It's funny that you think you proved something here. Not even close. Like a typical premil, you interpret almost everything literally. I believe the "clouds" refer to angels. Just like what we see here:
Matt 24:30 “Then will appear the sign of the Son of Man in heaven. And then all the peoples of the earth will mourn when they see
the Son of Man coming on the clouds of heaven, with power and great glory. 31 And
he will send his angels with a loud trumpet call, and they will gather his elect from the four winds, from one end of the heavens to the other.
In case you don't think the "clouds of heaven" refer to angels, look at this verse (which is about His ascension to heaven rather than 2nd coming):
Daniel 7:13 I saw in the night visions, and, behold,
one like the Son of man came with the clouds of heaven, and came to the Ancient of days, and
they brought him near before him.
What do you think, that Jesus can only return on a cloudy day?
That is speaking of the day Christ returns. He said Himself that He will be coming like a thief:
Rev 16:15
Behold, I come as a thief. Blessed is he that watcheth, and keepeth his garments, lest he walk naked, and they see his shame.
The context of 2 Peter 3:3-13 centers around the day that Christ will come back to bring vengeance down upon those who reject Him. It is speaking of the same event Paul referenced here:
2 Thess 1:6-10
6 God is just: He will pay back trouble to those who trouble you 7 and give relief to you who are troubled, and to us as well.
This will happen when the Lord Jesus is revealed from heaven in blazing fire with his powerful angels. 8 He will punish those who do not know God and do not obey the gospel of our Lord Jesus. 9 They will be punished with everlasting destruction and shut out from the presence of the Lord and from the glory of his might 10
on the day he comes to be glorified in his holy people and to be marveled at among all those who have believed. This includes you, because you believed our testimony to you.
The fire Peter speaks about coming down on the entire earth will come down on the day Jesus returns. The context of what he was talking about is established in verses 3 and 4 where he talks about scoffers scoffing at the idea of Christ coming again. Then right after that he compared the fire that will come down at His coming with the flood that occurred long ago.
After hinting that it may be a long time before Christ returns because of God's desire for everyone to repent (but not a long time to God), Peter then describes how the fire will come down and destroy the heavens and the earth in verses 10-12.
What he says after that in verse 13 is something that I think premils do not take to heart.
13 But i
n keeping with his promise we are looking forward to a new heaven and a new earth, where righteousness dwells.
What promise was Peter referring to here? It's not hard to determine that.
3 Above all, you must understand that
in the last days scoffers will come, scoffing and following their own evil desires. 4
They will say, “Where is this ‘coming’ he promised? Ever since our ancestors died, everything goes on as it has since the beginning of creation.”
Peter was referring to the promise of Jesus coming again. And he said in keeping with the promise of Jesus coming again, "we are looking forward to a new heaven and new earth, where righteousness dwells". He didn't say we are looking forward to a temporal earthly millennial kingdom, we are looking forward to the eternal new heavens and new earth where righteousness dwells and where "there will be no more death, mourning, crying or pain" (Rev 21:1-4).
My kind?
Births and death during that first new heavens and new earth? Where does scripture teach that there's more than one new heavens and new earth? It absolutely does not. Why would there be? What a strange thing to believe. If you read post #24 in this thread you should see that Isaiah 65:17-25 is not speaking of anything different from 2 Peter 3:13 and Rev 21:1-4.
Resorting to seeing them as being two new heavens and 2 new earths instead of taking the time to see how to reconcile the 2 passages that clearly speak of the same thing makes no sense to me.
Tell me, if Isaiah 65:17-25 speaks of a different new heavens and new earth than 2 Peter 3:13 and Rev 21:4, how can it be that there would still be death but no crying during this earthly millennial time period?
Isa 65:17 “See, I will create new heavens and a new earth.
The former things will not be remembered, nor will they come to mind. 18 But be glad and rejoice forever in what I will create, for I will create Jerusalem to be a delight and its people a joy. 19 I will rejoice over Jerusalem and take delight in my people;
the sound of weeping and of crying will be heard in it no more.
Do you think when people die during that time that no one will cry and mourn about it? How would that make any sense?
Notice in verse 17 that it says "the former things will not be remembered, nor will they come to mind". That concept seems familiar. I wonder why? Oh yeah, because that's what it indicates here as well:
Rev 21:Then I saw “a new heaven and a new earth,”
for the first heaven and the first earth had passed away, and there was no longer any sea. 2 I saw the Holy City, the new Jerusalem, coming down out of heaven from God, prepared as a bride beautifully dressed for her husband. 3 And I heard a loud voice from the throne saying, “Look! God’s dwelling place is now among the people, and he will dwell with them. They will be his people, and God himself will be with them and be their God. 4 ‘He will wipe every tear from their eyes. There will be no more death’ or mourning or crying or pain,
for the old order of things has passed away.”
Notice that it doesn't say that the first new heaven and first new earth had passed away. And it doesn't say the second earth and second heaven pass away. It's the first earth and first heaven which is speaking of the current heaven and current earth that we're living on right now. Another piece of evidence against your doctrine.
I think sovereigngrace did a great job of explaining how that verse should be understood in post #24. Please read it again (or for the first time if you haven't read it yet).
It's funny that you interpret that to be saying there will be death at that time and, yet, the preceding verse indicates there would be no crying at that time (just like Rev 21:4). How do you reconcile your understanding of there being death at that time but no crying? Will everyone not care about anyone else at that point or something? "You said my mom and dad died? Oh well. Too bad for them. Whatever.".
Not nearly as silly as thinking it's saying there will be death when the preceding verse says there will be no weeping or crying.
It's very easy to say things like that, but much harder to prove. You definitely have not proven anything here.