I can still clearly remember the gasps in that Sunday school classroom when the people first discovered that I was—a Calvinist! The look on each of their faces betrayed an obvious sense of disappointment that someone in their midst had the audacity to believe in such an archaic and cruel dogma. After all, who in this day and age truly believes that God is in control of the destiny of His creation, and worse, would admit to it? I had only been attending this small church for several weeks, yet the people thought I was of like mind—but were obviously mistaken.

The teacher sat it stunned silence and was perhaps a bit taken aback by the fact that he even had to defend such an obvious truth, that is, synergism. Finally, he looked at me and stated confidently, "God does not want anyone to perish but wants all to come to repentance." So that was it. End of discussion. Two thousand years of debate overthrown by simply citing 2 Peter 3:9 out of context. Alas, he was not the first to muster this response against the doctrines of grace nor will he be the last. It does seem that many resort to this passage when arguing against Calvinism. The problem, however, is not citing verses per se, but selectively proof-texting verses out of context. It is hard to know whether or not that man ever walked through that passage from Peter’s epistle, but if he had, I am confident that he would have discovered the reality is something far different from his interpretation. Let’s consider the verse:

"The Lord is not slow about His promise, as some count slowness, but is patient toward you, not wishing for any to perish but for all to come to repentance" (2 Pet 3:9).

Now when we read of God’s patience and not wanting any to perish Peter is simply reminding us that God is benevolent and loving. That is to say, God does not delight in the eternal damnation of His creatures any more so than a father delights in punishing his son. The interpretation, however, that many insist on from this passage is that God is not willing to send anyone to hell. The practical conclusion stemming from this line of thinking is therefore that God does all He can do in order to persuade humans to believe in Him—but leaves the final decision with man.

The image that immediately comes to mind is one of a parent desperately pleading with his child to obey him—just as I witnessed not too long ago at the store. A young mother was frazzled with her unruly children running up and down the aisles. She kept warning that they would be in trouble when they got home, her voice sounding more firm and agitated each time she admonished them. I truly felt pity for her, because she wanted to control her children but was unable. And that is precisely how the Synergist’s view represents God. He is like that parent pleading with His children to obey Him but is unwilling and unable to do anything about it. Is this supposed to uplift the character of God and to make us feel good about the great Sovereign of the universe? Does this truly glorify God? I would submit to you that it does not.

The real controversy in this passage, just as in others such as John 3:16, is the interpretation of universalistic words. That is to say, just as it can be demonstrated that world is used in a myriad of ways by the apostle, the words any and all must be qualified in their immediate context. Let's consider specifically how these two terms are used in Peter’s passage starting with the first phrase of the verse.

The Lord is not slow about His promise. We must here ask: What is the promise to which Peter refers? To answer this question we must look back to verses three and four where we read, "knowing this first of all, that scoffers will come in the last days with scoffing, following their own sinful desires. They will say, ‘Where is the promise of his coming? For ever since the fathers fell asleep, all things are continuing as they were from the beginning of creation’" (2 Pet 3:3–4). Peter’s words indicate that there were scoffers who denied that Jesus would return to earth. Many mocked the Christian belief that Christ was to return visibly and bodily for His elect. "Where is his coming?" they challenged. Peter responded to this charge by reminding his fellow believers that, "The Lord is not slow about His promise, as some count slowness, but is patient toward you."

Peter here alludes to the Old Testament prophecy of Habakkuk: "For the vision is yet for the appointed time; it hastens toward the goal and it will not fail though it tarries, wait for it; for it will certainly come, it will not delay (Hab 2:3). Similarly, the author of Hebrews also quotes from this prophecy when he reminds his readers "for yet in a very little while, He who is coming will come, and will not delay (Heb 10:37). The question should then be asked: Why does God delay His return? Is it a matter of indifference or apathy on the part of God?

Peter answers by telling us two things about God, specifically what God is and what God is not. First, God is not indifferent and will keep His promise. And second, that God is patient to us. Now the us of this epistle are the readers, that is those who obtained a like precious faith in and through Jesus Christ (cf. 2 Pet 1:1). The apostle was not teaching universalism but was addressing those elect who believed on Jesus Christ as the Redeemer.

God’s patience in returning lies in His sovereign grace and mercy towards sinners. He is delaying His return so that the unbelievers are given time to repent of their sins. Once the Lord returns there will be no further opportunity to repent and to believe on the Lamb who takes away the sin of the world.

Once we understand the context in which the words were written the verse takes on a completely different meaning. That the Lord does not want any to perish is simply another way of stating that the Lord will delay His return until all of the elect have come to believe. So we could say that God has not forgotten about His promise to return, but is purposefully delaying the Second Coming so that all of His people have the opportunity to come to repentance, because He does not wish for any of the elect to perish but for all the elect to repent and to believe.

So returning to the different usage of any and all throughout Scripture, consider some biblical examples of how each can be and has been used. For instance, it was said of John the Baptist that when he preached, "all the country of Judea was going out to him, and all the people of Jerusalem; and they were being baptized by him in the Jordan River, confessing their sins" (Mark 1:5). Similarly, we read that after Peter and John healed the lame man "all men glorified God for that which was done" (Acts 4:21 KJV). Jesus also used this type of language when He told the disciples, "you will be hated by all because of My name" (Luke 21:17).

In each these cases, it is unmistakable that the context in which all is used does not support the belief in all of humanity without exception. Each verse qualifies how the term is to be interpreted—just as the case with 2 Peter 3:9.

All-inclusive words must be carefully examined in context and are not always used in an all-inclusive sense. This is why cross-referencing is important when examining passages to discover what the text actually says. Anyone can take a passage from the Bible and alter the meaning to support a particular theological paradigm. We must have enough respect for God and His Word that we seek to honor Him by properly exegeting the God-breathed Scriptures.