Well, it's good to see you folks tonight, and thank you for the privilege of preaching once each month at the Tumlin Shoals Baptist Church. It is a great delight to my heart to get to preach to you on these occasions. Again, we are looking at the passage found in the New Testament book of 2 Peter, chapter 2, verses 1 through 3. The title for the sermon is, The Danger of False Apologies. Those who bring in alongside of the normal accepted view of scriptural doctrine another view. They bring in heresy. And not only do they introduce it, but they defend it. And the Apostle Peter gives us a warning about these men in this section of the book, The Danger of False Apologies. Now, I had intended to preach a two-point sermon in our last session, but you listened so well that I was only able to cover Roman numeral number one, which was the declarations against the false teachers, and I know that you remember what my four sub-points were under that heading, the declarations against the false prophets. But perhaps there are a few people here tonight who were not able to be here on that occasion, and so I will remind you of what those four items were. First, we said that these false teachers were insidious in their approach. They came in privately by stealth. They didn't wear a lapel pin saying, I'm a false prophet. Number two, they were influential in their attempts. Verse 2 says, and many shall follow their pernicious ways. And I gave you this line. I said, it is a phenomenon that a Baptist church can hire a staff member who turns out to be a homosexual axe murderer. And some of the folks will think he's the best thing since ice cream and will get upset with you if you fire him. It's a strange thing. False teachers are influential in their attempts. And then the third item was they were industrious in their avarice, in their desire for more money. Verse 3 says, they with feigned words shall make merchandise of you. Have you heard any of the televangelists saying, plant a seed, and when it grows and multiplies give it to the Tomlin Shoal Baptist Church. Have you heard any of that? No. It's send it to me. My little jet needs to be replaced and updated. So Peter's giving this warning. It's as if he lived in our day, isn't it? And given us current application of these truths. And then the last item was, these false teachers were indicted by their actions. Their judgment lingereth not, and their damnation slumbereth not. So here are the the four declarations against the false prophets. Now, that was Roman numeral number one. Now, I didn't get past that in the last sermon. I had this second item. I was going to talk about the difficulties associated with these false prophets. And when I get something like this in my mind and heart, one of these sermons working, you know, it's just hard to pass it over. And so I've decided to come back tonight and just spend all of our time talking about the difficulty associated with these false teachers. Now the difficulty is broad in its perspective. It affects all of the various groups. The Universalists and the Armenians and the Calvinists all have unresolved issues with this text. Martin Luther, the Lutherans, John Wesley, and the Methodists, Charles Spurgeon, and James Pettigrew Boyce, and the Baptists, all admit that there are some difficulties associated with this text. The difficulty is with the statement in verse 1. Look at it. It says that these false prophets will come in by stealth and they will deny the Lord that bought them and will ultimately bring swift destruction upon themselves. But the difficulty for the preacher or the teacher is this statement, they denied the Lord that bought them. Now what does that mean? Herein lies both the advantages and the disadvantages of verse-by-verse preaching through the Bible. The advantage of preaching verse-by-verse, or the advantages, are these. It lets you preach all of the counsel of God, not just part of it, not just some of it. And two, it gives the saints a balanced diet. Did you know the folks will get sick if you just preach John 3, 16 all of the time? It's kind of like eating ice cream and marshmallows. Now, they're good. They're wonderful. Josh and Kai and I had some roasted over an open fire yesterday afternoon. It's good, but you can't just have a... That can't be all that's on your diet. The saints need to stay... And verse-by-verse preaching does this. And furthermore, it keeps the preacher off his hobby horse. Doesn't it? You know the difference between a hobby horse and a regular horse? You can get off a regular horse. And preachers get on hobby horses sometimes and they can't find a place to get off. In fact, some of them never do get off. And preaching verse by verse through the Bible, it prevents that. Now here's the disadvantage of preaching verse by verse through the Bible. When you come to a text like this, where these false prophets denied the Lord that bought them, you can't just go oopity-oop and skip right over that. Did you notice in that last sermon, I didn't say anything about that. I gave no explanation or illustration or argumentation or application of that particular statement. I was saving it. I was going to deal with it at the end of the sermon. That would have been easy for me, just not to have brought that up, period, and gone on to talk about the destruction of the fallen angels, which is in the next passage. But I would not have dealt honestly and humbly with this issue. And so tonight, I come before you with this statement. I do not claim infallibility for my conclusions that I'm going to share. I do tell you forthrightly that I have spent many hours of wrassling and praying and studying over this statement. And not only that, I have consulted with brethren who are much wiser than I, men who know the technicalities of the Greek language in which this was originally given. So I'm just giving that as a disclaimer. If you don't agree with some of my statements, don't worry about it. I haven't always agreed with some of my statements. Now let me tell you this also. you agree with some of my conclusions or whether you disagree. It's not going to add even one to the number of people who are going to get to heaven in the end. Okay? Nor is it going to subtract from the number. So relax, and we'll look at the text and come to some kind of conclusions about it. Now, I'm going to preach my sermon around four headings. The first thing I want us to look at are the propositions that are stated in verse 1. First, it says that there were false prophets in the Old Testament times. Are we all together so far? You see how good we're doing? All right, here's the second one. There shall be false teachers in New Testament times. Still together? All right, number three. This is going to be easier than I thought. These false teachers will be among the people. These are not just outsiders who are trying to stir up trouble. These will be folks who are mingling among the people of God in the church. Number four, these false teachers will deny the Lord who bought them. Well, that's what the text says, isn't it? That's the proposition that's before us. Now, number five, These false teachers, because of their denying the Lord, will bring swift destruction upon themselves. Now, that's the proposition that we're dealing with in the sermon. Now, here's item number two, or number B, the possible solutions. What is the proper interpretation to give? to this statement. I'm going to present four possible solutions to this text. Number one, some say that these false teachers were saved by Christ's atoning death. They were Christians to begin with, but they later rejected the Lord. As the text says, they denied the Lord that had saved them, and they lost their salvation because of this. Or they committed apostasy. You are aware that the word apostasy is talking about falling from grace. All right? That's one possible solution. Number two. These false teachers were bought only in the sense that God created them. Some say that God owns all men. He bought them when he created them. All right, number three. These false teachers professed to be saved but did not actually possess salvation. They pretended to be Christians. Does that make sense for you? Now that's one possible solution to the text. Now, number four. Christ fully atoned for the sins of these false teachers, just like the text implies. But the false teachers never appropriated this atonement by believing on Jesus. Consequently, Christ died for them in vain. Now you got these four possible solutions in mind? Okay. The third thing I want us to do is to discuss the problems with each one of these four possible solutions. Did your mind consider any problems as we looked at these four possible solutions to the text? Did it? Well, let's consider it a while. Let's look at the first possible solution, that of apostasy or falling from grace. What are some problems with taking that position? Well, A, the Bible teaches that salvation is by grace, not of works. And you know what else the Bible teaches? It teaches that our security is also of grace and not of works. You all get that? You don't get saved by grace and then maintain your salvation by your good works. You know how I'd know that even if the Bible didn't teach it? By looking at you. I can tell by looking at you that if your security was contingent upon your performance that you wouldn't make it. And I'm not going to give you the opportunity to say the same thing about me because you know me too well. And doesn't your own heart, your own spirit teach you that if on your best day as a Christian, on your best day, not your worst day, not one of your ordinary days as a Christian, If on your best day as a Christian, if you had gotten what you deserved, you'd have gone to hell. That's the first problem with this position. Now here's a second problem. To say that these false teachers had been saved and then lost their salvation or fell from grace denigrates and nullifies the atonement of Christ. What did Christ do in his atoning death? He took upon himself our sins. That is the doctrine of imputation. Peter in his first book, chapter 4, verse 1, says that Christ suffered for us in the flesh. God took the sins of the people and he placed them, imputed them. to Christ. And what is the other side of imputation? When a person believes on the Lord Jesus Christ, God takes the perfect righteousness of Jesus and imputes that to us. Glory, glory. Were the sins of these false teachers imputed to Christ? That's the obvious question. And they ultimately lost their salvation. That impugns the atoning work of Christ. Now, it also nullifies or denigrates the expiation that Christ accomplished in the atonement. Do you remember what expiation is? Do you remember the scapegoat in the Old Testament atonement? The priest would place his hands on the head of the goat and he would confess the sins of the people, symbolically placing the sins of the people on this goat. And do you remember what he would do with this one goat? He'd take it out to the wilderness, and he'd turn it loose, and it would never be seen or heard from again. Symbolizing how that Christ, one day, when our sins were laid upon him by imputation, In his death, he would take those sins out of you. Remember them against us no more. Do you know what the Bible says that Christ has done with our sins? Cast them into the deepest sea and has removed them as far as the east is from the west. That's expiation, taking our sins out of you. Glory, glory. My sins are out of view. They've been removed. Well, beloved, rejoice in these truths. That's why you're never going to fall from grace. Your sins have been taken away. Tis done, tis done, the great transaction's done. They're gone. My sins are gone. Expiation. And then it denigrates and nullifies the aspect of propitiation in Christ's death. Do you remember what propitiation is? Propitiation presupposes that man is sinful and guilty. Well, dear me, we know that, don't we? And in propitiation, Christ, by shedding his blood and sprinkling that blood on the mercy seat in the heavens, he did two things. He satisfied the claims of holy justice against me. Folks, that's just as good as it gets in the Christian life. It just ain't gonna get any better than that in Christian doctrine. Christ has satisfied the claims of holy justice against me. And by doing that, you know what else he has done? He turned away the wrath of God from my soul. It's amazing to me, folks, find a 50 cent piece on the sidewalk somewhere and just shout all over creation, get on Daystar and give a testimony and they don't know what propitiation even means. They can't spell it, they can't even pronounce it. And yet the Christ of glory, the Christ of eternity came in the fullness of the times and shed his blood. and sprinkled it on the mercy seat in the heavens, and holy justice looked upon that scene, and holy justice cried out, I'm satisfied, I'm satisfied. And it turned away the wrath of God from my soul. Now look, I joined the Methodists or the Pentecostals or the General Baptists and the Free Will Baptists if I thought my salvation and my security was dependent upon my works. But I don't believe that. I believe that my salvation from commencement all the way to consummation is based upon the person and the work of Jesus Christ, the Son of God. Well, that's the problem with taking this position that you can be saved one day and lost the next. Your salvation is not dependent on you. It's dependent upon the person and the finished work of Christ. Are y'all getting this? All right, here's the second. Pardon me, it's the third item. Taking this position of falling from grace ignores the preponderance of scripture which states eternal security. You remember in my sermon at the end of chapter one we were talking about no scriptures of any private interpretation, and I gave you some basic hermeneutics, some basic principles for interpreting the scripture. Look at the punctuation. Look at the context. You remember the other one I gave you? The preponderance of Scripture that seems to lean in one direction. And when you look at what the Bible says about eternal security, there is a preponderance of evidence on the side of eternal security. All right, here's the problem with the second position. This position, that the false teachers were bought only in the sense that Christ created them, strains the meaning of the word bought, or the Greek word agorazo. This word means to purchase by the paying of a price. And in creation, God didn't pay any price. He didn't buy us back by paying the price. We didn't exist. He just created us because He wanted to and for no other reason. Does that make sense to you? That's the problem with taking that position. Now, we obviously don't deny that the Lord owns us because He created us. But he doesn't own us because he bought us by paying of a price. Now here's the problem with the third position. This position that the men professed or pretended to be saved but did not actually possess salvation, the problem with that is it may be convenient for the interpreter But it just isn't what this text says. Okay? Now, does the Bible teach us in other places that some men profess to be saved when in reality they're not? Well, sure it does. Can you think of one classic text, perhaps in 1 John? They went out from us, but they were not off us. For if they had been off us, they no doubt would have continued with us. So I don't mean to say here that some do not, I don't want to eliminate the biblical fact that some profess to be saved when in reality they're not. I'm just saying that's not what this text says. This text says they denied the Lord that bought them. We can't get away from the fact that these false teachers were bought in some sense. All right, here's the fourth problem. This position, B4 above, you remember what the position is? You've had to turn your page. That Christ fully atoned for the sins of these false teachers. But these false teachers never appropriated the atonement or salvation by believing. Now the problem with that is it forces us to deal with several tough questions about the atonement. And I have listed for you some of them, and I'm going to give you some others. Number one, it forces us to ask this question. For whom did Christ die? And to be more specific then, we've got to deal with this question. Did Christ die for these false teachers? When in reality, he knew in eternity past, and knew when he died. that they would deny him and ultimately go to hell. Did Christ die for these false teachers? Now, don't answer that yet. Now here's another question. What did Christ accomplish in his death? What was God's purpose in Christ's death? Were these God-ordained purposes accomplished in reality and in actuality or only hypothetically and theoretically or potentially? Now you can answer. Do you see how you have to wrestle with those tough issues? And it doesn't matter what your position is when you come to the text. That's why I gave the statement in the introduction that it doesn't matter if you're a Universalist or an Arminian or a Calvinist, this text present some difficulties, okay? Now, how are we going to answer these questions? Well, some have answered it like this, that Christ died for all men, without exception, even these false teachers. The second question, what was God's purpose in Christ's death? Well, we know that God's purpose was imputation with the sins of the people now, whomever you say he died for, God took the sins of those people and imputed them to Christ. And then Christ, as our substitute, suffered in the flesh, ultimately died and shed his blood for those people, regardless of how broad or how narrow you say that number is. And he accomplished expiation. He took those sins out of view, removed them as far as the east is from the west. And he satisfied the claims of justice and turned away the wrath of God. Now, many have taken that position through the years, and they deal with it like this. They say that Christ's death, the shedding of his blood, was sufficient for all, but efficient only for those who believed. Did you get that? And that's a lot of good brethren, I hate to say this, but much wiser than I, take that position. that Christ died sufficiently for all, but efficiently only for the elect. The bottom line is we know all are not going to be saved, right? It doesn't matter whether you're an Arminian or a Calvinist at that point. We know everybody's not going to be saved. straights the gate, narrows the way that leadeth to life, and few there be that find it, and wides the gate, and broads the way that leadeth to destruction, and many there be which go in thereaft." So everybody's not going to be saved. So what purpose did God have for the unbeliever, the person who ultimately goes to hell, what purpose did God have in the death of Christ for those people Was it simply to make salvation hypothetically possible for them, but actual and real only for the elect? Let me show you how difficult that becomes. What if no one ever believed on Christ? Conceivably, that could have happened considering the depravity of the human heart, right? I mean, that could have happened. You might have thought that if it was just left up to man, you know, in free will, then maybe half of them would believe and half of them would not believe, but that's not what the Scripture teaches. The Scripture teaches the many are going to be lost and the few are going to be saved, right? Well, then conceivably no one could have believed, just leaving it up to man, right? Now, here's the question. Isn't it hypothetically possible, then, that Christ could have died had our sins imputed expiated those sins by taking them out of view, casting them into the deepest sea, remembering them against us no more, propitiated God's holy justice by satisfying it and turning away the wrath of God, and yet not one person be saved. Which brings us back to our original question. Was the death of Christ a real atoning death? Or did God simply have him die to make salvation a possibility and a potentiality? Now, have I at least raised enough questions to cloud the issue for you? Page Patterson said when he didn't clearly know the answer, he'd speak in generalities until he had at least clouded the issues. Well, I shall tell you what my personal view is. I believe that Christ died for those who would believe. and that God elected them to salvation, and that that atonement is real. It accomplished, in actuality, their salvation. Now, does it get me off the hook to tell everybody who would stand still about Christ? It doesn't get me off the hook at all. I don't know who will believe. I don't know who God's elect is. My biblical responsibility is to preach the gospel to every creature, and I want to assure you that I am trying to fulfill that responsibility. Now, are you all doing okay so far? You got time for this last item? I want to offer this as a probable solution. Now, Brother Derek, I hope that you welled up with some pride when you saw that I didn't say the solution. I'm mellowing out in my older days. I have here the probable solution. And here's what I think it is. I personally do not believe that the atonement of Christ is in view at all in this text. And here are the reasons why. The Old Testament false prophet denied the Lord who bought them out of Egyptian bondage. You remember there was a mixed multitude that came out with the Israelites. When you study Deuteronomy chapter 32, he speaks of the Israelites being bought, redeemed out of Egyptian bondage. And the false prophet in the Old Testament times denied the sovereign Lord who bought them out of Egyptian bondage. Now, next item, three. These New Testament false teachers denied the same Lord who bought their forefathers out of Egyptian bondage. Now, can you take that position without violating this text, without violating the same hermeneutics that I gave you in chapter 1? That's the problem with this stuff. So you can't have it one way with one text and have it a different way in another. Now, let's see what the context is. There is clearly an Old Testament context here. Do you remember chapter 1 verse 21? Look at it. It says, for the prophecy came not in old times. What old times are you talking about? In the Old Testament times. It came not by the will of man, but holy men of God spake as they were moved by the Holy Ghost. So that's clearly an Old Testament context there. Now the very next verse, chapter 2 verse 1 says, but there were false prophets among the people. And this statement, the people, is almost always referring to the Israelites. There were false prophets among the Israelites. That's an Old Testament context. Now, here's what it says about these New Testament false teachers. It says they denied the Lord who bought them. Are we still in the Old Testament context? All right, here's the issue. The word for Lord is not kurios from the Greek, which normally means Christ or Lord. It's used, it's the word despotes, and it's used ten times in the New Testament, and five of these times it refers to Christ. But five times it refers to God, the Father. Now, I told you I have read and read and read, and I haven't found one compelling reason in this text that would calls us to say unequivocally that the word despotes in this text is referring to Christ. It could just as easily be referring to God the Father. Okay? They denied the sovereign Lord, the one who possesses unbridled authority. We get our word despot from the same root. When it's referring to God, obviously it's without the negative connotation that despot has in our culture. Now, normally, look down at E, normally and grammatically, the pronoun them in verse 1 would modify the nearest antecedent, which is false teachers. However, there are exceptions to this rule. Consequently, one must be guided by the context. The context is Old Testament here. The Old Testament false prophets denied the sovereign master who brought them out of Egyptian bondage. New Testament false teachers deny the same sovereign Lord that brought the Israelites out of Egyptian bondage. that violates no hermeneutic that could be applied to this text. And that's my position on the text, and I don't want to hear any more about it. Now, you, obviously I am teasing you with that statement. You feel free to come and discuss that, and you may have much light to shed on the issue, but I have given you the best that I have.