Category Archives: Questions and Answers

Understanding 1 John 2:2

Posted on by
2

You say that Christ died for His people, His sheep, His friends, for His Church and yet 1 John 2:2, speaking of Jesus, states, “He is the propitiation for our sins, and not for ours only but also for the sins of the whole world.” How do you explain that?

I can certainly see how someone would use this verse to undermine the reformed doctrine of Particular Redemption, yet Scripture, I believe, is not contradictory to itself. There is one Divine Author of Scripture and He does not contradict Himself. So how are we to understand 1 John 2:2?

I have written elsewhere about the principles of correct interpretation of scripture. There is only one correct interpretation of scripture. Though there may be many applications of a verse, it only means what it was intended to mean when it was written.

In my article entitled “Playing Marbles with Diamonds” I refer to a number of principles of biblical interpretation (hermeneutics), three of which would apply here:

1. Consider the Author – who wrote the book? (what was his background, language, culture, vocation, concerns, education, circumstance, what stage of life?)

2. Consider the Audience (why was the book written? who was the audience? what would these words have meant to its original recipients?) Continue reading →

Purgatory (1)

Posted on by
Reply

There is no doubt that Dr. R.C. Sproul is a highly trained theologian. One of the many things I appreciate about him is his ability to simplify issues without distorting them. Very few people are able to accomplish this as well as he does.

If you have ever been to a Ligonier Ministries Conference, you will know that one of the highlights is when Dr. R. C. Sproul (either alone or with an expert panel alongside him) has a Question and Answer session. Usually the questions relate to the theme of the Conference and the answers given are often extremely helpful and insightful.

In a recent CD release called “Ask R.C.” (from Ligonier Ministries), Dr. R. C. Sproul fielded questions and provided answers on a wide range of biblical and theological issues. One of the questions concerned the doctrine of purgatory and I have transcribed the verbal interchange below.

Questioner: Could you explain the Roman Catholic doctrine of purgatory and whether or not it is a truthful doctrine?

R.C. – Thank you for that. I will try to deal with that as briefly as I can and I want to be accurate with it. The doctrine of purgatory is an integral doctrine to the Roman Catholic understanding of redemption. It has been modified just in the last year or so with respect to infants, but purgatory is defined by Rome as a purging place. It is a place where the vast majority of even professing Christians go upon their death.

As recently as the Roman Catholic Catechism, the Church declares that if a person dies with any spot or blemish or stain on their soul – any impurity – instead of going directly to heaven they must first go to this place of purging which is this intermediate state between earth and heaven. And in purgatory, which is not hell, it is not a place of the punitive wrath of God, but it is a place for the corrective wrath of God (as it were), where the sanctifying process is continued through the crucible of fire (as it were).

Now in purgatory, as I said, the vast majority of people experience this time; they may be there for two weeks or they may be there for two hundred million years – in fact at the heart of the controversy in the 16th century Reformation had to do with the sale of indulgences, and on the external situation there, particularly in Germany when Tetzel was selling the indulgences to the peasants, he distorted seriously the Roman doctrine. The Roman Catholic Church has held for many, many centuries that the grace of justification is infused into a person at baptism, and that that grace of justification remains intact until or unless a person commits a mortal sin. That mortal sin is called mortal because it is so serious that it destroys the justifying grace in the soul. And so a person who commits mortal sin, in other words, has to be re-justified, brought anew into a state of grace. In the 16th century, the Council of Trent declared that the sacrament of penance is the second plank of justification for those who have made shipwreck of their souls. Continue reading →

God Is Not A Respecter Of Persons

Posted on by
3

Question: If the doctrine of Divine election is true, how do you explain the verse that says that God is not a respecter of persons? Surely, He is favoring one and not another when He chooses one and not another.

If you will allow me, because I believe the Bible teaches the doctrine of election clearly, I would first like to change the wording of your question from using the word “if” to instead use “since.” In other words, the question should be this:

“Since the doctrine of election is true, how do you explain the verse that says that God is not a respecter of persons?”

The verse you are referring to is found in Acts chapter 10. In our English translations we read words such as these:

Acts 10:34-35 KJV Then Peter opened his mouth, and said, Of a truth I perceive that God is no respecter of persons: But in every nation he that feareth him, and worketh righteousness, is accepted with him.

Acts 10:34-35 NASB Opening his mouth, Peter said: “I most certainly understand now that God is not one to show partiality, but in every nation the man who fears Him and does what is right is welcome to Him.

Acts 10:34-35 NIV Then Peter began to speak: “I now realize how true it is that God does not show favoritism but accepts men from every nation who fear him and do what is right. Continue reading →