2 Peter 3:10-12. Not when but how?

[DavidPT]

2 Peter 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.
11 Seeing then that all these things shall be dissolved, what manner of persons ought ye to be in all holy conversation and godliness,
12 Looking for and hasting unto the coming of the day of God, wherein the heavens being on fire shall be dissolved, and the elements shall melt with fervent heat?

It's not a question of when since it will happen, though that too is apparently debatable as to when, what I want to focus on in this thread is how this is fulfilled. Such as. Should we take all or some of this in a literal sense? Or should we take none of it in a literal sense?

2 Peter 3:5 For this they willingly are ignorant of, that by the word of God the heavens were of old, and the earth standing out of the water and in the water:
6 Whereby the world that then was, being overflowed with water, perished:
7 But the heavens and the earth, which are now, by the same word are kept in store, reserved unto fire against the day of judgment and perdition of ungodly men.

Some interpreters take verse 5 and 6 to be referring to Genesis 1:1-2, thus allegedly supporting their gap theory. But is that what Peter took it to mean? To determine that one must look at some of what Peter said in his earlier writings. Such as the following.

2 Peter 2:3 And through covetousness shall they with feigned words make merchandise of you: whose judgment now of a long time lingereth not, and their damnation slumbereth not.
4 For if God spared not the angels that sinned, but cast them down to hell, and delivered them into chains of darkness, to be reserved unto judgment;
5 And spared not the old world, but saved Noah the eighth person, a preacher of righteousness, bringing in the flood upon the world of the ungodly;
6 And turning the cities of Sodom and Gomorrha into ashes condemned them with an overthrow, making them an ensample unto those that after should live ungodly;


No interpreter is going to get confused here and think verse 5 is pertaining to Genesis 1:1-2 and an alleged gap. It is crystal clear that Noah's flood is meant here. This verse helps us to correctly interpret 2 Peter 3:5-6, where most of us already correctly interpret 2 Peter 3:5-6 to begin with, yet some don't. I know that for a fact because I have encountered interpreters in the past, even on this board, taking 2 Peter 3:5-6 to be involving Genesis 1:1-2 rather than Noah's flood.

In light of 2 Peter 2:5, 2 Peter 3:5-6 should be understood like such.

For this they willingly are ignorant of, that by the word of God the heavens were of old, and the earth standing out of the water and in the water: Whereby the world that then was(the old world, the world of the ungodly), being overflowed with water, perished

In 2 Peter 3:5-6, world and earth are not the same Greek word. World is this Greek word--kosmos

kosmos
kos'-mos
probably from the base of komizw - komizo 2865; orderly arrangement, i.e. decoration; by implication, the world (in a wide or narrow sense, including its inhabitants, literally or figuratively (morally)):--adorning, world.


Earth is the Greek word ge and is meaning the land. It is not the land that perished, it is the world of the ungodly that perished. And how did they perish? By literally being drowned to death via literal water by way of rain. None of this involved 24 hours or less, though. This involved days. We need to keep this in mind since this could mean 2 Peter 3:10-12 also involves more than a single 24 hour day or less.

Now we come to verse 7 in 2 Peter 3.

2 Peter 3:7 But the heavens and the earth, which are now, by the same word are kept in store, reserved unto fire against the day of judgment and perdition of ungodly men.

We know that during Noah's flood that it involved literal water accomplishing the task. Does that automatically mean, since fire is mentioned in verse 7, the fire will be just as literal as the water was? Except this time no one will be drowning to death, they will be burning to death, thus cremated, thus leaving nothing but ashes remaining.

Assuming that scenario, are there any other passages in the OT or the NT that support that, that at the 2nd coming everyone but the saved will be cremated, therefore leaving nothing but ashes remaining? I can maybe see Revelation 20:9 supporting one being turned to ashes, but is Revelation 20:9 even involving what 2 Peter 3:10-12 is involving?

Let's assume it might be. I don't see how any of that would have to involve the entire planet going up in flames, though. That passage doesn't have animals, for example, coming against the camp of the saints. Why does the entire planet need to be ablaze which would mean animals are being punished as well? And what about infants and children up to a certain age? Would they be coming against the camp of the saints as well? Probably not, right? So why would they deserve to be burned to death with the rest, this assuming the entire planet is literally ablaze?

Keeping in mind, per Noah's flood God spared no one but those aboard the ark. Actually though, He obviously spared some not on the ark as well unless one wants to think there were sharks, whales, every kind of fish, so on and so on, also aboard the ark. Can you even drown creatures when water is their natural habitat to begin with?

Here are some quick observations on my part which might connect some of 2 Peter 3, some of Revelation 6, and some of Isaiah 34 with each other, or maybe not. I'm guessing that no one would take any of these things recorded in Revelation 6 and Isaiah 34 in a literal sense, so why take any of what is recorded in 2 Peter 3:10-12 in the literal sense if there is a connection between all these accounts?

wherein the heavens being on fire shall be dissolved(2 Peter 3:12)----And all the host of heaven shall be dissolved(Isaiah 34:4)----and the heavens shall be rolled together as a scroll(Isaiah 34:4)----And the heaven departed as a scroll when it is rolled together(Revelation 6:14)----and all their host shall fall down, as the leaf falleth off from the vine, and as a falling fig from the fig tree(Isaiah 34:4)---And the stars of heaven fell unto the earth, even as a fig tree casteth her untimely figs, when she is shaken of a mighty wind((Revelation 6:13).

 

[Spiritual Jew]

2 Peter 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.
11 Seeing then that all these things shall be dissolved, what manner of persons ought ye to be in all holy conversation and godliness,
12 Looking for and hasting unto the coming of the day of God, wherein the heavens being on fire shall be dissolved, and the elements shall melt with fervent heat?

It's not a question of when since it will happen, though that too is apparently debatable as to when, what I want to focus on in this thread is how this is fulfilled. Such as. Should we take all or some of this in a literal sense? Or should we take none of it in a literal sense?

2 Peter 3:5 For this they willingly are ignorant of, that by the word of God the heavens were of old, and the earth standing out of the water and in the water:
6 Whereby the world that then was, being overflowed with water, perished:
7 But the heavens and the earth, which are now, by the same word are kept in store, reserved unto fire against the day of judgment and perdition of ungodly men.

Some interpreters take verse 5 and 6 to be referring to Genesis 1:1-2, thus allegedly supporting their gap theory. But is that what Peter took it to mean? To determine that one must look at some of what Peter said in his earlier writings. Such as the following.

2 Peter 2:3 And through covetousness shall they with feigned words make merchandise of you: whose judgment now of a long time lingereth not, and their damnation slumbereth not.
4 For if God spared not the angels that sinned, but cast them down to hell, and delivered them into chains of darkness, to be reserved unto judgment;
5 And spared not the old world, but saved Noah the eighth person, a preacher of righteousness, bringing in the flood upon the world of the ungodly;
6 And turning the cities of Sodom and Gomorrha into ashes condemned them with an overthrow, making them an ensample unto those that after should live ungodly;


No interpreter is going to get confused here and think verse 5 is pertaining to Genesis 1:1-2 and an alleged gap. It is crystal clear that Noah's flood is meant here.

I believe that is so clear that even mentioning that other belief that people have is a waste of time. It's ludicrous to think that it's talking about anything but the flood becaues it clearly talks about the waters destroying the world. Genesis 1:1-2 obviously has nothing to do with destroying the world, but Noah's flood obviously did.

This verse helps us to correctly interpret 2 Peter 3:5-6, where most of us already correctly interpret 2 Peter 3:5-6 to begin with, yet some don't. I know that for a fact because I have encountered interpreters in the past, even on this board, taking 2 Peter 3:5-6 to be involving Genesis 1:1-2 rather than Noah's flood.

In light of 2 Peter 2:5, 2 Peter 3:5-6 should be understood like such.

For this they willingly are ignorant of, that by the word of God the heavens were of old, and the earth standing out of the water and in the water: Whereby the world that then was(the old world, the world of the ungodly), being overflowed with water, perished

In 2 Peter 3:5-6, world and earth are not the same Greek word. World is this Greek word--kosmos

kosmos
kos'-mos
probably from the base of komizw - komizo 2865; orderly arrangement, i.e. decoration; by implication, the world (in a wide or narrow sense, including its inhabitants, literally or figuratively (morally)):--adorning, world.


Earth is the Greek word ge and is meaning the land. It is not the land that perished, it is the world of the ungodly that perished. And how did they perish? By literally being drowned to death via literal water by way of rain. None of this involved 24 hours or less, though. This involved days. We need to keep this in mind since this could mean 2 Peter 3:10-12 also involves more than a single 24 hour day or less.

How long the flood took to drown everyone is completely irrelevant. There is no indication in the text itself that Peter was making any kind of point about how long it took for the flood waters to destroy the ungodly. It seems that the only reason you are bringing that up is because of doctrinal bias rather than because of anything Peter said to indicate that the amount of time the flood took to destroy the ungodly had anything to do with the point he was making. Instead, he was just making the point that the last days scoffers, who scoff at the idea of Christ's second coming, were willfully ignorant of the fact that the flood had taken place in the past and destroyed all the ungodly people on earth who were unbelievers like them.

Now we come to verse 7 in 2 Peter 3.

2 Peter 3:7 But the heavens and the earth, which are now, by the same word are kept in store, reserved unto fire against the day of judgment and perdition of ungodly men.

We know that during Noah's flood that it involved literal water accomplishing the task. Does that automatically mean, since fire is mentioned in verse 7, the fire will be just as literal as the water was? Except this time no one will be drowning to death, they will be burning to death, thus cremated, thus leaving nothing but ashes remaining.

Yes, it does, because after mentioning the destruction caused by the global flood waters he then said "But the heavens and the earth, which are now, BY THE SAME WORD are kept in store, reserved unto fire". Him saying "by the same word" indicates that he was making a direct comparison between a future event and that past event which means both events were of the same scope (global) and type (literal and physical).

How would it make any sense for him to compare a non-literal, non-physical event to a literal, physical event? It wouldn't. He was clearly comparing two similar events.

Assuming that scenario, are there any other passages in the OT or the NT that support that, that at the 2nd coming everyone but the saved will be cremated, therefore leaving nothing but ashes remaining? I can maybe see Revelation 20:9 supporting one being turned to ashes, but is Revelation 20:9 even involving what 2 Peter 3:10-12 is involving?

Yes, it is. And, while there may not be other scripture which specifically describes the destruction as being by fire, there is plenty of other scripture which indicates that the heavens and earth and all unbelievers will be destroyed at His return including the following passage where, like Peter, Jesus compared the destruction that will occur at His second coming to the destruction that occurred because of the flood in Noah's day. And He even indicated that heaven and earth will pass away at that time as well.

Matthew 24:35 Heaven and earth shall pass away, but my words shall not pass away. 36 But of that day and hour knoweth no man, no, not the angels of heaven, but my Father only. 37 But as the days of Noah were, so shall also the coming of the Son of man be. 38 For as in the days that were before the flood they were eating and drinking, marrying and giving in marriage, until the day that Noe entered into the ark, 39 And knew not until the flood came, and took them all away; so shall also the coming of the Son of man be.

First, Jesus pointed out that heaven and earth will pass away, then He pointed out that the flood came and destroyed all unbelievers the day that Noah entered the ark, and then He pointed out that it would be just like that at the coming of the Son of man, which means that all unbelievers will be killed at His second coming just as they were in the flood.

Why would you not want to take what Jesus taught into consideration when interpreting 2 Peter 3? Was Jesus comparing something non-literal to the flood or was He comparing literal, physical destruction to the flood? He clearly was comparing literal, physical destruction that will occur at His second coming to what happened with the flood. So, what basis is there for thinking that Peter wasn't doing the same thing?

Let's assume it might be. I don't see how any of that would have to involve the entire planet going up in flames, though.

Why not?

That passage doesn't have animals, for example, coming against the camp of the saints. Why does the entire planet need to be ablaze which would mean animals are being punished as well?

I suppose it doesn't have to be, but tell me how else the new earth will come about and how all the wicked things on the earth will be removed if not by way of the earth being burned up and renewed?

And what about infants and children up to a certain age? Would they be coming against the camp of the saints as well? Probably not, right?

Of course not.

So why would they deserve to be burned to death with the rest, this assuming the entire planet is literally ablaze?

Maybe they won't be, but that's up to God. We know infants and children were killed in the flood, though, so we can only speculate on this. I find this to be irrelevant in terms of determining if it's talking about the entire earth being burned up or not, though. If God wants to spare animals and/or infants and children, He certainly can do that, but that really has nothing to do with whether or not He is going to burn up the entire earth. Peter said He is. Why not accept it while at the same time realizing that He can easily spare some animals and the infants and children if He wants to.

Keeping in mind, per Noah's flood God spared no one but those aboard the ark. Actually though, He obviously spared some not on the ark as well unless one wants to think there were sharks, whales, every kind of fish, so on and so on, also aboard the ark. Can you even drown creatures when water is their natural habitat to begin with?

That's not people, but okay.

Here are some quick observations on my part which might connect some of 2 Peter 3, some of Revelation 6, and some of Isaiah 34 with each other, or maybe not. I'm guessing that no one would take any of these things recorded in Revelation 6 and Isaiah 34 in a literal sense, so why take any of what is recorded in 2 Peter 3:10-12 in the literal sense if there is a connection between all these accounts?

Because it's all about context. The context of 2 Peter 3 is very clearly literal while the context of Revelation 6 is clearly not. The book of Revelation is a highly symbolic book (Isaiah has more of an equal mix of literal and symbolic text) while 2 Peter is not. You can't just ignore that.

wherein the heavens being on fire shall be dissolved(2 Peter 3:12)----And all the host of heaven shall be dissolved(Isaiah 34:4)----and the heavens shall be rolled together as a scroll(Isaiah 34:4)----And the heaven departed as a scroll when it is rolled together(Revelation 6:14)----and all their host shall fall down, as the leaf falleth off from the vine, and as a falling fig from the fig tree(Isaiah 34:4)---And the stars of heaven fell unto the earth, even as a fig tree casteth her untimely figs, when she is shaken of a mighty wind((Revelation 6:13).

What are you thinking you're proving here? You need to look at the context of 2 Peter 3 itself. Just because another passage might talk about the heavens and earth in a figurative way does not at all mean that 2 Peter 3 has to be talking about them in the same way. The context of 2 Peter 3 is clearly about literal things, so why try to change that?

 

[Gregory Thompson]

What if it was like a movie?

 

[Clare73]

I believe that is so clear that even mentioning that other belief that people have is a waste of time. It's ludicrous to think that it's talking about anything but the flood becaues it clearly talks about the waters destroying the world. Genesis 1:1-2 obviously has nothing to do with destroying the world, but Noah's flood obviously did.

How long the flood took to drown everyone is completely irrelevant. There is no indication in the text itself that Peter was making any kind of point about how long it took for the flood waters to destroy the ungodly. It seems that the only reason you are bringing that up is because of doctrinal bias rather than because of anything Peter said to indicate that the amount of time the flood took to destroy the ungodly had anything to do with the point he was making. Instead, he was just making the point that the last days scoffers, who scoff at the idea of Christ's second coming, were willfully ignorant of the fact that the flood had taken place in the past and destroyed all the ungodly people on earth who were unbelievers like them.

Yes, it does, because after mentioning the destruction caused by the global flood waters he then said "But the heavens and the earth, which are now, BY THE SAME WORD are kept in store, reserved unto fire". Him saying "by the same word" indicates that he was making a direct comparison between a future event and that past event which means both events were of the same scope (global) and type (literal and physical).

How would it make any sense for him to compare a non-literal, non-physical event to a literal, physical event? It wouldn't. He was clearly comparing two similar events.

Yes, it is. And, while there may not be other scripture which specifically describes the destruction as being by fire, there is plenty of other scripture which indicates that the heavens and earth and all unbelievers will be destroyed at His return including the following passage where, like Peter, Jesus compared the destruction that will occur at His second coming to the destruction that occurred because of the flood in Noah's day. And He even indicated that heaven and earth will pass away at that time as well.

Matthew 24:35 Heaven and earth shall pass away, but my words shall not pass away. 36 But of that day and hour knoweth no man, no, not the angels of heaven, but my Father only. 37 But as the days of Noah were, so shall also the coming of the Son of man be. 38 For as in the days that were before the flood they were eating and drinking, marrying and giving in marriage, until the day that Noe entered into the ark, 39 And knew not until the flood came, and took them all away; so shall also the coming of the Son of man be.

First, Jesus pointed out that heaven and earth will pass away, then He pointed out that the flood came and destroyed all unbelievers the day that Noah entered the ark, and then He pointed out that it would be just like that at the coming of the Son of man, which means that all unbelievers will be killed at His second coming just as they were in the flood.

Why would you not want to take what Jesus taught into consideration when interpreting 2 Peter 3? Was Jesus comparing something non-literal to the flood or was He comparing literal, physical destruction to the flood? He clearly was comparing literal, physical destruction that will occur at His second coming to what happened with the flood. So, what basis is there for thinking that Peter wasn't doing the same thing?

Why not?

I suppose it doesn't have to be, but tell me how else the new earth will come about and how all the wicked things on the earth will be removed if not by way of the earth being burned up and renewed?

Of course not.

Maybe they won't be, but that's up to God. We know infants and children were killed in the flood, though, so we can only speculate on this. I find this to be irrelevant in terms of determining if it's talking about the entire earth being burned up or not, though. If God wants to spare animals and/or infants and children, He certainly can do that, but that really has nothing to do with whether or not He is going to burn up the entire earth. Peter said He is. Why not accept it while at the same time realizing that He can easily spare some animals and the infants and children if He wants to.

That's not people, but okay.

Because it's all about context. The context of 2 Peter 3 is very clearly literal while the context of Revelation 6 is clearly not. The book of Revelation is a highly symbolic book (Isaiah has more of an equal mix of literal and symbolic text) while 2 Peter is not. You can't just ignore that.

What are you thinking you're proving here? You need to look at the context of 2 Peter 3 itself. Just because another passage might talk about the heavens and earth in a figurative way does not at all mean that 2 Peter 3 has to be talking about them in the same way. The context of 2 Peter 3 is clearly about literal things, so why try to change that?

. . .

 

[sovereigngrace]

2 Peter 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.
11 Seeing then that all these things shall be dissolved, what manner of persons ought ye to be in all holy conversation and godliness,
12 Looking for and hasting unto the coming of the day of God, wherein the heavens being on fire shall be dissolved, and the elements shall melt with fervent heat?

It's not a question of when since it will happen, though that too is apparently debatable as to when, what I want to focus on in this thread is how this is fulfilled. Such as. Should we take all or some of this in a literal sense? Or should we take none of it in a literal sense?

2 Peter 3:5 For this they willingly are ignorant of, that by the word of God the heavens were of old, and the earth standing out of the water and in the water:
6 Whereby the world that then was, being overflowed with water, perished:
7 But the heavens and the earth, which are now, by the same word are kept in store, reserved unto fire against the day of judgment and perdition of ungodly men.

Some interpreters take verse 5 and 6 to be referring to Genesis 1:1-2, thus allegedly supporting their gap theory. But is that what Peter took it to mean? To determine that one must look at some of what Peter said in his earlier writings. Such as the following.

2 Peter 2:3 And through covetousness shall they with feigned words make merchandise of you: whose judgment now of a long time lingereth not, and their damnation slumbereth not.
4 For if God spared not the angels that sinned, but cast them down to hell, and delivered them into chains of darkness, to be reserved unto judgment;
5 And spared not the old world, but saved Noah the eighth person, a preacher of righteousness, bringing in the flood upon the world of the ungodly;
6 And turning the cities of Sodom and Gomorrha into ashes condemned them with an overthrow, making them an ensample unto those that after should live ungodly;


No interpreter is going to get confused here and think verse 5 is pertaining to Genesis 1:1-2 and an alleged gap. It is crystal clear that Noah's flood is meant here. This verse helps us to correctly interpret 2 Peter 3:5-6, where most of us already correctly interpret 2 Peter 3:5-6 to begin with, yet some don't. I know that for a fact because I have encountered interpreters in the past, even on this board, taking 2 Peter 3:5-6 to be involving Genesis 1:1-2 rather than Noah's flood.

In light of 2 Peter 2:5, 2 Peter 3:5-6 should be understood like such.

For this they willingly are ignorant of, that by the word of God the heavens were of old, and the earth standing out of the water and in the water: Whereby the world that then was(the old world, the world of the ungodly), being overflowed with water, perished

In 2 Peter 3:5-6, world and earth are not the same Greek word. World is this Greek word--kosmos

kosmos
kos'-mos
probably from the base of komizw - komizo 2865; orderly arrangement, i.e. decoration; by implication, the world (in a wide or narrow sense, including its inhabitants, literally or figuratively (morally)):--adorning, world.


Earth is the Greek word ge and is meaning the land. It is not the land that perished, it is the world of the ungodly that perished. And how did they perish? By literally being drowned to death via literal water by way of rain. None of this involved 24 hours or less, though. This involved days. We need to keep this in mind since this could mean 2 Peter 3:10-12 also involves more than a single 24 hour day or less.

Now we come to verse 7 in 2 Peter 3.

2 Peter 3:7 But the heavens and the earth, which are now, by the same word are kept in store, reserved unto fire against the day of judgment and perdition of ungodly men.

We know that during Noah's flood that it involved literal water accomplishing the task. Does that automatically mean, since fire is mentioned in verse 7, the fire will be just as literal as the water was? Except this time no one will be drowning to death, they will be burning to death, thus cremated, thus leaving nothing but ashes remaining.

Assuming that scenario, are there any other passages in the OT or the NT that support that, that at the 2nd coming everyone but the saved will be cremated, therefore leaving nothing but ashes remaining? I can maybe see Revelation 20:9 supporting one being turned to ashes, but is Revelation 20:9 even involving what 2 Peter 3:10-12 is involving?

Let's assume it might be. I don't see how any of that would have to involve the entire planet going up in flames, though. That passage doesn't have animals, for example, coming against the camp of the saints. Why does the entire planet need to be ablaze which would mean animals are being punished as well? And what about infants and children up to a certain age? Would they be coming against the camp of the saints as well? Probably not, right? So why would they deserve to be burned to death with the rest, this assuming the entire planet is literally ablaze?

Keeping in mind, per Noah's flood God spared no one but those aboard the ark. Actually though, He obviously spared some not on the ark as well unless one wants to think there were sharks, whales, every kind of fish, so on and so on, also aboard the ark. Can you even drown creatures when water is their natural habitat to begin with?

Here are some quick observations on my part which might connect some of 2 Peter 3, some of Revelation 6, and some of Isaiah 34 with each other, or maybe not. I'm guessing that no one would take any of these things recorded in Revelation 6 and Isaiah 34 in a literal sense, so why take any of what is recorded in 2 Peter 3:10-12 in the literal sense if there is a connection between all these accounts?

wherein the heavens being on fire shall be dissolved(2 Peter 3:12)----And all the host of heaven shall be dissolved(Isaiah 34:4)----and the heavens shall be rolled together as a scroll(Isaiah 34:4)----And the heaven departed as a scroll when it is rolled together(Revelation 6:14)----and all their host shall fall down, as the leaf falleth off from the vine, and as a falling fig from the fig tree(Isaiah 34:4)---And the stars of heaven fell unto the earth, even as a fig tree casteth her untimely figs, when she is shaken of a mighty wind((Revelation 6:13).

So what is your argument? You mistakenly claim: "I'm guessing that no one would take any of these things recorded in Revelation 6 and Isaiah 34 in a literal sense, so why take any of what is recorded in 2 Peter 3:10-12 in the literal sense if there is a connection between all these accounts?"

That is absurd. So, your evidence is that no one takes Revelation 6 and Isaiah 34 "in a literal sense" is proof that they are not literal and neither is 2 Peter 3. Where do you glean this conclusion? Nowhere! You simply invented this fallacy. This is as clear a case of circular reasoning (or a logical fallacy) as i have seen on this forum. Basically, you have zero grounds to spiritualize away the literal fire so you invent a false premise to support your personal opinion.

Of course, it seems like your motive for pushing this is your misplaced long-held opinion that God would never destroy "infants" or "children up to a certain age." This is so wrong. He has done it many times in Scripture. Why would He not do it again? Why do you limit God?

You need to take that up with God. Do a little research and you will see that. Let the Bible speak for itself and stop trying to interpret every text in the light of your (flawed) opinion of Revelation 20. There is such an incredible bias in how you approach every text. You force a Premil millennium into every text when the reality is: it is not there.

The only problem is, I haven't found anyone that can show me Scripture that teaches that babies miss the catching away and are left behind to enter a future millennial kingdom. Moreover, I can't find anything in the Word that would remotely support such a claim. Nothing. Maybe you can address these questions.

1. As the destruction of Noah’s day is given as a powerful picture of the second coming, how many children that were locked outside the ark below the age of accountability at the time of the flood survived?
2. As the destruction of Sodom is given as an accurate picture of the second coming, how many children that were left in Sodom below the age of accountability at the time of the fiery destruction in Sodom survived?
3. Since you obviously believe that children under the age of accountability do not warrant resurrection bodies at the second coming, and since also they have not had the opportunity or ability to choose Christ yet, what do you do with the billions of children throughout the history of the world who have died prior to the age of accountability?
4. Will they too be excluded from the resurrection that occurs at the second coming?
5. If not, when does the Scripture teach they will be ‘re-mortalized’ so they can decide to accept Christ?
6. Does Christ not accept them in their innocence?

 

[sovereigngrace]

2 Peter 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.
11 Seeing then that all these things shall be dissolved, what manner of persons ought ye to be in all holy conversation and godliness,
12 Looking for and hasting unto the coming of the day of God, wherein the heavens being on fire shall be dissolved, and the elements shall melt with fervent heat?

It's not a question of when since it will happen, though that too is apparently debatable as to when, what I want to focus on in this thread is how this is fulfilled. Such as. Should we take all or some of this in a literal sense? Or should we take none of it in a literal sense?

2 Peter 3:5 For this they willingly are ignorant of, that by the word of God the heavens were of old, and the earth standing out of the water and in the water:
6 Whereby the world that then was, being overflowed with water, perished:
7 But the heavens and the earth, which are now, by the same word are kept in store, reserved unto fire against the day of judgment and perdition of ungodly men.

Some interpreters take verse 5 and 6 to be referring to Genesis 1:1-2, thus allegedly supporting their gap theory. But is that what Peter took it to mean? To determine that one must look at some of what Peter said in his earlier writings. Such as the following.

2 Peter 2:3 And through covetousness shall they with feigned words make merchandise of you: whose judgment now of a long time lingereth not, and their damnation slumbereth not.
4 For if God spared not the angels that sinned, but cast them down to hell, and delivered them into chains of darkness, to be reserved unto judgment;
5 And spared not the old world, but saved Noah the eighth person, a preacher of righteousness, bringing in the flood upon the world of the ungodly;
6 And turning the cities of Sodom and Gomorrha into ashes condemned them with an overthrow, making them an ensample unto those that after should live ungodly;


No interpreter is going to get confused here and think verse 5 is pertaining to Genesis 1:1-2 and an alleged gap. It is crystal clear that Noah's flood is meant here. This verse helps us to correctly interpret 2 Peter 3:5-6, where most of us already correctly interpret 2 Peter 3:5-6 to begin with, yet some don't. I know that for a fact because I have encountered interpreters in the past, even on this board, taking 2 Peter 3:5-6 to be involving Genesis 1:1-2 rather than Noah's flood.

In light of 2 Peter 2:5, 2 Peter 3:5-6 should be understood like such.

For this they willingly are ignorant of, that by the word of God the heavens were of old, and the earth standing out of the water and in the water: Whereby the world that then was(the old world, the world of the ungodly), being overflowed with water, perished

In 2 Peter 3:5-6, world and earth are not the same Greek word. World is this Greek word--kosmos

kosmos
kos'-mos
probably from the base of komizw - komizo 2865; orderly arrangement, i.e. decoration; by implication, the world (in a wide or narrow sense, including its inhabitants, literally or figuratively (morally)):--adorning, world.


Earth is the Greek word ge and is meaning the land. It is not the land that perished, it is the world of the ungodly that perished. And how did they perish? By literally being drowned to death via literal water by way of rain. None of this involved 24 hours or less, though. This involved days. We need to keep this in mind since this could mean 2 Peter 3:10-12 also involves more than a single 24 hour day or less.

Now we come to verse 7 in 2 Peter 3.

2 Peter 3:7 But the heavens and the earth, which are now, by the same word are kept in store, reserved unto fire against the day of judgment and perdition of ungodly men.

We know that during Noah's flood that it involved literal water accomplishing the task. Does that automatically mean, since fire is mentioned in verse 7, the fire will be just as literal as the water was? Except this time no one will be drowning to death, they will be burning to death, thus cremated, thus leaving nothing but ashes remaining.

Assuming that scenario, are there any other passages in the OT or the NT that support that, that at the 2nd coming everyone but the saved will be cremated, therefore leaving nothing but ashes remaining? I can maybe see Revelation 20:9 supporting one being turned to ashes, but is Revelation 20:9 even involving what 2 Peter 3:10-12 is involving?

Let's assume it might be. I don't see how any of that would have to involve the entire planet going up in flames, though. That passage doesn't have animals, for example, coming against the camp of the saints. Why does the entire planet need to be ablaze which would mean animals are being punished as well? And what about infants and children up to a certain age? Would they be coming against the camp of the saints as well? Probably not, right? So why would they deserve to be burned to death with the rest, this assuming the entire planet is literally ablaze?

Keeping in mind, per Noah's flood God spared no one but those aboard the ark. Actually though, He obviously spared some not on the ark as well unless one wants to think there were sharks, whales, every kind of fish, so on and so on, also aboard the ark. Can you even drown creatures when water is their natural habitat to begin with?

Here are some quick observations on my part which might connect some of 2 Peter 3, some of Revelation 6, and some of Isaiah 34 with each other, or maybe not. I'm guessing that no one would take any of these things recorded in Revelation 6 and Isaiah 34 in a literal sense, so why take any of what is recorded in 2 Peter 3:10-12 in the literal sense if there is a connection between all these accounts?

wherein the heavens being on fire shall be dissolved(2 Peter 3:12)----And all the host of heaven shall be dissolved(Isaiah 34:4)----and the heavens shall be rolled together as a scroll(Isaiah 34:4)----And the heaven departed as a scroll when it is rolled together(Revelation 6:14)----and all their host shall fall down, as the leaf falleth off from the vine, and as a falling fig from the fig tree(Isaiah 34:4)---And the stars of heaven fell unto the earth, even as a fig tree casteth her untimely figs, when she is shaken of a mighty wind((Revelation 6:13).

The writer is very careful to compare the judgment of this world at the end by fire to the previous wholesale judgment of the world in Noah’s day by water. In fact, both 1 and 2 Peter make a linkage between the flood and the coming outpouring of judgment on the earth. In the former judgment, God set His rainbow in the sky as an indication that He would never again judge mankind in this way. The judgment at the end of the age will, instead, be a fiery conflagration. Through this, corruption will be banished, the current heaven and earth will pass away, the wicked and all wickedness will be removed.

We should note, water only washes, fire regenerates. Fire will purge this earth of the curse and introduce the perfect new earth when Jesus comes.

The difference between the flood and the end is that the wicked and all wickedness will be finally and eternally eliminated. What is more, instead of the mortal righteous being persevered in a wooden boat, they will be physically glorified and rescued to the air, while Christ destroys all those left behind. Only the elect survives the conflagration; only righteousness will be left on the earth.

 

[Zao is life]

Will redo this post and shorten it and cut out all the unnecessary off-topic stuff.

 

[Zao is life]

The writer is very careful to compare the judgment of this world at the end by fire to the previous wholesale judgment of the world in Noah’s day by water. In fact, both 1 and 2 Peter make a linkage between the flood and the coming outpouring of judgment on the earth. In the former judgment, God set His rainbow in the sky as an indication that He would never again judge mankind in this way. The judgment at the end of the age will, instead, be a fiery conflagration. Through this, corruption will be banished, the current heaven and earth will pass away, the wicked and all wickedness will be removed.

We should note, water only washes, fire regenerates. Fire will purge this earth of the curse and introduce the perfect new earth when Jesus comes.

The difference between the flood and the end is that the wicked and all wickedness will be finally and eternally eliminated. What is more, instead of the mortal righteous being persevered in a wooden boat, they will be physically glorified and rescued to the air, while Christ destroys all those left behind. Only the elect survives the conflagration; only righteousness will be left on the earth.

Yes Peter could only use the first universal judgment as the biblical type of the second. Sodom & Gomorrah were turned to ashes but that judgment was localized.

And your point is very good. How can there be survivors when the biblical type in the first universal judgment had no one who wasn't in the ark surviving. Jesus is our Ark:

John 3
16 For God so loved the world that He gave His only-begotten Son, that whoever believes in Him should not perish but have everlasting life.
17 For God did not send His Son into the world to condemn the world, but so that the world might be saved through Him.
18 He who believes on Him is not condemned, but he who does not believe is condemned already, because he has not believed in the name of the only-begotten Son of God.

Hebrews 11:7
"By faith Noah, having been warned by God of things not yet seen, moved with fear, prepared an ark to the saving of his house, by which he condemned the world and became heir of the righteousness which is by faith."

Peter can only use the first universal judgment as a biblical type of the second, otherwise it would be confusion.

 

[d taylor]

I take this as literal.

 

[sovereigngrace]

2 Peter 2
6 And turning the cities of Sodom and Gomorrah into ashes, He condemned them with an overthrow, setting an example to men intending to live ungodly.

Nothing was left of Sodom & Gomorrah. Lot & family was saved, but the rest was literally ashes. But Peter could not have used Sodom & Gomorrah @DavidPT for his type of the universal judgment, because that judgment was localized.

Peter was speaking about a universal judgment, and the only other universal judgment was the one that took place in the days of Noah.

Therefore Peter first uses many judgments as typology, but he compares the universality of the first judgment with the universality of the second, and it just so happens that the first universal judgment, unlike the localized one at Sodom, was by water.

Isaiah 34
4 And all the host of the heavens shall be dissolved, and the heavens shall be rolled like a scroll; and all their host shall droop, as a leaf falls off from the vine, and as the falling from the fig tree.

Here's the metaphor used in Ezekiel when God prophesied against Pharaoh, king of Egypt regarding the fact that God was going to judge Egypt at the hand of Babylon:

Ezekiel 32
7 And when I put you out, I will cover the heaven and make its stars dark; I will cover the sun with a cloud, and the moon shall not give her light.
8 I will make all the bright lights of the heavens dark over you, and will set darkness on your land, says the Lord Jehovah.

The first two chapters of Joel are a prophecy of a judgment against Judah, which is full of "Markan Sandwiches". This is how the prophecy against Judah started:

Joel 1
15 Alas for the day! For the day of the LORD is at hand, and it shall come as a ruin from the Almighty.

For the first two chapters in Joel, Joel is oscillating between prophesying judgment against Judah, and prophesying of her restoration. Joel chapter 3 switches to prophesying against the nations that scattered Judah.

Joel 2
30 And I will show wonders in the heavens, and in the earth, blood and fire and pillars of smoke.
31 The sun shall be turned into darkness, and the moon into blood, before the coming of the great and awesome day of the LORD.

That sort of metaphor was used many times prophesying the judgment of a nation or nations.

Revelation uses the same metaphor for the VISION John sees when the 6th seal is opened.

This takes me way off topic into a terriory that if anyone agrees with what I'm going to say below, then it's proof of the fact that big mircales do happen (because I doubt anyone will agree with me on this):

What is seen in the SEALS in Revelation are NOT the EVENTS. They are VISIONS that SIGNIFY something about THE EVENTS that are written about IN THE SCROLL.

The VISIONS John is seeing in the SEALS, which SIGNIFY something about THE EVENTS, should not be taken literally:

"The Revelation of Jesus Christ, which God gave unto him, to show unto his servants things which must shortly come to pass; and he sent and signified it by his angel unto his servant John" (Revelation 1:1).

Therefore only once we read about THE EVENTS written about IN THE SCROLL can we understand the significance of THE VISIONS John sees when each SEAL is loosened:

"Voices, thunderings, Lightnings and an earthquake" are always symbols of God speaking from heaven: We see it in Exodus 20:18, we see it used in poetic form by David in 2 Samuel 22:14-15, we see it proceeding from the throne of God in Revelation 4:5.

Only after reading THE EVENTS written IN THE SCROLL about the 7th trumpet and the 7th bowl of wrath, do we realize that THE VISION John sees when the 7TH SEAL is loosened, symbolizes God's judgment:

Seventh Trumpet:
Revelation 11
19 And the temple of God was opened in Heaven, and there was seen in His temple the ark of His covenant, and occurred lightnings and voices, and thunders and an earthquake, and a great hail.

Seventh bowl of wrath:
Revelation 16
18 And voices and thunders and lightnings occurred. And there was a great earthquake, such as has not been since men were on the earth, so mighty and so great an earthquake.

Seventh seal:
5 And the angel took the censer and filled it with fire from the altar, and cast it into the earth. And voices and thunderings and lightnings and an earthquake occurred.

7 7 7

This, together with the introduction of the 7 trumpets when the 7th seal has been loosened, also reminds the reader of the walls of Jericho falling the 7th time the people marched around the city on the 7th day, when the 7th trumpet sounded (Joshua 6:1-20).

So now that the seals have all been loosened, the scroll, where the events are written about, unrolls:

6 And the seven angels which had the seven trumpets prepared themselves to sound.

* The scroll could only unroll once all the seals had been loosened.

I'm scrolling down to 6 6 6 now.

* In the Revelation, the first "woe" is linked to the fifth trumpet, which is when the bottomless pit is opened (Revelation 8:13 - Revelation 9:1-12).

* In the Revelation, the third "woe" is linked to the seventh trumpet (Revelation 11:14-15).

* The Revelation links the second "woe" to:

(A) The sixth trumpet (Revelation 9:12-13); and
(B) To the period during which the two witnesses are prophesying (Revelation 11:3-14). *

* The events described in both of the above are recorded as unfolding in-between the 5th and 7th trumpets (i.e the 6th trumpet), as well as in-between the 1st and 3rd "woe" (i.e the 2nd "woe").

The Revelation employs the same metaphor for the 6th SEAL which has been employed many times before, and it signifies something about THE EVENTS in the scroll:

Revelation 6
12 And when He had opened the sixth seal, I looked, and behold, there was a great earthquake. And the sun became black as sackcloth of hair, and the moon became like blood.
13 And the stars of heaven fell to the earth, even as a fig tree casts her untimely figs when she is shaken by a mighty wind.
14 And the heaven departed like a scroll when it is rolled together. And every mountain and island were moved out of their places.

Once we read THE EVENTS of the 6th trumpet and 6th bowl of wrath, we understand that the metaphor used in the 6th SEAL signifies Armageddon:

6th trumpet: Angels bound at Euphrates are loosed. An innumerable army is seen.

6th bowl of wrath: Euphrates dried up. Beast gathers his armies: Armageddon.

The METAPHOR in the 6th SEAL signifies what is going on in the 6th trumpet and 6th bowl of wrath.

6 6 6

Remember, in the Revelation, the first "woe" is linked to the fifth trumpet, which is when the bottomless pit is opened (Revelation 8:13 - Revelation 9:1-12).

* In the Revelation, the third "woe" is linked to the seventh trumpet (Revelation 11:14-15).

* The Revelation links the second "woe" to:

(A) The sixth trumpet (Revelation 9:12-13); and
(B) To the period during which the two witnesses are prophesying (Revelation 11:3-14).

The big mistake people make is to believe that the VISIONS seen by John when each SEAL is loosened are EVENTS. They are not. They are VISIONS signifying THE EVENTS which are written about in THE SCROLL (which only unrolled when the 7th seal was loosened and the trumpets were introduced).

GETTING BACK TO PETER

Peter is talking about the same thing (Armageddon and the judgment of the beast on the Day of Christ), SO it COULD BE metaphor that Peter is using.

But .. then again it might not be, it might be literal when Peter is using it.

BUT Peter IS using the first universal judgment as the type of the second. He could not use Sodom and Gomorrah being turned to ashes as a type, because that was a localized judgment, though he did use various judgments as examples of what happens to the unrepentant ungodly.

Jesus and Peter used the destruction of Sodom as an appropriate picture of the destruction accompanying the second coming because of the fiery nature of the punishment. They used Noah's judgment to represent the scale - wholesale.

 

[keras]

Should we take all or some of this in a literal sense? Or should we take none of it in a literal sense?

If it can happen as described; then it will.

2 Peter 3:3-4 In the last days, scoffers will come – scoffing and following their own evil desires. They will say: Where is this ‘coming’ He promised? Our fathers have been laid to rest, but still everything goes on as it always has done.

This is a question posed by sceptics, put so as to ridicule, by those who have not entered into the experience of believing in and trusting the Lord Jesus.

We Christian believers may well ask; Why does Jesus delay His Return? We await His coming and sometimes get impatient. But we can be confident that this delay is not due to some kind of mix up. God is sovereign; when everything that needs to be accomplished before His Return, is done – then He will come.

2 Peter 3:5-7 When they say this, they forget that God created the universe and the first civilization on earth was destroyed by a great flood. Scripture says that the present heavens and earth are reserved for burning, until the Day of judgement, when the godless will be destroyed.

Atheists, evolutionists and just simply apathetic people, deny or ignore the obvious fact that something does not come out of nothing; there has to be a Creator.
The reality of the Flood is proved by the geological record and ancient writings.

2 Peter 3:8-9 Dear friends, do not forget; in the Lord’s sight, 1 day is like 1000 years. The Lord is not slow in keeping His promises, He is patient. It is not His will that any be lost, but that all should come to repentance.

2 Peter 3:10-13 The Day of the Lord will come unexpectedly. On that Day, the heavens will dissolve with a roar and flames, then the earth and all those in it will be brought to judgement. Since this will happen, you must live holy and dedicated lives, as you look forward to the renewal of the heavens and earth, where justice will be established.

This passage may allude to Revelation 21, at the end of the Millennium and is often thought to relate to the Return of Jesus, but careful study shows it is neither.
There are many prophecies about the Day of the Lord’s vengeance and wrath, yet to be fulfilled – which don’t fit this Revelation 21 scenario, or the Return, therefore what Peter is prophesying about is the next event on this earth. The descriptions of the Day of the Lord, are of a soon to happen cleansing of the earth, with earthquakes and fire, which will cleanse the Holy Land and destroy His enemies. Revelation 6:12-17, Isaiah 63:1-6, Isaiah 30:26, Joel 2:1-11, Deut 32:34-43, Psalms 18:7-15, Isaiah 2:12-22.

This will enable the fulfilment of the many prophecies that say how the Lord’s faithful people will gather in all of the area Promised to their spiritual forefathers, and is the beginning of events leading up to the Return of Jesus Christ in His glory. NOW, we look forward to a renewed [cleansed] heaven and earth and the establishment of justice.
In the new nation of Beulah: Isaiah 62:1-5, Isaiah 35:1-10, Zechariah 8:1-13, Ezekiel 34:11-16, in all of the holy Land.

2 Peter 3:17-18 So, dear friends, you have been forewarned. Take care that you do not let anyone seduce you with their errors, hold on to your faith. Grow in grace and in the knowledge of our Lord and Savior, Jesus Christ. To him be the glory, both now and for eternity! Reference: Revised English Bible. Verses abridged.


Analysis of 2 Peter 3:10 The Day of the Lord will come like a thief. On that Day, the heavens will disappear with a great rushing sound, the elements will be dissolved in flames and the earth with all that is in it will be brought to judgement.
Is this verse about the Return of Jesus? No, for the following reasons:

1/ Day of the Lord – His Return is not called that in Revelation 19 or Matthew 24.

2/ Like a thief – After the ‘abomination of desolation is placed into the 3rd Temple, we are given 3 specific time periods – 3½ years, or 42 months, or 1260 days. This will allow an exact calculation of His Return, at that time.

3/ The Heavens disappear and the elements dissolve - As He will Return ‘on the clouds”, it is rather difficult to imagine this happening at that time.

4/ All the earth judged - Jesus will destroy the armies of the Anti Christ and He will divide the remaining nations. [the sheep and goat judgement] But the final judgement of all people, alive and dead, is at the end of the Millennium.

It is not the Great white Throne judgement. That happens at the end of the Millennium period.

1/ Day of the Lord – not described as such in Revelation 20-21 or Daniel 7:9-10.

2/Like a thief– Jesus will have reigned on earth for 1000 years.

3/ The heavens will disappear with a great rushing sound – The earth and heavens flee.

4/ The elements will be dissolved in flames – Only the Lake of fire is mentioned in Rev., not a fire judgement of all mankind.

5/ The earth and all that is in it, judged – All those that are alive at that time, not the dead, as in Revelation 20:12. Note – the KJV says; the earth and all its works.

What this verse does fit, is the next prophesied event – the Day of the Lords vengeance and wrath. Isaiah 34:5, Hebrews 10:27, Malachi 4:1, Isaiah 29:5-6, Deuteronomy 32:34-43.

1/ The Day of the Lord – This is mentioned many times, always in conjunction with a terrible judgement against His enemies, by fire and sword.

2/ Like a thief – Yes, this will certainly be an unexpected event.

3/ The heavens will disappear with a great rushing sound - Paralleled by Revelation 6:14 and Isaiah 34:4 ‘the sky rolled up like a scroll’. Description of what will happen to the sky when a huge coronal mass ejection hits the earth.

4/ The elements dissolved in flames - Many prophecies say how the earth will be devastated: the land burnt clean, whole cities just heaps of white ash, etc.

5/ The earth and all those in it, judged - This Day will be a worldwide event. Isaiah 66: 15-17 The Lord is coming in fire, like a whirlwind, He will judge with fire. His sword will test mankind, many will be slain by Him.

Haggai 2:6-7 & 21-22 The Lord says: In a little while from now, I shall shake the heavens and the earth, I will shake all the nations, their treasure will come to Jerusalem.

Hebrews 12:26-29 [In ancient times]His voice shook the earth and now He has promised ‘Once again, I shall shake the earth and the heavens’. The words ‘once again’ point to the removal of created things, of all that is shaken, so that what cannot be shaken, may remain. The Kingdom we are given is unshakeable, let us, therefore give thanks to God for it and worship Him with reverence and awe – for our God is a devouring fire. REBible

 

[DavidPT]

So what is your argument? "I'm guessing that no one would take any of these things recorded in Revelation 6 and Isaiah 34 in a literal sense, so why take any of what is recorded in 2 Peter 3:10-12 in the literal sense if there is a connection between all these accounts?"

That is absurd. So, your evidence is that no one takes Revelation 6 and Isaiah 34 "in a literal sense" is proof that they are not literal and neither is 2 Peter 3. Where do you glean this conclusion? Nowhere! You simply invented this fallacy. This is as clear a case of circular reasoning (or a logical fallacy) as i have seen on this forum. Basically, you have zero grounds to spiritualize away the literal fire so you invent a false premise to support your personal opinion.

Isaiah 34 also depicts the heaven dissolving, as does 2 Peter 3. Some think that has already been fulfilled, meaning Isaiah 34, some think it might be meaning 2 Peter 3, me being of the latter view, but even if I'm wrong, nothing like that ever happened in a literal sense for certain, assuming it has already been fulfilled. Why should we assume, that in 2 Peter 3 when these things dissolve, it's meaning in a literal sense? One needs to prove it via Isaiah 34 then. One needs to show how those things are also meaning in a literal sense, regardless that one might conclude that chapter has already been fulfilled. And if it has already been fulfilled, good luck proving those things were meaning in a literal sense.

I doubt there is a single person in this thread grasping what I'm arguing here, because if they did, based on Isaiah 34 alone, especially if that chapter is supposed to already be fulfilled, much of that never even remotely happened in a literal sense, such as all the host of heaven being dissolved, but when we see similar language in 2 Peter 3 though, now all of a sudden we are to take those things literally even though we don't in Isaiah 34.

Let's keep in mind that this thread is in regards as to how this is fulfilled. I'm not arguing that it won't be fulfilled. I'm focusing on how will it be fulfilled.

 

[DavidPT]

If it can happen as described; then it will.

2 Peter 3:3-4 In the last days, scoffers will come – scoffing and following their own evil desires. They will say: Where is this ‘coming’ He promised? Our fathers have been laid to rest, but still everything goes on as it always has done.

This is a question posed by sceptics, put so as to ridicule, by those who have not entered into the experience of believing in and trusting the Lord Jesus.

We Christian believers may well ask; Why does Jesus delay His Return? We await His coming and sometimes get impatient. But we can be confident that this delay is not due to some kind of mix up. God is sovereign; when everything that needs to be accomplished before His Return, is done – then He will come.

2 Peter 3:5-7 When they say this, they forget that God created the universe and the first civilization on earth was destroyed by a great flood. Scripture says that the present heavens and earth are reserved for burning, until the Day of judgement, when the godless will be destroyed.

Atheists, evolutionists and just simply apathetic people, deny or ignore the obvious fact that something does not come out of nothing; there has to be a Creator.
The reality of the Flood is proved by the geological record and ancient writings.

2 Peter 3:8-9 Dear friends, do not forget; in the Lord’s sight, 1 day is like 1000 years. The Lord is not slow in keeping His promises, He is patient. It is not His will that any be lost, but that all should come to repentance.

2 Peter 3:10-13 The Day of the Lord will come unexpectedly. On that Day, the heavens will dissolve with a roar and flames, then the earth and all those in it will be brought to judgement. Since this will happen, you must live holy and dedicated lives, as you look forward to the renewal of the heavens and earth, where justice will be established.

This passage may allude to Revelation 21, at the end of the Millennium and is often thought to relate to the Return of Jesus, but careful study shows it is neither.
There are many prophecies about the Day of the Lord’s vengeance and wrath, yet to be fulfilled – which don’t fit this Revelation 21 scenario, or the Return, therefore what Peter is prophesying about is the next event on this earth. The descriptions of the Day of the Lord, are of a soon to happen cleansing of the earth, with earthquakes and fire, which will cleanse the Holy Land and destroy His enemies. Revelation 6:12-17, Isaiah 63:1-6, Isaiah 30:26, Joel 2:1-11, Deut 32:34-43, Psalms 18:7-15, Isaiah 2:12-22.

This will enable the fulfilment of the many prophecies that say how the Lord’s faithful people will gather in all of the area Promised to their spiritual forefathers, and is the beginning of events leading up to the Return of Jesus Christ in His glory. NOW, we look forward to a renewed [cleansed] heaven and earth and the establishment of justice.
In the new nation of Beulah: Isaiah 62:1-5, Isaiah 35:1-10, Zechariah 8:1-13, Ezekiel 34:11-16, in all of the holy Land.

2 Peter 3:17-18 So, dear friends, you have been forewarned. Take care that you do not let anyone seduce you with their errors, hold on to your faith. Grow in grace and in the knowledge of our Lord and Savior, Jesus Christ. To him be the glory, both now and for eternity! Reference: Revised English Bible. Verses abridged.


Analysis of 2 Peter 3:10 The Day of the Lord will come like a thief. On that Day, the heavens will disappear with a great rushing sound, the elements will be dissolved in flames and the earth with all that is in it will be brought to judgement.
Is this verse about the Return of Jesus? No, for the following reasons:

1/ Day of the Lord – His Return is not called that in Revelation 19 or Matthew 24.

2/ Like a thief – After the ‘abomination of desolation is placed into the 3rd Temple, we are given 3 specific time periods – 3½ years, or 42 months, or 1260 days. This will allow an exact calculation of His Return, at that time.

3/ The Heavens disappear and the elements dissolve - As He will Return ‘on the clouds”, it is rather difficult to imagine this happening at that time.

4/ All the earth judged - Jesus will destroy the armies of the Anti Christ and He will divide the remaining nations. [the sheep and goat judgement] But the final judgement of all people, alive and dead, is at the end of the Millennium.

It is not the Great white Throne judgement. That happens at the end of the Millennium period.

1/ Day of the Lord – not described as such in Revelation 20-21 or Daniel 7:9-10.

2/Like a thief– Jesus will have reigned on earth for 1000 years.

3/ The heavens will disappear with a great rushing sound – The earth and heavens flee.

4/ The elements will be dissolved in flames – Only the Lake of fire is mentioned in Rev., not a fire judgement of all mankind.

5/ The earth and all that is in it, judged – All those that are alive at that time, not the dead, as in Revelation 20:12. Note – the KJV says; the earth and all its works.

What this verse does fit, is the next prophesied event – the Day of the Lords vengeance and wrath. Isaiah 34:5, Hebrews 10:27, Malachi 4:1, Isaiah 29:5-6, Deuteronomy 32:34-43.

1/ The Day of the Lord – This is mentioned many times, always in conjunction with a terrible judgement against His enemies, by fire and sword.

2/ Like a thief – Yes, this will certainly be an unexpected event.

3/ The heavens will disappear with a great rushing sound - Paralleled by Revelation 6:14 and Isaiah 34:4 ‘the sky rolled up like a scroll’. Description of what will happen to the sky when a huge coronal mass ejection hits the earth.

4/ The elements dissolved in flames - Many prophecies say how the earth will be devastated: the land burnt clean, whole cities just heaps of white ash, etc.

5/ The earth and all those in it, judged - This Day will be a worldwide event. Isaiah 66: 15-17 The Lord is coming in fire, like a whirlwind, He will judge with fire. His sword will test mankind, many will be slain by Him.

Haggai 2:6-7 & 21-22 The Lord says: In a little while from now, I shall shake the heavens and the earth, I will shake all the nations, their treasure will come to Jerusalem.

Hebrews 12:26-29 [In ancient times]His voice shook the earth and now He has promised ‘Once again, I shall shake the earth and the heavens’. The words ‘once again’ point to the removal of created things, of all that is shaken, so that what cannot be shaken, may remain. The Kingdom we are given is unshakeable, let us, therefore give thanks to God for it and worship Him with reverence and awe – for our God is a devouring fire. REBible

What I'm not entirely certain about is whether the Lord needs to be physically present during the day of the Lord. I tend to think He does need to be bodily present, but maybe I'm wrong to think that for all I know. Unlike some around here, I don't have my mind fully made up about some of these things, which means the way I view some things one day is subject to change the next day.

 

[DavidPT]

The writer is very careful to compare the judgment of this world at the end by fire to the previous wholesale judgment of the world in Noah’s day by water. In fact, both 1 and 2 Peter make a linkage between the flood and the coming outpouring of judgment on the earth. In the former judgment, God set His rainbow in the sky as an indication that He would never again judge mankind in this way. The judgment at the end of the age will, instead, be a fiery conflagration. Through this, corruption will be banished, the current heaven and earth will pass away, the wicked and all wickedness will be removed.

We should note, water only washes, fire regenerates. Fire will purge this earth of the curse and introduce the perfect new earth when Jesus comes.

The difference between the flood and the end is that the wicked and all wickedness will be finally and eternally eliminated. What is more, instead of the mortal righteous being persevered in a wooden boat, they will be physically glorified and rescued to the air, while Christ destroys all those left behind. Only the elect survives the conflagration; only righteousness will be left on the earth.

Fire destroys everything in it's path. Water apparently doesn't because if it did, does that mean all plant life and all trees were destroyed in Noah's flood, thus the earth was void of any trees once the flood waters receded, and that they then used seeds they took aboard the ark and sowed them worldwide and waited years for them to grow into adult sized trees, though I'm assuming, that in the beginning God planted adult sized trees throughout the entire planet rather than putting man on a planet with no trees yet and that man has to wait for the trees to grow into adult sized trees because God planted seeds rather than trees already grown? Which leads to my point. If this planet goes up in literal flames, there goes all of the trees, all of the plant life.

I do tend to think outside the box a lot. Maybe that's my problem? Maybe I shouldn't be doing things like that.

 

[Spiritual Jew]

Isaiah 34 also depicts the heaven dissolving, as does 2 Peter 3. Some think that has already been fulfilled, meaning Isaiah 34, some think it might be meaning 2 Peter 3, me being of the latter view, but even if I'm wrong, nothing like that ever happened in a literal sense for certain, assuming it has already been fulfilled. Why should we assume, that in 2 Peter 3 when these things dissolve, it's meaning in a literal sense?

This has already been addressed by both myself in post #2 and by sovereigngrace in post #6. Can you please address the points we made in those posts regarding this? The context of 2 Peter 3 is clearly literal and we both explained why already.

One needs to prove it via Isaiah 34 then. One needs to show how those things are also meaning in a literal sense, regardless that one might conclude that chapter has already been fulfilled. And if it has already been fulfilled, good luck proving those things were meaning in a literal sense.

Why do you make demands like this? How are you coming to the conclusion that whether Isaiah 34 is literal or not determines whether 2 Peter 3 is literal or not? That makes no sense. Just look at the context of 2 Peter 3 itself. Was Peter comparing a figurative event to a literal event in 2 Peter 3:5-7? Clearly not. How would that even make any sense? Please explain that instead of trying to divert attention away from it by bringing up Isaiah 34.

I doubt there is a single person in this thread grasping what I'm arguing here, because if they did, based on Isaiah 34 alone, especially if that chapter is supposed to already be fulfilled, much of that never even remotely happened in a literal sense, such as all the host of heaven being dissolved, but when we see similar language in 2 Peter 3 though, now all of a sudden we are to take those things literally even though we don't in Isaiah 34.

Let's keep in mind that this thread is in regards as to how this is fulfilled. I'm not arguing that it won't be fulfilled. I'm focusing on how will it be fulfilled.

I'm not grasping how you are concluding that Isaiah 34 has to be speaking of the same event as 2 Peter 3 or how you are concluding that they either both have to be literal or both have to be symbolic.

Can you tell me how you currently are interpreting 2 Peter 3? If it's not talking about literal, physical destruction then what do you think it's talking about? What did Peter mean when he said this:

2 Peter 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.

What would the above even mean in a non-literal sense?

11 Seeing then that all these things shall be dissolved, what manner of persons ought ye to be in all holy conversation and godliness, 12 Looking for and hasting unto the coming of the day of God, wherein the heavens being on fire shall be dissolved, and the elements shall melt with fervent heat?

If the above passage is not talking about literal, physical destruction then why did Peter tell his readers to think about their behavior and what kind of people they should be in relation to "all these things" (the heavens, the elements and the earth) being dissolved? Wasn't he warning them to make sure they were in good standing with the Lord in order to avoid being among those who will be destroyed?

13 Nevertheless we, according to his promise, look for new heavens and a new earth, wherein dwelleth righteousness.

If Peter was not talking about the literal, physical destruction of the heavens and earth, then why did he say that we are looking forward to the new heavens and new earth in accordance with the promise of His coming? Doesn't it make sense that the literal burning up and renewing of the current heavens and earth would result in the new heavens and new earth?

 

[Spiritual Jew]

Fire destroys everything in it's path. Water apparently doesn't because if it did, does that mean all plant life and all trees were destroyed in Noah's flood, thus the earth was void of any trees once the flood waters receded, and that they then used seeds they took aboard the ark and sowed them worldwide and waited years for them to grow into adult sized trees, though I'm assuming, that in the beginning God planted adult sized trees throughout the entire planet rather than putting man on a planet with no trees yet and that man has to wait for the trees to grow into adult sized trees because God planted seeds rather than trees already grown? Which leads to my point. If this planet goes up in literal flames, there goes all of the trees, all of the plant life.

So? God will be creating new things on the earth at that point. You understand that the result of what is described in 2 Peter 3:10-12 will be the new heavens and new earth because of what Peter said in verse 13, right? So, what does scripture say about the new heavens and new earth?

Revelation 21:1 And I saw a new heaven and a new earth: for the first heaven and the first earth were passed away; and there was no more sea. 2 And I John saw the holy city, new Jerusalem, coming down from God out of heaven, prepared as a bride adorned for her husband. 3 And I heard a great voice out of heaven saying, Behold, the tabernacle of God is with men, and he will dwell with them, and they shall be his people, and God himself shall be with them, and be their God. 4 And God shall wipe away all tears from their eyes; and there shall be no more death, neither sorrow, nor crying, neither shall there be any more pain: for the former things are passed away. 5 And he that sat upon the throne said, Behold, I make all things new. And he said unto me, Write: for these words are true and faithful.

See that? God is going to "make all things new". So, you don't need to be concerned about the survival of things like trees and plant life. God will likely make new trees and plant life and possibly even things that don't currently exist that we can't even imagine right now.

I do tend to think outside the box a lot. Maybe that's my problem? Maybe I shouldn't be doing things like that.

I definitely believe you should not be doing that in this case. There may be times when thinking outside the box is beneficial, but this isn't one of those times. The text of 2 Peter 3 is very straightforward and literal and there is simply no basis whatsoever to interpret it any other way.

 

[Spiritual Jew]

What I'm not entirely certain about is whether the Lord needs to be physically present during the day of the Lord. I tend to think He does need to be bodily present, but maybe I'm wrong to think that for all I know. Unlike some around here, I don't have my mind fully made up about some of these things, which means the way I view some things one day is subject to change the next day.

Jesus Himself compared His second coming to the flood just like Peter did. Do you think Jesus will be bodily present at "the coming of the Son of man" that He described here:

Matthew 24:37 But as the days of Noah were, so shall also the coming of the Son of man be. 38 For as in the days that were before the flood they were eating and drinking, marrying and giving in marriage, until the day that Noe entered into the ark, 39 And knew not until the flood came, and took them all away; so shall also the coming of the Son of man be.

Do you think the coming of Christ that Jesus Himself described in the above passage is the same coming of Christ that Peter referenced in 2 Peter 3?

2 Peter 3:3 Knowing this first, that there shall come in the last days scoffers, walking after their own lusts, 4 And saying, Where is the promise of his coming? for since the fathers fell asleep, all things continue as they were from the beginning of the creation....9 The Lord is not slack concerning his promise, as some men count slackness; but is longsuffering to us-ward, not willing that any should perish, but that all should come to repentance....13 Nevertheless we, according to his promise, look for new heavens and a new earth, wherein dwelleth righteousness.

Is there any reason to think that the day of the Lord is not referring to the day Christ returns when you consider that Jesus described mass destruction occurring at His second coming? Why would the mass destruction that will occur on the day of the Lord be different than the mass destruction that will occur at the coming of the Son of man, keeping in mind that both Peter and Jesus compared the destruction to what happened with the flood?

If Peter wrote about the same coming of Christ that Jesus Himself referenced in Matthew 24:37-39 and you believe that Jesus was talking about His bodily coming in Matt 24:37-39, then that means Peter was talking about Christ's bodily coming in 2 Peter 3 as well.

 

[Zao is life]

Isaiah 34 also depicts the heaven dissolving, as does 2 Peter 3. Some think that has already been fulfilled, meaning Isaiah 34, some think it might be meaning 2 Peter 3, me being of the latter view, but even if I'm wrong, nothing like that ever happened in a literal sense for certain, assuming it has already been fulfilled. Why should we assume, that in 2 Peter 3 when these things dissolve, it's meaning in a literal sense? One needs to prove it via Isaiah 34 then. One needs to show how those things are also meaning in a literal sense, regardless that one might conclude that chapter has already been fulfilled. And if it has already been fulfilled, good luck proving those things were meaning in a literal sense.

I doubt there is a single person in this thread grasping what I'm arguing here, because if they did, based on Isaiah 34 alone, especially if that chapter is supposed to already be fulfilled, much of that never even remotely happened in a literal sense, such as all the host of heaven being dissolved, but when we see similar language in 2 Peter 3 though, now all of a sudden we are to take those things literally even though we don't in Isaiah 34.

Let's keep in mind that this thread is in regards as to how this is fulfilled. I'm not arguing that it won't be fulfilled. I'm focusing on how will it be fulfilled.

The difference between Isaiah, Jeremiah, the book of Revelation, Ezekiel etc etc etc on one hand, and 2 Peter 3 on the other, is that the former is all apocalyptic biblical literature, which employs a great deal of symbolic representation that is produced by poetry employing simile and metaphor, often mixed with hyperbole.

But Peter is talking plainly. He isn't employing apocalyptic language.

Something @Spiritual Jew said to you in this thread has made me see something that has been staring at me in the face for many years but I failed to see it, thanks (no thanks) to my former Premil specs.

There will not be anyone who was not in Christ (our "Ark") going into the NHNE. To claim that there will be, is to disbelieve the words of Christ in John 3:18.

The flood is the type of the end of this Age. The ark is the type of Christ, and the new world which came after the flood is the type of the NHNE.

Also, we should pray to God and petition him not only for children and infants alive in that Day of Christ, but for those alive now who are not safe from being kidnapped by the hundreds from their schools by Islamists in West Africa, something which has occurred many times in the last few decades.

That was an example of the many reasons why we should be praying to God regularly for the safety of children everywhere even now.

Hundreds of thousands of children have lost their lives in wars, in natural disasters, to starvation, and to being murdered in the last 100 years.

 

[DavidPT]

What are you thinking you're proving here? You need to look at the context of 2 Peter 3 itself. Just because another passage might talk about the heavens and earth in a figurative way does not at all mean that 2 Peter 3 has to be talking about them in the same way. The context of 2 Peter 3 is clearly about literal things, so why try to change that?

Can't you see what is going on here? Some of you are basing your literal interpretation of some of 2 Peter 3 because it is being compared to a literal event that involved literal water, therefore, so must the fire be literal. Things that might survive an earth engulfed in water is not going to survive an earth engulfed in flames. Doesn't water put out fires? How does one literally burn up oceans and seas then? And what about all of the stars and planets in our universe, what does one propose happens to them during these alleged literal events? They are going to be wiped out of existence but the earth isn't? How does that make good sense? How is it that stars and other planets can be literally destroyed, as if they never existed, but that the earth remains having only experienced surface damage, but everything else in the universe is utterly destroyed?

Luke 19:15 And it came to pass, that when he was returned, having received the kingdom, then he commanded these servants to be called unto him, to whom he had given the money, that he might know how much every man had gained by trading.

It really makes good sense for this to be taking place on a planet that is no longer habitable once He returns because the planet goes up in literal flames? This verse says returned. You only return to some place you have previously been. You don't return to somewhere you haven't been yet. Obviously then, where He is returning to is the earth, thus He has bodily set foot on the earth when these things are taking place.

 

[Clare73]

The difference between Isaiah, Jeremiah, the book of Revelation, Ezekiel etc etc etc on one hand, and 2 Peter 3 on the other, is that the former is all apocalyptic biblical literature, which employs a great deal of symbolic representation that is produced by poetry employing simile and metaphor, often mixed with hyperbole.

But Peter is talking plainly. He isn't employing apocalyptic language.

Something @Spiritual Jew said to you in this thread has made me see something that has been staring at me in the face for many years but I failed to see it, thanks (no thanks) to my former Premil specs.

There will not be anyone who was not in Christ (our "Ark") going into the NHNE. To claim that there will be, is to disbelieve the words of Christ in John 3:18.

The flood is the type of the end of this Age. The ark is the type of Christ, and the new world which came after the flood is the type of the NHNE.

Also, we should pray to God and petition him not only for children and infants alive in that Day of Christ, but for those alive now who are not safe from being kidnapped by the hundreds from their schools by Islamists in West Africa, something which has occurred many times in the last few decades.

That was an example of the many reasons why we should be praying to God regularly for the safety of children everywhere even now.

Hundreds of thousands of children have lost their lives in wars, in natural disasters, to starvation, and to being murdered in the last 100 years.

As Christians we MUST zealously and jealously guard Biblical scripture against our own false assumptions and human imagination.

. . .