• Starting today August 7th, 2024, in order to post in the Married Couples, Courting Couples, or Singles forums, you will not be allowed to post if you have your Marital status designated as private. Announcements will be made in the respective forums as well but please note that if yours is currently listed as Private, you will need to submit a ticket in the Support Area to have yours changed.

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

Zao is life

Well-Known Member
Site Supporter
Apr 18, 2020
3,010
930
Africa
✟223,456.00
Country
South Africa
Gender
Male
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
The way I look at things, if God can create plant life all over again, and that He can create animals all over again, why didn't He do any of those things post Noah's flood? The point being, He was able to destroy the world of the ungodly without having to destroy the entire planet in order to do so. Animals still existed after that. Plant life still existed after that. But if this entire planet were to go up in literal flames, there goes all plant life, there goes the animal kingdom. While plant life might survive a flood it certainly isn't going to survive literal fire.

And something else that crosses my mind. During Noah's flood God did not need to remove one single person from the planet in order to destroy the world of the ungodly. Apparently, assuming how some of you interpret 2 Peter 3:10-12, this time around He has to literally remove saved ppl from the planet first before He can destroy the world of the ungodly.
Genesis 6
13 And God said to Noah, The end of all flesh has come before Me, for the earth is filled with violence through them. And, behold, I will destroy them with the earth.

@DavidPT The ark did remove those in it from the world. The judgment waters was the very thing that lifted the ark up and out of the flooded world where the judgment was taking place.

But Noah and his family were saved. They were in the ark. And so were the animals who were to be saved.

Since Jesus is our "Ark", there's no reason not to allow for the possibility that there will be some animals taken out of the earth to heaven with the resurrection of those of the sons of Adam who have been adopted through faith in Christ and regeneration of the Spirit into God's family as the sons of God.

I'm not adding that to the scriptures as a doctrine. I'm just saying we can allow for that possibility, because of the type.
 
Upvote 0

Timtofly

Well-Known Member
Jun 29, 2020
9,417
575
58
Mount Morris
✟148,028.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
Baptist
Marital Status
Married
There has never yet been an end to the first earth! This world has never been regenerated since the fall. Even after the flood it still remained corrupt. This earth is still the same earth from the beginning. It is only at the second coming where corruption, sin, death, the wicked, wickedness and Satan are removed. This occurs at the conflagration. You nullify the whole meaning of the original text and spiritualize it away to allow Premil.

I thought you might have known that there has never before been a glorification which perfects all the elect (that is an elementary Christian fundamental). That is why the world was repopulated in Noah's day. You know in Noah's day all the elect were immediately and totally rescued and all the wicked were immediately and totally destroyed. So it will be when Jesus appears. Noah and his family are a picture of the catching away of the saints. Those left behind will face the same fate as those left behind in Noah's day - total annihilation.
Total annihilation would negate the GWT.

Are they totally annihilated, or just physically killed to stand as dead at the GWT?

When you claim the earth itself needs spiritual regeneration, how did water destroy the spiritual earth? A new heaven and earth is not just spiritual, but there was a totally different physical earth after the Flood. If fire is just symbolic and destroys spiritual earth at the Second Coming, then the physical earth will still be OK. Is the point spiritual or physical?

"for since the fathers fell asleep, all things continue as they were from the beginning of the creation."

How has there not been a physical new heaven and earth after the Flood? Peter does declare the heaven and earth now is not the same as prior to the Flood of Noah's day. Because of the Ark, both the earth and the elect started out new both physically and spiritually. It was their offspring, even Ham who kept sin and rebellion going, even as the saved elect.

Yet when I point out that there is no more sin, death from sin, and decay both spiritual and physical for 1000 years after the Second Coming, you claim nonsense. Yet God started fresh with Noah. Water did not nor cannot remove sin. But the refining fire and physical death at the Second Coming does remove Adam's flesh and blood. God starts the earth with a resurrection of eternal life. Not glorification, but still a life free from sin and death, and even Satan. All Amil do is remove the Day of the Lord, the Sabbath day of rest, the 1000 years that John does declare after the Second Coming.

Don't say, "well it is the here and now." That defeats the whole purpose of a 1000 year period after 6000 years of Adam's fallen flesh and blood.

"Remember the sabbath day, to keep it holy. Six days shalt thou labour, and do all thy work: But the seventh day is the sabbath of the Lord thy God: in it thou shalt not do any work, thou, nor thy son, nor thy daughter, thy manservant, nor thy maidservant, nor thy cattle, nor thy stranger that is within thy gates: For in six days the Lord made heaven and earth, the sea, and all that in them is, and rested the seventh day: wherefore the Lord blessed the sabbath day, and hallowed it."

After 6000 years, God cannot keep Adam's punishment going indefinitely. God set the punishment limit at 6 days, 6000 years. The next 1000 are set apart as Holy. If you reject John's eye witness account, you are not bound by God's Law to accept it. Amil have that going for their eschatology.

"And God blessed the seventh day, and sanctified it: because that in it he had rested from all his work which God created and made. These are the generations (plural) of the heavens and of the earth when they were created, in the day that the Lord (singular) God made the earth and the heavens,"

This was the first day of the Lord. The first 1000 years. But no one Remembers that day of the Lord. Even though Exodus 20 tells us to. The earth did not change, up until the Flood. For the first 1000 years there was not even death and decay. No ground was ever tilled, no seed ever sown. Not even wild plants grew out of the ground. The only nutrition for all life on land and sea were the seeds and fruit of the plants and trees God planted on the third day. After 1000 years God planted the Garden of Eden and placed Adam in it. But take it or leave it. Every one thinks their own interpretation is the correct one.

Still no one Remembers. If they did it would have been passed down from generation to generation, and all would know, without any questions or guess work. Satan gave a false knowledge or science to the Greeks and the last 2500 years have been shaped to Satan's advantage so all humanity would forget God.
 
Upvote 0

Acts29

Active Member
Oct 24, 2021
287
76
51
Tennessee
✟31,133.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
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).

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?

Preface. Religious Pharisees that make almost everything in scripture to be symbolic, love to take the above passage of Peter very literally because they can't wait for God to destroy the "sinners."

First, it is unreasonable to conclude that Peter had a perfect sequential understanding of the time of the end. It is possible he assumed everything will happen at one time. I don't know. What I do know is Peter was told plainly that knowing the times and seasons was not given to him. Same goes for Paul.

Acts 1:6 Therefore, when they had come together, they asked Him, saying, “Lord, will You at this time restore the kingdom to Israel?” 7 And He said to them, “It is not for you to know times or seasons which the Father has put in His own authority.

1 Corinthians 13:12 For now we see in a mirror, dimly, but then face to face. Now I know in part, but then I shall know just as I also am known.

Now, we can cover the "how" that you asked about. Peter referred to the Day of the Lord coming like a thief. Therefore, we can determine which Day of the Lord he is speaking about and what people Peter is writing to.

Revelation 16:15 “Behold, I am coming as a thief. Blessed is he who watches, and keeps his garments, lest he walk naked and they see his shame.”

This is written just prior to the 7th bowl of wrath in which Jesus returns on the white horse. Revelation 19-20 and Ezekiel 39. Those two accounts of this particular Day of the Lord should answer your "how" questions.

Revelation 19:17 Then I saw an angel standing in the sun; and he cried with a loud voice, saying to all the birds that fly in the midst of heaven, “Come and gather together for the supper of the great God, 18 that you may eat the flesh of kings, the flesh of captains, the flesh of mighty men, the flesh of horses and of those who sit on them, and the flesh of all people, free and slave, both small and great.”

Ezekiel 39:17 “And as for you, son of man, thus says the Lord God, ‘Speak to every sort of bird and to every beast of the field:

“Assemble yourselves and come;
Gather together from all sides to My sacrificial meal

Which I am sacrificing for you,
A great sacrificial meal on the mountains of Israel,
That you may eat flesh and drink blood.
18 You shall eat the flesh of the mighty,
Drink the blood of the princes of the earth,
 
Upvote 0

Marilyn C

Pre-tribulation.
Site Supporter
Dec 26, 2013
5,154
645
Victoria
✟704,943.00
Country
Australia
Gender
Female
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
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?
.


IMG_20220124_0001.jpg
 
Upvote 0

DavidPT

Well-Known Member
Sep 26, 2016
8,609
2,107
Texas
✟204,831.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married


I don't have a problem thinking the DOTL might be involving more than a single day, but I don't know if I could agree it involves everything you have it involving. On your chart it looks like you have the beginning of the DOTL starting with the beginning of the 7 years, which I'm assuming you are meaning the tribulation, except there is no 7 year trib recorded in the Bible that I'm aware of. The trib is only 42 months. But even at the beginning of the 42 months I don't see that being where the beginning of the DOTL begins either. The DOTL involves darkness, etc, whether it's meaning literal darkness that I'm not certain, and that Matthew 24:29 for one records a time of darkness and that it places it after the trib.
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0

Spiritual Jew

Amillennialist
Site Supporter
Oct 12, 2020
8,360
2,786
MI
✟424,101.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
The universe as science teaches us will cease to exist.
What are you talking about?

Tell me who survives.
The only ones who will survive Christ's return are Christians who will be changed and put on immortality at that time.

I asked is the restoration before or after Christ comes to earth.
Before.

Do you consider letting sin have free reign a model kingdom?
Of course not. You ask ridiculous questions.

You have rules that end up making nonsense. Jesus Himself left the Mt of Olives and claimed to return.
No, He never claimed that He would return to the Mt. of Olives. Tell me where you think He said that so that I can show you how you're wrong.

Zechariah prophesied that return. Do you need symbolism to figure that out?
When are you going to figure out that your interpretation of Zechariah 14 doesn't line up with the rest of scripture? It certainly doesn't line up with what is taught in the New Testament.
 
Upvote 0

Spiritual Jew

Amillennialist
Site Supporter
Oct 12, 2020
8,360
2,786
MI
✟424,101.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
That is because you are stuck in symbolism and that makes you comfortable. There is more to God's Word than symbolism.
Okay, I've had enough of your false accusations. I never claimed that all of God's Word is symbolism and you know it. Obviously, some of it is and some isn't and you're not able to discern which is which.

I don't need to put up with your false accusations and nonsense anymore. It's not worth it. You are a waste of my time. You are going to become the only person on my ignore list.
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0

Spiritual Jew

Amillennialist
Site Supporter
Oct 12, 2020
8,360
2,786
MI
✟424,101.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
LOL in return. I don't even remotely think I have all the answers. I just can't see some of what is being proposed as the answers by others as actually being the answers. In my mind, whatever view one takes of things, whether Premil or Amil, everything has to work with that view not just some of it. As to Premil it appears that maybe not everything works with that view.

If we then consider Amil as an alternative it also appears that maybe not everything works with that view either. What would be the point of switching from one view to another if both views have their share of problems to begin with? Personally, I wish there was no such thing as these views, Premil and Amil, and that one could just simply stick to what the texts are stating without it having to imply either Premil or Amil.
With all this in mind, why are you a Premil then? Why consider yourself a Premil when you acknowledge that it has its share of problems? I don't get that. It'd makes a lot more sense to consider yourself what Fullness of the Gentiles is calling himself: an agnosmillennialist.
 
Upvote 0

Spiritual Jew

Amillennialist
Site Supporter
Oct 12, 2020
8,360
2,786
MI
✟424,101.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
So, when God said the flood destroyed “every living thing” we’re not to take that literally? The flood did not destroy the fish? Or it did?
No, it didn't. The context was that He was going to destroy every living thing on land except for the animals that were brought onto the ark. Why are you asking me this?

We do know that no new living things were created after the flood, as all living things that ever were, and are now, were created by the 6th day, and since Noah was not commanded to bring any fish on the Ark, they must have survived in the floodwaters, rendering God’s declaration that He destroyed “every living thing” in the flood, NOT a literal statement.
What is your point here exactly? It seems ironic to me that you're pointing out that what He said didn't apply to literally every living thing when you take Genesis 8:21 to be God saying He literally wouldn't destroy the earth again even though Genesis 9:11 shows that the context is that He wouldn't destroy the earth with a flood again.
 
Upvote 0
Jan 24, 2022
18
18
48
Colorado
✟23,513.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Single
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).

I think the best reply to this original posting is given in this:

2 Thessalonians 1:7-9
7 And to you who are troubled rest with us, when the Lord Jesus shall be revealed from heaven with his mighty angels,

8 In flaming fire taking vengeance on them that know not God, and that obey not the gospel of our Lord Jesus Christ:

9 Who shall be punished with everlasting destruction from the presence of the Lord, and from the glory of his power;

If you read that Thessalonians passage you will see that Yeshua is returning in fire and it makes most sense that we will more than likely destroy the world by fire at that time.
 

Attachments

  • download (3).jpg
    download (3).jpg
    8.9 KB · Views: 10
Upvote 0

DavidPT

Well-Known Member
Sep 26, 2016
8,609
2,107
Texas
✟204,831.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
I think the best reply to this original posting is given in this:

2 Thessalonians 1:7-9
7 And to you who are troubled rest with us, when the Lord Jesus shall be revealed from heaven with his mighty angels,

8 In flaming fire taking vengeance on them that know not God, and that obey not the gospel of our Lord Jesus Christ:

9 Who shall be punished with everlasting destruction from the presence of the Lord, and from the glory of his power;

If you read that Thessalonians passage you will see that Yeshua is returning in fire and it makes most sense that we will more than likely destroy the world by fire at that time.


In flaming fire has to be understood in the literal sense? Why can't it be a description of His wrath without it having to mean literal fire?
 
  • Agree
Reactions: Zao is life
Upvote 0

Zao is life

Well-Known Member
Site Supporter
Apr 18, 2020
3,010
930
Africa
✟223,456.00
Country
South Africa
Gender
Male
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
I think the best reply to this original posting is given in this:

2 Thessalonians 1:7-9
7 And to you who are troubled rest with us, when the Lord Jesus shall be revealed from heaven with his mighty angels,

8 In flaming fire taking vengeance on them that know not God, and that obey not the gospel of our Lord Jesus Christ:

9 Who shall be punished with everlasting destruction from the presence of the Lord, and from the glory of his power;

If you read that Thessalonians passage you will see that Yeshua is returning in fire and it makes most sense that we will more than likely destroy the world by fire at that time.

In flaming fire has to be understood in the literal sense? Why can't it be a description of His wrath without it having to mean literal fire?
Or another way of talking about the LOF for those who receive the mark of the beast.
 
Upvote 0
Jan 24, 2022
18
18
48
Colorado
✟23,513.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Single
In flaming fire has to be understood in the literal sense? Why can't it be a description of His wrath without it having to mean literal fire?

You are certainly correct in saying that "In Flaming Fire" represents the wrath of Christ at his second coming but I have chosen to view this as a fulfillment of the passage you were questioning us about in 2 Peter 3. We know that just prior to the second coming of Christ that the Sun will be turned to darkness so I believe right after that at the second coming will be when Jesus returns "in flaming fire" and destroys the world.
 
  • Agree
Reactions: Spiritual Jew
Upvote 0
Jan 24, 2022
18
18
48
Colorado
✟23,513.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Single
Or another way of talking about the LOF for those who receive the mark of the beast.

How would you view it as a human assumption since the Thessalonians passage clearly states that Christ will return "In Flaming Fire" and Jude also states that he returns to execute judgement with his Holy Myriads which also seems to refer to that same instance?
 
Upvote 0

Zao is life

Well-Known Member
Site Supporter
Apr 18, 2020
3,010
930
Africa
✟223,456.00
Country
South Africa
Gender
Male
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
How would you view it as a human assumption since the Thessalonians passage clearly states that Christ will return "In Flaming Fire" and Jude also states that he returns to execute judgement with his Holy Myriads which also seems to refer to that same instance?
Whether we view it as literal or as figurative involves a certain amount of human assumption. There is a lot of metaphor used in Apocalptic biblical literature (like a lot).
 
Upvote 0
Jan 24, 2022
18
18
48
Colorado
✟23,513.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Single
Whether we view it as literal or as figurative involves a certain amount of human assumption. There is a lot of metaphor used in Apocalptic biblical literature (like a lot).

Well I can agree with that because it does seem as if what exactly will take place at the second coming on the last day is not exactly clearly defined. We do know that Christ is returning in "flaming fire" but we don't know for sure if he will destroy the world by fire at that time even though we can make an assumption towards that end it is not a clear one.
 
  • Agree
Reactions: Zao is life
Upvote 0

Zao is life

Well-Known Member
Site Supporter
Apr 18, 2020
3,010
930
Africa
✟223,456.00
Country
South Africa
Gender
Male
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
Well I can agree with that because it does seem as if what exactly will take place at the second coming on the last day is not exactly clearly defined. We do know that Christ is returning in "flaming fire" but we don't know for sure if he will destroy the world by fire at that time even though we can make an assumption towards that end it is not a clear one.
I'm an agnosmillennialist because it's not totally clear.

gnosis = knowledge.
agnostic = "no knowledge" "don't know". "believe nothing"

agnosmillennialist = I don't know, but it's either/or (either the mill is symbolic for this current Age, or it's still coming).
 
Upvote 0

Marilyn C

Pre-tribulation.
Site Supporter
Dec 26, 2013
5,154
645
Victoria
✟704,943.00
Country
Australia
Gender
Female
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
I don't have a problem thinking the DOTL might be involving more than a single day, but I don't know if I could agree it involves everything you have it involving. On your chart it looks like you have the beginning of the DOTL starting with the beginning of the 7 years, which I'm assuming you are meaning the tribulation, except there is no 7 year trib recorded in the Bible that I'm aware of. The trib is only 42 months. But even at the beginning of the 42 months I don't see that being where the beginning of the DOTL begins either. The DOTL involves darkness, etc, whether it's meaning literal darkness that I'm not certain, and that Matthew 24:29 for one records a time of darkness and that it places it after the trib.

Hi David,

Actually I believe the Day of the Lord (God Almighty) starts when the Russian`s invade Israel. After God deals with them, then Israel will celebrate Purim, (National deliverance) and a bit later will be the Peace Treaty. Thus the trib, as I see it does not start immediately at the DOL.

The DOL is a time period (as Peter said) & a specific Day when the Lord returns to deliver Israel and deal vengeance upon the rebellious.
 
Upvote 0

Zao is life

Well-Known Member
Site Supporter
Apr 18, 2020
3,010
930
Africa
✟223,456.00
Country
South Africa
Gender
Male
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
Well I can agree with that because it does seem as if what exactly will take place at the second coming on the last day is not exactly clearly defined. We do know that Christ is returning in "flaming fire" but we don't know for sure if he will destroy the world by fire at that time even though we can make an assumption towards that end it is not a clear one.
But Peter leaves us in no doubt.

Yet there are biblical statements that also make it possible that it's referring to the fire coming down from heaven at the close of a literal millennium.
 
Upvote 0
Jan 24, 2022
18
18
48
Colorado
✟23,513.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Single
But Peter leaves us in no doubt.

Yet there are biblical statements that also make it possible that it's referring to the fire coming down from heaven at the close of a literal millennium.

What scriptures reference that because I am unfamiliar with those passages?
 
Upvote 0