The Triune God’s Work In Salvation

Transcript

GR 1922
The Triune God’s Work in Salvation
I Peter 1:2
06/28/2015
Gil Rugh

We are going to return to our study of I Peter. So if you would turn to I Peter chapter 1 we are really just in the opening couple of verses and the opening couple of verses bring us into the doctrine of election. Let’s just read those first two verses. You follow along as I read them. I Peter chapter 1, “Peter, an apostle of Jesus Christ to those who reside as aliens scattered throughout Pontus, Galatia, Cappadocia, Asia, and Bithynia who are chosen according to the foreknowledge of God the Father by the sanctifying work of the Spirit to obey Jesus Christ and be sprinkled with His blood. May grace and peace be yours in the fullest measure.”

After identifying himself as Peter the apostle then he identified those he is writing to and we noted the rest of the verse would simply be translated, “to the elect sojourners of the diaspora” and he mentions where they are scattered, the different regions. We noted the diaspora referring to Jews, elect Jews who have been scattered outside the land of Palestine. They are the remnant, the nation which is under judgment but a remnant that indicates as Paul said when he wrote to the Romans, “God has not cast away His people.” Paul says, “I am an example. I am a Jew yet God has saved me.” So the fact that God has put the nation Israel under judgment doesn’t mean that He withholds salvation from all the Jews but by and large as a nation it is under judgment.

Peter is writing to the believers and these are believing Jews and he calls them the chosen or the elect and that is what we were talking about. I brought a few books from my office. This week I went and looked and just pulled off half a dozen books from my shelf, three, and these are from say the last 15, 20 years. Three reflecting the Calvinistic view and three reflecting the Armenian view. I didn’t read every line on every page but I roamed through them and I found out I don’t agree with the Calvinist position and I don’t agree with the Armenian position so that means they are both wrong but it is a war going on in the church and the Calvinists say it is because Armenianism has infiltrated the church and the Armenians say it’s because Calvinism is dividing the church.

The Southern Baptists have their battle going on. I thought it was sort of humorous. What’s the date on this one? In 2010 this was published and it’s published by Broadman Press, Whosoever Will and you can tell from the title it’s reflecting what the Armenian view. We will just use those general titles. People are saved by their own choice and not by God’s election. That got a response from another group of Southern Baptists and this was done in 2012, Whomever He Wills. So they picked up on the title and they are answering that book with Calvinism and then there have been, I just have two of the book on Armenianism here. I will just refer to one because some of you will be familiar with some of these authors, some of you wouldn’t so I’m not going to talk about those but I will refer to Dave Hunt’s book, What Love is This? And David Hunt is a very staunch Armenian and he is home with the Lord now so maybe I should say, he was a very staunch Armenian. I did read this book. Every time I refer to something I would have people say, “Well, have you really read it?”

This is a book I did receive the prepublication manuscript and asked to give my opinion so I did write my opinions on it, very in detail, and when I was done I thought maybe I was so harsh I don’t want to send this to them so I just put it aside. Then the publisher called and said I was obligated to return the manuscript and was not allowed to make any copies so I did that.

But I had a humorous letter. Someone who used to attend here who has appreciation for Dave Hunt and would follow Dave Hunt and his view turned up here. I don’t remember the date and this letter is a few years old but he had a t-shirt made up with the name of Dave Hunt’s book, What Love is This? And he wanted to have my picture taken with him with that t-shirt on. So Dave Hunt wrote him a letter after he sent him the picture so I thought I would share that with you. After he mentions Dear So and So, I’m not going to use his name he said, “I am impressed with your t-shirt,” this is from Dave Hunt. “Are you in that business? Maybe you ought to be. You must get some interesting comments at least from those who have read the books and disagree. It was brave of Gil Rugh to have his picture taken with you wearing that advertisement. Thank you for passing along some comments from Gil. Tell him I am definitely not going to convert to Calvinism but have enough confidence in his knowledge of Scripture, love of truth and his common sense to hope he will eventually see how unbiblical and irrational Calvinism is and will turn away from it.” Love that and then he had some warm comments I consider him a good friend and so on; so a little interaction.

The doctrine of election divides. It should be a great encouragement. Peter opens up with these statements and we will be looking in detail. “Elect according to the foreknowledge of God by the sanctifying of the Spirit to obey Jesus Christ and be sprinkled with His blood.” That is an encouragement to believers undergoing persecution, suffering, and trial. We noted that basic theme that runs through this first letter of Peter to these believing Jews scattered around. They are undergoing testing and trial. He talks about in verse 7 “The proof for testing of your faith.” It is a time of trial and recognizing God is sovereign and I belong to Him because of His sovereign choice is a great comfort.

I mention I don’t find myself in agreement with everything Calvinism holds. You know I don’t hold to limited atonement. I think it is ridiculous their arguments that the new birth preceded faith in reading through some of the Calvinistic books again there argument that a dead man couldn’t believe so God had to regenerate people so that they could believe but the Scripture says we are sons of God by faith in Christ. They turn it around. We are sons of God therefore we have faith in Christ. I am not able to follow their arguments either and a number of others.

There are certain truths in Calvinism I am comfortable with, total depravity, unconditional election which we are talking about, irresistible grace, the perseverance of the saints and basically Dave Hunt holds none of those. Some of you are familiar with his writings. Some of you are on the newsletter that still persists under his successor now that Dave Hunt is home with the Lord.

Dave Hunt holds the view of Zane Hodges, Joseph Dillow, the anti-lordship position. So he is strongly opposed to irresistible grace; strongly opposed to the doctrine of foreknowledge meaning anything more than God knows beforehand what will happen. My observation was, after roaming through these books from the different position, these are error from them both. They start with their theological position. The Calvinists start with their theological position then they use logic and then they come to Scripture to support it all.

The Armenians do the same thing. They start with their theological position then they use emotion and then they come to the Scripture. Dave Hunt’s book is an example of that, ‘What Love is This?’ The whole thing is if you are a Calvinist you don’t believe in the love of God. You deny God’s love. You don’t see Him as a God of love because He can’t be a God of love if He doesn’t save everyone that He could possibly save. It is an emotional argument. When I critiqued the manuscript I talked about some of those things. He also thinks by discrediting John Calvin he can discredit Calvinism. We wouldn’t agree with everything John Calvin did but again I didn’t think that Dave Hunt accurately represented why John Calvin did what he did.

So we want to be careful as we read through some of this material that we don’t get side tracked. Let me just give you a couple of examples. He has more than a chapter in here on John Calvin and how ungodly he was. John Calvin at Geneva started what he saw would be, if you will, the kingdom in Geneva and he implemented strict laws. And one man, Servetus who was a heretic, Dave Hunt agrees he was a heretic denying the trinity and so on but John Calvin had him executed. Well there is a certain consistency for Calvin in that. I don’t agree with that but Dave Hunt’s view is “to understand Calvin we need to consider that if the God one believes in predestines billions of the totally depraved to a burning hell, all of whom He could rescue, then to burn at the stake an obviously totally depraved heretic would seem quite mild and easily justifiable. That logic however, seems somehow to escape many of today’s evangelical Christians who admire the man and call themselves Calvinists.”

Well that is a misrepresentation of why Calvin did what he did not because of his doctrine of election and predestination. I communicated to Dave Hunt that I thought that was a misrepresentation and you know it’s not accurate. What Calvin was doing came out of his confused theology which we have talked about – is the church Israel and so on. And Dave’s attacks leaves you with thinking, “Is the God of the Old Testament a different God than the God of the New Testament?”

I want you to come back to Leviticus chapter 20. Dave said he doesn’t think Calvinists know or face the reality of what a terrible man Calvin was because he executed Servetus for being a depraved heretic. That is Dave Hunt’s evaluation of him. Burn him at the stake, oh, would a godly man do that? But what does God say in Leviticus chapter 20. “Then the Lord spoke to Moses saying, ‘You shall also say to the sons of Israel, any man from among the sons of Israel or from the aliens sojourning in Israel who gives any of his offspring to Moloch, (false god) shall surely be put to death. The people of the land shall stone him with stones.’”

You know in our day we have capital punishment. We do away with it all because it might cause pain to the person being executed. Being stoned to death was a very unpleasant way to die. You know what they did? Everybody gathered stones and they started throwing them at you and they just threw them at you until you were dead. Some stones hit you in the leg, some stones hit you in the arm, some stones hit you in the head and they just keep throwing stones. Well, is this God a monster? Some liberal theologians say the God of the Old Testament was a God of anger and so on.

Come down to verse 9: “If there is anyone who curses father or mother he shall surely be put to death.” Immorality, the end of verse 10: “The adulterer and adulteress shall surely be put to death;” Verse 11 for a different kind of immorality and so on. “Both of them shall surely be put to death.” Verse 12: “Both of them shall surely be put to death.” Verse 13: “They shall surely be put to death.” Verse 14: “If there is a man who marries a woman and her mother it is immorality. He and they shall be burned with fire.” Dave Hunt said if John Calvin burned a heretic at the stake I mean, he doesn’t know anything about the love and mercy of God. That’s because Dave Hunt’s theology, it did come out of Roman Catholicism, that didn’t ever change, that a-millennialism and blending of Israel and the church and so trying to implement. I mean, what Israel did was what God waid them to do. Calvin thought he was following through on what God says, the new Israel if you will, ought to do – establish God’s rule in this city. He goes on to talk about their death.

Come over to Deuteronomy 13, one other example. My critique didn’t make any difference in the final form of the book. Deuteronomy 13 goes the same thing. Here if anybody claims to be a prophet or have a revelation from God and he’s telling you to remove away from the true and living God, verse 5: “That prophet or dreamer of dreams shall be put to death.” And then you go on down here. It doesn’t matter if it’s a family member, verse 6 and following. Verse 8 says “You shall not yield to him or listen to him. Your eyes shall not pity him. You shouldn’t spare or conceal him. You shall surely kill him.” Verse 10: “So you shall stone him to death.”

You know, so this idea, well Calvin, that shows what doctrine of election and predestination does. It makes you think you might as well kill these people because they are not elect. That’s not why Calvin did it. That’s why John Knox, a great reformer said when he visited Geneva and that it was the most wonderful place he had ever been. But we would say their theology was in error but at least you should be honest and not say, “Well it because of his doctrine of election. This is just what God said to do, burn heretics at the stake, stone them to death. Don’t allow them to live.” If you are confused on the Old Testament and its use for today Calvin said, “I should start a city where the rule of God is implemented and heretics are not tolerated. Want to say a God of mercy and kindness people who know that God wouldn’t do that, where does that leave the Old Testament?”

These kinds of arguments, they are emotional arguments and say, “Oh yes, that’s not love, that’s not mercy why would Calvin do that?” Well you understand the weakness he had in his theology and Dave Hunt knows. He mentions it at the beginning of that chapter and he sometimes referred to as an a-millennialist, sometimes as a post-millennialist but it doesn’t make any difference. He wants to make the doctrine of election look bad so the real reason Calvin burned him at the stake is Calvin was mean-spirited, intolerant, unloving, not reflective of the true character of God. I asked him, “Where does that leave the God of the Old Testament? It is the same God, the same character.” Now I realize we are not a nation today. We don’t implement those laws but Calvin was operating without that understanding.

Alright, let’s go back to Peter. We come, they are elect and we all believe in election if you are a Bible believer because the word is Biblical. It is usually translated ‘chosen.’ You get the English word from the Greek word eklektos, election, to choose, to select. The debate comes upon what basis does God make His choice or His election? It says here in 1 Peter chapter 1, he is writing to the elect, sojourners of the diaspora and they are elect according to the foreknowledge of God and that is what we were talking about at our last study. What is the foreknowledge of God? Two basic views and again we are going through the variations, just the basic views. The view that I would hold and would be consistent with Calvinistic view in this area is that foreknowledge of God is His selecting love. We go back to the Old Testament and we look at passages like Amos chapter 3, verse 2 where God says, “You only have I known of all the families of the earth.” Well He is the omniscient God. He knows all the families of the earth but Israel is the only nation among all the nations that God has placed His love upon, His favor upon. So the word knowledge doesn’t just mean knowledge. It means more than knowledge. We looked at other passages, Jeremiah 1:5 “Before you were born I knew you.” Well, of course He did. Everyone has to agree that God is omniscient but He is saying more than that. He selected him and chose him to be a prophet. So foreknowledge, I think when you come to the New Testament, come down to I Peter chapter 1, verse 18: “Knowing that you were not redeemed with perishable things like silver or gold from your futile way of life inherited from your fathers but with precious blood as of a lamb unblemished and spotless, the blood of Christ for He was foreknown before the foundation of the world.” Now the other view of foreknowledge is God just looked ahead in the future, saw who would believe, that’s Dave Hunt’s view and on that basis chose them. That’s how he would interpret verse 2 but what do you do then with verse 20? You are saying Christ died just because God looked ahead in the future and saw that Christ would be crucified and therefore He chose Him? I don’t know what Dave Hunt says about verse 20. There is no reference to this verse in the Scripture index and I couldn’t find it anywhere in the book. I don’t know why you would leave that out. There is not that many verses that use the word foreknowledge in the New Testament but that one doesn’t appear. His view of foreknowledge is it is just to know beforehand.

Let me read you, I am reading you this because I have some letters in my file between Dave Hunt and those who work for him and a pastor you would know on the West coast who critiqued this evidently one time and they listened to his tape and they accuse him of not having read the book or knowing what the true position is. I don’t want to get into that. What Dave Hunt says regarding foreknowledge, let me give you a definition from him. “Clearly what God foreknew would be the response of certain persons to the Gospel was the reason for electing or predestining them to the blessings reserved for the redeemed. So He foreknew, He knew ahead what they would do.” That is his strong view that foreknowledge just means foreknowledge. He says, “We simply can’t find a verse anywhere that uses foreknowledge in any other way than to express the fact of knowing in advance. They get into problems here. I have a hard time following because sometimes Dave Hunt asks the question that I have but then he answers a different question and then he acts like he answered the question that he raised and I find that a little difficult to follow. That is his view. He doesn’t think that you can use the Old Testament while ‘yada,’ the Hebrew word for ‘to know’ in the Old Testament is used to denote a special relationship. For example, Hosea 13:5, “I did not know thee in the wilderness.” Or what we referred to, “You only have I known of all the families of the earth.” Never does it mean to know in advance. But that is what the Greek word and he has it here, ‘proginosko’ which is the word ginosko, the Greek word for ‘knowledge,’ yada’ was the Hebrew word with ‘pro’ on the front, the preposition which means before. “There is therefore no relationship between these words which will be of any help in supporting Calvinism.” Well of course, the Hebrew word for knowledge doesn’t mean foreknowledge because it doesn’t have the preposition on the front but you do establish that the word ‘knowledge’ is used of special attention, affection and love. He mentions there are occasions where it is used of the relationship between the husband and the wife and the sexual relationship but none of that background can be carried over. What background did these Jewish believers have that Peter is writing to? And you talk about the foreknowledge of God and we’ve looked at some verses and we will look at the rest of those now. There are one, two, three, four, five references to God with foreknowledge in the New Testament, “Known according to the foreknowledge of God.” Two of them are here in Peter, verse 2 of chapter 1 and where we just looked at verse 20.

Come back to Romans chapter 11, verse 2 just a little bit of review, chapter 11, verse 2: “God has not rejected His people whom He foreknew.” You see you do have a problem with the sovereignty of God because you end up with what? God foreknew Israel. All He did then was look ahead and see Israel would be a people that chose Him so He chose them? I don’t know how you explain these things. God makes clear through the prophets, you were nothing when I took and called you. I mean He takes total credit.

What does it mean “God has not rejected His people whom He foreknew?” He knew ahead of time that they would become His people? You see God is no longer in control. The only thing He did was get to see the movie ahead of time. So He can tell you what is coming up next and plan for it, so to speak but He is just observing. And as I wrote to Dave Hunt on this, he gets perilously close to open theism because the same kind of logic, because if God knows it all ahead of time and has made His decisions on the basis of what He foresaw, the fact is now that we are living it out, it’s still settled. You are just saying, “How did God settle it?” By being in control of it or seeing it ahead of time but it is still done. You know when somebody says to you, “Did you see this movie?” “No, I am going to see it this week.” Well you already know how it begins, how it proceeds and how it ends. It’s not going to change because somebody is seeing it at a later time. So everything was settled by what God foresaw what would happen. It is still settled today. If God chose people on the basis of looking ahead and seeing they would respond in faith, the fact of the matter is it is still settled. No one else is going to respond in faith. So it is settled.

Sometimes it’s hard to follow the arguments here like its open when Dave was here and spoke on Roman Catholicism. We were out having a bite to eat afterwards and “Oh Gil, I tried so hard to make it so clear I can’t understand why they didn’t respond.” “Well Dave, they are totally depraved.” He doesn’t agree with that. He doesn’t agree with total depravity either. He thinks that is a wicked, unbiblical doctrine also.

Foreknowledge has to be more than God just knows ahead of time. My life under His control or did He just look ahead and see I am going to be run over by a car tomorrow so He included it in His plan? Where are we if foreknowledge is just knowing beforehand and he argues strongly on let’s just keep it simple. Foreknowledge means to know before. It can’t mean anything more than that. God knew beforehand who would believe in Him so He chose them. But that means when Christ went to the cross as we saw God just looked ahead and saw boy, that’s what is going to happen. What about the passages in Isaiah where we were earlier today that God says, “I have planned it, it will happen.” Well, His plans are made on the basis of what He saw people would do. No matter how you explain that, God is not in control. He does try to slide into, “Well, we have to remember God lives in the eternal present. He is not in time.” As we have talked about I just don’t know what that means. That means if everything is happening all at the same time before God, Christ is dying on the cross right now before God, the millennium is happening right now before God, I am an unbeliever right now before God as well as a believer because everything is meaningless. God is like you know, bzzzzzzzzzzzz,and time is simply just what? Things happening one after another, one before another. We turn God into some kind of static machine. That is not what the Scripture portrays. I don’t have the answer to all of this but I don’t want to fall back on things since God lives in the eternal present His foreknowledge is really present knowledge because He is omniscient and pretty soon we have just moved outside the realm of what the Scripture talks about.

Alright, isn’t this great stuff? Well, come back to I Peter. We will make a little bit of progress. We don’t look at the other verses, Acts chapter 2, verse 23; Romans chapter 8, verse 29; Romans chapter 11, verse 2; I Peter chapter 1, verse 2 and verse 20. Those are all the verses that use foreknowledge relating to God. There are two verses in the Bible that use foreknowledge relating to man that I don’t have written down here and I don’t remember off hand, Acts 26 something but at any rate when it is used of God I think it is used in this particular place. I think Acts chapter 2, well come back to Acts chapter 2, verse 23. I did spend a little time reading in a Greek grammar that used Acts chapter 2, ‘Wallace’s Greek Grammar’ that some of you are familiar with on Acts chapter 2, verse 23: “This man (referring to Christ) delivered over by the predetermined plan and foreknowledge of God.” And the construction here would indicate the close connection between predetermined plan and foreknowledge of God. “You nailed to a cross by the hands of godless men and put Him to death.” And I think grammatically, predetermined plan and foreknowledge are closely linked together and it was the predetermined plan that’s put first here and foreknowledge of God, “You nailed to a cross.” And I think in the context the predetermined plan, foreknowledge are very closely related in their concepts. I just cannot live with the idea that God just looked ahead and saw His Son would be crucified and adjusted His plan. He sounds like the open theist because this just shows how great God is. He looked ahead. He could adjust and maneuver and work things so that it all came out the way He wanted. It comes out the way He wanted because He determined what would happen.

Alright, now you can come back to I Peter chapter 1, verse 2: “Elect according to the foreknowledge of God the Father by the sanctifying work of the Spirit.” And as we noted at the end of our last study we have in these verses all three members of the trinity, God the Father, God the Son, and God the Holy Spirit involved in our work of salvation, the work that brought salvation to us. We were elect by God according to His foreknowledge which I would take it would be His determination, His determination to place His love upon us by the sanctifying work of the Spirit.

The word ‘sanctifying’ as you are familiar with is the same basic word that we get the word ‘saint’ and the word ‘holy’ from. They are referring to the word ‘hagios’ where it means to be separate, to be apart. God is holy because He is separated from all sin, all defilement, all so He is the One who is holy, holy, holy. We are saints. We are to be holy because God is holy. He saved us, He cleansed us so that what, so that we would be set apart from sin to serve Him. Now here is says “It is by the sanctifying work of the Spirit,” the Spirit of God setting us apart, His action on the basis of God’s electing choice. The Spirit of God sets us apart to prepare us to believe.

Come back to the book of II Thessalonians chapter 2, II Thessalonians chapter 2. Here you have the same parts that we have in Peter here written by Paul. II Thessalonians chapter 2, verse 13: “But we should always give thanks to God for you, brethren beloved by the Lord because God has chosen you from the beginning” and I take it that would be back in the beginning God created the heavens and the earth. When you get there God had already made His choice; “For salvation, through sanctification by the Spirit.” It is the Spirit’s work to act upon the decision of God and set us apart and “faith in the truth” which we will get to in a moment in Peter.
So that same idea. It is the Father’s decision, the Spirit carrying that out in setting us apart and then we believe.

Come back to I Corinthians chapter 6, I Corinthians chapter 6, verse 11: “Such were some of you (the unrighteous who were not destined to be part of the kingdom) but you were washed, you were sanctified, you were justified.” It talks about all that in our salvation, the washing, cleansing, sanctified, set apart for God, declared righteous. They all go together, all part of that one work of salvation.

Come over to chapter 12 of Corinthians while you are here, I Corinthians chapter 12, verse 13: “For by one Spirit we were all baptized into one body. Whether Jews or Greeks, slaves or free we were all made to drink of one Spirit.” So we become partakers of the Holy Spirit and His ministry. He baptizes us. He identifies us spiritually with Christ as Romans 6 develops in His death, burial and resurrection. The Spirit is actively involved in the work of salvation. We go out and proclaim the Gospel to people but unless the Spirit of God takes that truth and carries it to the heart the supernatural way there is no response to accept and believe; so the work of the Spirit.

Come back to Peter. So God did the choosing according to His foreknowledge which would be just simply His prior determination that occurred before the foundation of the world as Ephesians 1 said or back at the beginning. “According to the foreknowledge of God by the sanctifying work of the Spirit to obey Jesus Christ and be sprinkled with His blood.” Those two I think go together – to obey Jesus Christ. We are talking here about the obedience of faith. “Unto obedience and sprinkling” would be a literal translation. “That by the sanctifying work of the Spirit unto obedience and sprinkling of Jesus Christ with His blood.” The obedience is the obedience of faith.

Come back to Romans chapter 1, verse 5. Paul talks about his proclaiming for the Gospel that he was set apart for the Gospel of God, verse 1. Then come down, talking about this one long sentence, but we will break in at verse 5: “Through Whom we have received grace and apostleship to bring about obedience of faith among the Gentiles for His name’s sake.” The obedience of faith is what? Paul was the apostle to the Gentiles. He went and preached Christ to the Gentiles so that they could respond to God’s command and believe in Christ. That’s not work in responding in obedience. It is an act of faith. It is the obedience of faith.

Come over to chapter 10, verse 16. This is that context. Verse 14: “How will they call on Him in whom they will not believe? How will they believe in Him in Whom they have not heard? How will they hear without a preacher? How will they preach unless they are sent?” Verse 16: “However they did not all heed the good news.” They didn’t believe it. They didn’t respond in faith. They didn’t obey it. Where it says, “The Lord, who has believed our report?” Faith comes from hearing and hearing by the Word of Christ. So to benefit from the Word of Christ we talked about you must believe. We have been through those verses.

Over in chapter 16 of Romans, verse 26. Paul says in verse 25 “He’s preaching the Gospel of Jesus Christ according to the revelation of the mystery which has been kept secret for long ages past but now is manifested and by the Scriptures of the prophet according to the commandment of the eternal God has been made known to the nations to obedience of faith.” This is what God is commanding and requiring. “You now believe in My Son and the work He accomplished on the cross.” So that’s the commandment of the eternal God which is to result in the obedience of faith. That means what? Obeying the command of God to believe in the Gospel that is being presented to you. Paul says that is my ministry, that’s the message I bring.

Back up to John chapter 3. I need to be careful these aren’t works. There are different words used as synonyms. Sometime ago we have done on occasion the synonyms of faith and in John we have some of these synonyms. In John chapter 1, verse 12: “But as many as received Him to them He gave the right to become children of God even those who believe in His name.” So to receive Christ is the same thing as to believe in Christ. It is important here because those are not works as the Scripture considers them that you do to earn salvation. It is simply a response. So receiving Christ, believing in Christ is the same thing.

Come over to John 3, verse 36: “He who believes in the Son has eternal life but he who does not obey the Son will not see life but the wrath of God abides on him.” You see believe and he uses as the opposite of that not unbelief but not obeying. It means who does not believe but the word is not to obey. So that’s what you have to do. People say, “Oh, I want to follow God’s command.” Well, you know where you start? Believe the Gospel. That is the point.

Come over to II Thessalonians chapter 1, II Thessalonians chapter 1and here Paul talks about the coming judgment, verse 6: “For after all it is only just for God to repay with affliction those who afflict you to give relief to those who are afflicted and to us as well when the Lord Jesus will be revealed from heaven with His mighty angels in flaming fire, dealing out retribution to those who do not know God and to those who do not obey the Gospel of our Lord Jesus. These will pay the penalty of eternal destruction away from the presence of the Lord and from the glory of His power.” We see why. They don’t obey the Gospel. What does it mean to obey the Gospel? Believe it, respond in faith to it, recognize you are a sinner and Christ died to pay the penalty for your sin.

When you come back to I Peter, in chapter 2 of I Peter, verse 8: “Christ is a stone of stumbling and a rock of offense for they stumble because they are disobedient to the Word.” There is the issue. The obedience of faith and they are disobedient to the Word. To be obedient to the Word would be to believe the Gospel and to this doom they were appointed. Meaning those who don’t obey or believe the Gospel are appointed to eternal destruction.

In chapter 3, verse 1Peter says, “In the same way you wives be submissive to your own husbands so that even if any of them are disobedient to the Word they may be won without a word by the behavior of the wives;” talking about unbelieving husbands. They are disobedient to the Word; they have not believed the Word at least not yet.

Over in chapter 4, verse 17 of I Peter still. “It is time for judgment to begin with the household of God; and if it begins with us first, what will be the outcome for those who do not obey the Gospel of God?” So obedience of faith is obedience to the Gospel believing it. This is the human side of if you will, salvation, our response.

Back in chapter 1, look at verse 22: “Since you have in obedience to the truth purified your souls.” What does that mean? You believed the Gospel; the obedience of faith. You might say, “Well, the reformed people say “how can an unregenerate person believe?” Well because of the work of the Holy Spirit in moving him and opening his eyes to understand, bring conviction. “When the Spirit comes He will convict the world of sin, righteousness and judgment,” Jesus said before He went to the cross. The Spirit has a convicting work. We bring the truth of God and the Gospel to people so that by the grace of God the Spirit of God might bring that conviction to their heart and mind that causes them to realize, “I am a sinner, I am lost and I need the salvation that is only found in the provision Christ made by His death on the cross for me.”

So in I Peter chapter 1: “We are elect according to the foreknowledge of God by the sanctifying work of the Spirit to obey Jesus Christ and be sprinkled with His blood.” Connected with obeying Christ is the sprinkling. They both go with Jesus Christ, the obedience and sprinkling here. The blood is the blood of Christ. Obeying Christ, sprinkled with His blood is to be sprinkled with the blood and to have the blood applied to you.

Come back to Exodus chapter 24. This is the background; the establishing here of the covenant. Here Moses reaffirming the covenant from God. Verse 3: “Moses came and recounted to the people all the words of the Lord, all the ordinances and all the people answered with one voice that all the words which the Lord has spoken we will do.” Moses wrote down all the words of the Lord and then he rose and built an altar, makes the sacrifices, verses 4 and 5 and then he takes the blood. Verse 6: “He took half of the blood and put it in basins. The other half of the blood he sprinkled on the altar and then he took the book of the covenant and read it in the hearing of the people and they said, ‘all that the Lord has spoken we will do. We will be obedient.’ Moses took the blood and sprinkled it on the people. Behold the blood of the covenant which the Lord has made with you.” So they were becoming the beneficiaries of the covenant and its provisions for them.

Now when you come over to the New Testament, to Hebrews chapter 9, verse 18 and he is talking about the old covenant and the new covenant. Christ, in verse 15, is the Mediator of a new covenant and it provides an eternal inheritance. In verse 16: “Where a covenant is, there must of necessity be the death of the one who made it for a covenant is valid only when men are dead,” and like we have with a will. “Therefore even the first covenant was not inaugurated without blood.” And we just read that and he repeats that quoting in verse 20 from the portion that we just read in Exodus chapter 24. Then he comes to verse 22, the end of it. “Without shedding of blood there is no forgiveness.” So even though the blood of bulls and goats couldn’t take away sin, it was conveying to people the truth; the wages of sin is death. God saying, “when you believe in Me I will graciously provide the cleansing and the sacrifice for you.” And in picture this animal was accepted but in reality as we saw when we studied Hebrews, they were saved because Christ was going to die. But the reminder there, “Without the shedding of blood there is no forgiveness.”

So you come back to Peter and we talk about the cleansing, to be sprinkled with the blood of Christ. Look down in chapter 1, verse 18 of Peter. “Knowing that you were not redeemed with perishable things like silver or gold from your futile way of life inherited from your forefathers but with precious blood, as of a lamb unblemished and spotless, the blood of Christ.”

So verse 22: “In obedience to the truth purified your souls.” Verse 23: “For you have been born again.” All of this tied together so you see the beauty of the picture. God sovereignly chose. And as we noted we want to be clear. You say, well that’s not fair. That’s why he says, “What love is this that God would choose some and not others?” He has the same problem. He looked ahead and saw who was going to believe and who wasn’t. He still went ahead and went through the process and no matter what. They would not believe. God chose. He chose from among sinful men. He didn’t choose from among innocent people. He is not obligated to save sinners. Somehow that eludes some of these writers. Angels sinned and God never provided a Savior for them. Is He not a loving God? Is that a violation of His character? No. So this idea, if God doesn’t save everyone He could, He is not a loving God. He offers salvation to everyone but from among rebellious, sinful people if it wasn’t for His sovereign intervention, no one would respond.

So those who are lost are lost because of their own choice. They refuse to obey the Gospel. Those of us who are saved can’t take any credit because it is by the grace and mercy of God that we have been brought to salvation. That doesn’t mean that I have all the answers to sovereignty and the responsible will of man but it seems that much I can understand. Man is a guilty sinner by birth and by choice. If God sends every single human being ever born to an eternal hell that would manifest His justice. He would still be displaying His love among the other members of the trinity. He has chosen to demonstrate the greatness of His grace and love by exercising His sovereign will to select some to salvation. Let’s face it. We all agree God knew who would believe and who wouldn’t, who was going to hell and who wasn’t before He ever created them. So you could use the same argument. Why would a God of love create people who He knew before He created them were going to go to an eternal hell? I don’t know all the answers. I am not God, He is. I don’t have to have all the answers but I do have to accept what He said. He is God. What He does is just and right. I can understand that. The question really in Scripture is, why would God save wretched, hell deserving sinners? None of us deserve it but it is His grace.

So we are ready to move into the letter and when you come to verse 3 Peter will talk about “Blessing God who according to His great mercy has caused us to be born again.” And we will pick up with that in our next study.

Let’s pray together. Thank You, Lord, for the riches of Your Word and Lord as we study the Word, the longer the walk with You, the more we study Your Word, the more we are in awe and we never plumb the depths of the revelation that You have given. We study it again and again. We see things that weren’t clear to us before. We grow in our knowledge and understanding. Lord, we bow before You as the God who is sovereign, the God who is the God of love, a God of mercy, a God of patience but a God of wrath. Thank You for Your grace in these days. Thank You for the privilege that is ours to belong to You we pray in Christ’s name, amen.