who prophesies speaks to people for their upbuilding and encouragement and consolation." Therefore, if tongues is interpreted it has the same function for upbuilding and encouragement as prophecy is, but this does not mean that it is the same thing.

Since he argued in the previous part that prophecy ceased and now argued that tongues was a form of prophecy, the logical step for the waterfall is that tongues also ceased.

4. Miracle-Workers

He does not spend much time on miracles. What he is arguing against is miracle workers, not miracles per se. He tries to establish the distinction from 1 Cor 12:28-29.

Then he goes on to define miracle. Broadly speaking a miracle is "any unusual exhibition of the extraordinary providence or supernatural power of God." And he adds "In this broad sense, I am happy to affirm that God does miracles today." (p. 99) However, there is also a strict definition of miracles which he bel...

Ephesians 1:10, 'unite all things in him'

Simon Wartanian | 8,534 views | 1,426 words | 0:08:13 hours | 21 April 2016 23:32

Ephesians 1 Predestination Calvinism Universalism Salvation Sovereignty Lordship

...the author there says that the law may be “summarized in one command, to love your neighbor as yourself.” The idea then in Eph 1:10 would be that all things in heaven and on earth can be summed up and made sense out of in relation to Christ. (2) “To renew.” If this is the nuance of the verb then all things in heaven and earth, after their plunge into sin and ruin, are renewed by the coming of Christ and his redemption. (3) “To head up.” In this translation the idea is that Christ, in the fullness of the times, has been exalted so as to be appointed as the ruler (i.e., “head”) over all things in heaven and earth (including the Church). That this is perhaps the best understanding of the verb is evidenced by the repeated theme of Christ’s exaltation and reign in Ephesians and by the connection to the κεφαλή- (kefalh-) language of 1:22 (cf. Schlier, TDNT 3:682; L&N 63.8; M. Barth, Ephesians [AB 34], 1:89-92; contra A. T. Lincoln, Ephesians [WBC], 32-33).[2]

We see a variety of translations of the word anakephalaiomai, but one thing is certain, all things will be in/under Christ, whether that means salvation of all people or something else. The easiest translation to understand the meaning of the verse/word seems to be the NET. Paul here is writing about the coming exaltation and sovereignty of the Lord Jesus Christ over everything that is created. This is further supported by other writings of Paul about the coming reign and exaltation of the Lord Jesus like Colossians 1:16, where we are told “For by him all things were created, in heaven and on earth, visible and invisible, whether thrones or dominions or rulers or authorities—all things were created through him and for him.” All things were created for the glory of the Lord Jesus. All authority is the Lord Jesus’ (Mt 28:18); the Father has put everything under his feet (Eph 1:22; Heb 2:8; 1Cor 15:24-28); the Lord Jesus is the head of all rule and authority (Col 2:10); everyone will bow down to Him, whether as servants or as defeated enemies (Phil 2:10). See also the use of Colossians 1:20 by Universalists or Universal Atonement advocates here. That is a text which to the sovereignty of Christ much like this passage here.

There seems to be no reason to think that this verse refers to salvation beyond the grave, after given an amazing display of God’s predestination to salvation in the opening verses (Eph 1:3-6), salvation by grace through faith (2:8-9). After death comes the judgment (Heb 9:27). All things will be put under His feet and they already are actually— since all authority is given to the Lord Jesus (Mt 28:18), He already is Lord both of the living and the dead (Rom 14:9) and He upholds the universe by His omnipotence (Heb 1:3).

Commentaries

Let’s take a look at few commentaries and see how they understand the word “anakephalaiomai,“ shall we?

Here is what the Commentary Critical and Explanatory on the Whole Bible says:[3]

Gather together in one , [ anakephalaioosasthai (G346)] - 'sum up again (in their original unity) for Himself under one head;' 'recapitulate.' The 'good pleasure which He purposed' was 'to sum up all things [ ta (G3588) panta (G3956): 'THE whole range of things'] in Christ' [ to (G3588) Christoo (G5547): 'the Christ']. God sums up the whole creation in Christ, the Head of angels, with whom He is linked by His invisible nature; and of men, with whom He is linked by His humanity; of Jews and Gentiles; of the living and the dead (Eph 3:...

Resources for studying the Christian Sabbath

Simon Wartanian | 74 views | 1,107 words | 0:05:48 hours | 18 August 2025 21:18

Sabbath

...ing Platform], 2015). pp. 53-56.

Richard Barcellos:

Getting the Garden Right: Adam’s Work and God’s Rest in Light of Christ (Cape Coral, FL: Founders Press, 2017).
The First Day of the Week in the New Testament. 8-part blog post, beginning with the first here https://cbtseminary.org/the-first-day-of-the-week-in-the-new-testament-part-1-of-8/.

Roger T. Beckwith, Wilfrid Stott, This Is The Day: The Biblical Doctrine Of The Christian Sunday In Its Jewish And Early Church Setting (London: Marshall, Morgan and Scott, 1978). Can be found at https://earlyChurch.org.uk/book_sabbath_beckwith-stott.php.
Robert L. Dabney:
- Systematic Theology (Edinburgh: Banner of Truth Trust, 1985 [1871]). pp. 366-397.
- From The Seventh Day To The First: A Brief Look At The History Of The Sabbath Day Vs. The Lord’s Day. Found at https://ncfic.org/resources/view/from-the-seventh-day-to-the-first-a-brief-look-at-the-history-of-the.
- The Christian Sabbath Its Nature, Design and Proper Observance (1882). Found at http://www.the-highway.com/christian-sabbath_Dabney.html.
Charles Hodge, Systematic Theology: Volume 3: Soteriology (Peabody, MA: Hendrickson Publishers, 1999 [1872]), pp. 321-348, chapter 19:8. Can be found at http://www.ccel.org/ccel/hodge/theology3.iii.v.viii.html.
A. H. Strong, Systematic Theology: A Compendium Designed For The Use Of Theological Students (London: Pickering & Inglis, 1970 [1907]), pp. 408-410.
Thomas Watson:
- The Ten Commandments (1692). The chapter on the fourth commandment found at https://ccel.org/ccel/watson/commandments/commandments.iv.iv.html .
- The Christian Soldier; or Heaven Taken by Storm, “Part 6, by sanctifying the Lord’s Day and holy conversation.” Found at https://www.apuritansmind.com/puritan-worship/the-lords-day/sanctifying-the-lords-day-and-holy-conversation-by-rev-thomas-watson/.
Ezekiel Hopkins, An Exposition Of The Ten Commandments (1690), pp. 192-224. Found at https://faculty.gordon.edu/hu/bi/ted_hildebrandt/otesources/02-exodus/text/books/hopkins-tencommands/hopkins-tencommands.pdf.
Jonathan Edwards, The Works of Jonathan Edwards, Volume 2, revised and corrected by Edward Hickman (Edinburgh: Banner of Truth Trust, 1974 edition). pp. 93-103.
- Three sermons entitled “The Perpetuity and Change of the Sabbath.” https://ccel.org/ccel/edwards/works2/works2.iv.xv.html
Samuel E. Waldron:
- A Modern Exposition Of The 1689 Baptist Confession Of Faith (Darlington: Evangelical Press, 2013), pp. 336-341.
- Lectures On The Lord’s Day (2007). Found at https://www.thecalvinist.net/files/Sam-Waldron-Lectures-of-the-Lords-Day.pdf.
- The Lord’s Day: Its Presuppositions, Proofs, Precedents, and Practice (2017). Found at
  
  1 John 2:2, 'for the sins of the whole world'
  
  Simon Wartanian | 18,040 views | 2,583 words | 0:13:28 hours | 09 February 2014 17:51
  
  1 John 2:2 Propitiation For The Sins Of The Whole World Calvinism Election Predestination Limited Atonement Mercy Sovereignty
  
  ...t divided, or does not dissent {s}; כולי עלמא סברי, "the whole world" are of opinion {t}, are frequently met with in the Talmud, by which, an agreement among the Rabbins, in certain points, is designed; yea, sometimes the phrase, "all the men of the world" {u}, only intend the inhabitants of a city where a synagogue was, and, at most, only the Jews: and so this phrase, "all the world", or "the whole world", in Scripture, unless when it signifies the whole universe, or the habitable earth, is always used in a limited sense, either for the Roman empire, or the Churches of Christ in the world, or believers, or the present inhabitants of the world, or a part of them only, Lu 2:1; and so it is in this epistle, 1Jo 5:19; where the whole world lying in wickedness is manifestly distinguished from the saints, who are of God, and belong not to the world; and therefore cannot be understood of all the individuals in the world; and the like distinction is in this text itself, for "the sins of the whole world" are opposed to "our sins", the sins of the apostle and others to whom he joins himself; who therefore belonged not to, nor were a part of the whole world, for whose sins Christ is a propitiation as for theirs: so that this passage cannot furnish out any argument for universal redemption; for besides these things, it may be further observed, that for whose sins Christ is a propitiation, their sins are atoned for and pardoned, and their persons justified from all sin, and so shall certainly be glorified, which is not true of the whole world, and every man and woman in it; moreover, Christ is a propitiation through faith in his blood, the benefit of his propitiatory sacrifice is only received and enjoyed through faith; so that in the event it appears that Christ is a propitiation only for believers, a character which does not agree with all mankind; add to this, that for whom Christ is a propitiation he is also an advocate, 1Jo 2:1; but he is not an advocate for every individual person in the world; yea, there is a world he will not pray for Joh 17:9, and consequently is not a propitiation for them. Once more, the design of the apostle in these words is to comfort his "little children" with the advocacy and propitiatory sacrifice of Christ, who might fall into sin through weakness and inadvertency; but what comfort would it yield to a distressed mind, to be told that Christ was a propitiation not only for the sins of the apostles and other saints, but for the sins of every individual in the world, even of these that are in hell? Would it not be natural for persons in such circumstances to argue rather against, than for themselves, and conclude that seeing persons might be damned notwithstanding the propitiatory sacrifice of Christ, that this might, and would be their case. In what sense Christ is a propitiation, [See comments on Ro 3:25]. The Jews have no notion of the Messiah as a propitiation or atonement; sometimes they say {w} repentance atones for all sin; sometimes the death of the righteous {x}; sometimes incense {y}; sometimes the priests' garments {z}; sometimes it is the day of atonement {a}; and indeed they are in the utmost puzzle about atonement; and they even confess in their prayers {b}, that they have now neither altar nor priest to atone for them; [See comments on 1Jo 4:10]. John Gill, Exposition of the Bible
What Matthew Henry said about 1 John 2:1-2 -- [5]

By the plea he has to make, the ground and basis of hi...

Romans 11:32, 'he may have mercy on all'

Simon Wartanian | 8,271 views | 1,404 words | 0:07:37 hours | 10 February 2014 14:29

Mercy On All Calvinism Predestination Limited Atonement Mercy Sovereignty Unconditional Election John Gill Adam Clarke

...quo; as into a cage, or trap, into which they have leapt,) in order to the complete display of mercy, and only mercy, wholly apart from privilege or merit, in the salvation both of Gentiles and of Jews. Here again mercy is the emphatic idea.—“Did shut up:”—i.e. when He “cut off” the Jews: for this completed, as it were, the process of that developement of unbelief which was to bring out into clear light the equal sovereignty of mercy in all cases.

“All” must manifestly be taken here, as so often elsewhere, (see on ch. Rom 5:18,) with limitation. St Paul is contemplating not the whole race, but the whole Church in its two great elements—Gentile and Jewish. See Rom 2:8-9, for his distinct warning of a “judgment without mercy” on the impenitent and unbelieving, Gentiles and Jews alike.

Cambridge University Press, Cambridge Greek Testament for Schools and Colleges

This content is taken from this document

[1] ESV Study Bible, 2008 (Crossway). Taken from the Online Version at www.esvbible.org

...