- Oct 12, 2020
- 7,394
- 2,496
- Country
- United States
- Faith
- Christian
- Marital Status
- Married
You are trying to say the fire of 2 Peter 3 is not literal? Why is it compared directly to the watery destruction of the global flood in Noah's day then?2Pe 3:10 But the day of the Lord will come as a thief in the night; in the which the heavens shall pass away with a great noise, and the elements shall melt with fervent heat, the earth also and the works that are therein shall be burned up.
You are confusing the fire which burns the heavens and the Earth with the Revelation 20 fire that only burns up people. While the fire which can burn the heavens is NOT literal fire, the fire from God the Father in Revelation 20 is literal and kills literal people.
2 Peter 3:3 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.” 5 But they deliberately forget that long ago by God’s word the heavens came into being and the earth was formed out of water and by water. 6 By these waters also the world of that time was deluged and destroyed. 7 By the same word the present heavens and earth are reserved for fire, being kept for the day of judgment and destruction of the ungodly.
The fact that this fiery destruction will happen at the Lord's second coming is established in verses 3 and 4. In verses 5 and 6 Peter references the global flood of Noah's day that destroyed the earth. Then in verse 7 Peter said "By the same word the present heavens and earth are reserved for fire". Why would he compare something spiritual "by the same word" to something physical?
Notice in verse 7 that he said "By the same word...". That phrase means he was saying his reference to the destruction by fire should be understood in the same sense as the historical destruction by water, which means that the destruction by fire would be physical and global just like the destruction by water long ago.
Jesus said there would be physical destruction at His coming that would be like the physical destruction of Noah's day as well.
Matthew 24:37 As it was in the days of Noah, so it will be at the coming of the Son of Man. 38 For in the days before the flood, people were eating and drinking, marrying and giving in marriage, up to the day Noah entered the ark; 39 and they knew nothing about what would happen until the flood came and took them all away. That is how it will be at the coming of the Son of Man.
So, there is no basis whatsoever for seeing the fire of 2 Peter 3 as being spiritual. Also, Peter said in 2 Peter 3:13 that because of what he said about the burning up of the heavens and earth we are looking forward to the new heavens and new earth. It makes sense that there would be a new heavens and new earth if the current heavens and current earth will be burned up.
You can only blame yourself for indicating the destruction would be by the sword without giving any indication that you meant figuratively by the sword. What was I supposed to think?Your error here is assuming I think the sword is literal and then accusing me of it. This is known as a strawman fallacy.
The symbolism does not have to resemble what it symbolizes in appearance. For example, the dragon with seven heads and ten horns. Does Satan look like a dragon with seven heads and ten horns in reality? I'm pretty sure he doesn't. Another example would be the woman (harlot) who rides on the beast with seven heads and ten horns? Does what that represents in reality resemble a woman riding a beast with seven heads and ten horns? Of course not.I only refer to the sword as a sword because the text does. The symbolism of a sword is vastly different than fire.
I believe Jesus symbolically destroying people with a sword symbolically refers to the fact that He is the Word (John 1) and the sword of the Spirit is the word of God (Eph 6:17) and He will come to take His vengeance by authority of the Word of God which is all about Him.
See above. I don't believe the sword is intended to symbolize His method of destruction at all. I believe it symbolizes His authority as the King of kings and Lord of lords to take vengeance on His enemies.If you wanted to describe killing someone with fire, why use the imagery of a sword? Would you use the imagery of a sword to depict killing someone with water or ice? A sword in the mouth is symbolic of words. He likely shouts at the people and they die.
Your insistence that the symbols must resemble what they symbolize is a big mistake on your part. I gave examples where symbols in Revelation do not resemble what they symbolize in reality. Can you take that information and reconsider how you go about interpreting the symbols?
Upvote
0