2 Peter 3...Elements or elements!

End Times
_psychohmike
Posts: 32
Joined: Sun Nov 05, 2006 1:41 pm
Location: lakewood, Ca.

2 Peter 3...Elements or elements!

Post by _psychohmike » Thu Nov 09, 2006 8:42 pm

This is from the 2 Thess 1 = 70 A.D. topic. I wanted to repost this because I knew that it would get obscured by other posts. I feel that this is an important issue that Non-Full preterists sweep under the rug. Kind of like a hot potato.

Please someone address this issue please...Please...PLEASE?


rvornberg wrote:

My understanding from the Full Preterist side is that the elements are the Old and New Covenants.

Any thoughts on this from anyone?

The plain meaning of the Greek and context of the passage doesn't seem to indicate that. Although the Full Preterist will argue big on the plain meaning of the text, when it comes to passages like this usually that changes.

This is not a shot at the Full Preterist. I'm just curious if anyone see it the way I do.
Hey Ron, It's not that the preterist shifts their method of interpretation, it's that they consider the context of the New Testament as a whole. As a singular message told by a number of different authors. In that one author is going to be substantianted by the others. It's an organic message told by different authors sometimes using the same words sometimes different and often very picturesque but it's always the same story.

Paul used the same words(ELEMENTS) as Peter in talking about the Old Covenant Legal...Works system. The author of Hebrews did too. I believe this word is used some 7 times in the N.T. Never is it used to talk about elements as we understand them from our 21st century periodic table. Here is how it is used in the rest of the N.T.

Hebrews 5:12 For though by this time you ought to be teachers, you need someone to teach you again the first principles(stoichion) of the oracles of God; and you have come to need milk and not solid food.

Galatians 4:3;9 Even so we, when we were children, were in bondage under the elements(stoichion) of the world...But now after you have known God, or rather are known by God, how is it that you turn again to the weak and beggarly elements(stoichion), to which you desire again to be in bondage?

Col. 2:8, 20-22 Beware lest anyone cheat you through philosophy and empty deceit, according to the tradition of men, according to the basic principles(stoichion) of the world, and not according to Christ...Therefore, if you died with Christ from the basic principles(stoichion) of the world, why, as though living in the world, do you subject yourselves to regulations— “Do not touch, do not taste, do not handle,” which all concern things which perish with the using—according to the commandments and doctrines of men?

The word stoichion is NEVER used in the Bible to speak of hydrogen, oxygen and helium. Maybe I am too simplistic, but it seems to me that if God is going to communicate something to man, He is going to use language that they are familiar with and are going to understand. I don't know that the Bible was ever meant to be enigmatic to it's readers. Now does this mean that Peter couldn't have used this word that they would have been familiar with to mean something completely different. Sure...Why not. But the better question would be...Why?

The burden of proof is NOT on the full preterist...But it is upon those that say that elements(stoichion) isn't speaking of the principles of the Law.

So my challenge is to you that say that elements means rocks and water to prove it etymologically.

Brothers it's time we move beyond the elementary principles of our KJV only mentality regarding inspiration of our English versions and move on to a better understanding of the original languages and culture. For everyone who partakes only of milk is unskilled in the word of righteousness, for he is a babe. But solid food belongs to those who are of full age, that is, those who by reason of use have their senses exercised to discern both good and evil.

Let's move on brothers...8) Mike
Last edited by Guest on Wed Dec 31, 1969 7:00 pm, edited 0 times in total.
Reason:
Soon means later, Near means far, and at hand means countless thousands of years off in the future.

Hermeneutics 101, Dallas Theological Seminary

User avatar
_TK
Posts: 698
Joined: Mon Jun 26, 2006 12:10 pm
Location: Northeast Ohio

Post by _TK » Thu Nov 09, 2006 10:13 pm

mike-

give me a quick education-- what do the thessalonians have to do with 70 AD? they arent anywhere near jerusalem, are they? i know this may be an elementary question, but i am fairly new to full preterist viewpoints.

in regard to 2 Peter 3, peter is discussing the heavens, and the earth, then talks about a roar, and burning and the earth being laid bare, and elements melting. why would he talk about the law (or covenants, or principles, etc) melting? what is the greek word for melting? where else is it used? sorry, i dont have greek lexicons handy. i am trying to put myself in the place of the people who originally read this epistle; it sure seems like peter is talking about literal things burning and melting, not abstract principles. in 70 ad the heavens werent burnt up and the earth wasnt laid bare, was it? maybe a small part (i.e jerusalem) was burnt.

i realize this post may seem quite juvenile. oh well, i can live with that if you can!

TK
Last edited by Guest on Wed Dec 31, 1969 7:00 pm, edited 0 times in total.
Reason:
"Were not our hearts burning within us? (Lk 24:32)

_psychohmike
Posts: 32
Joined: Sun Nov 05, 2006 1:41 pm
Location: lakewood, Ca.

Lesson 1

Post by _psychohmike » Fri Nov 10, 2006 12:57 am

TK wrote:mike-

give me a quick education-- what do the thessalonians have to do with 70 AD? they arent anywhere near jerusalem, are they? i know this may be an elementary question, but i am fairly new to full preterist viewpoints.

in regard to 2 Peter 3, peter is discussing the heavens, and the earth, then talks about a roar, and burning and the earth being laid bare, and elements melting. why would he talk about the law (or covenants, or principles, etc) melting? what is the greek word for melting? where else is it used? sorry, i dont have greek lexicons handy. i am trying to put myself in the place of the people who originally read this epistle; it sure seems like peter is talking about literal things burning and melting, not abstract principles. in 70 ad the heavens werent burnt up and the earth wasnt laid bare, was it? maybe a small part (i.e jerusalem) was burnt.

i realize this post may seem quite juvenile. oh well, i can live with that if you can!

TK
Question 1: The Thessalonians were being persecuted by the Jews.(See 1 Thes 2 & Acts 17) Maybe I'm wrong but if some 1.1 million Jews were slaughtered and the center of their world(Jerusalem) destroyed...Seems to me like they might have lost some of their motivation. Plus they knew from their own past history that if their temple was destroyed that God was not on their side anymore.

Question 2: I would suggest starting with Isaiah 34. Read that passage and tell me how one is to interpret this kind of language.

TK...These letters that these people in the early church were receiving didn't just fall out of the sky in a language that they couldn't understand. These things were spoken to them in language that was common to their day. Language that the common man would understand. Language that Jewish converts to Christ would have understood as figurative. Figurative language that they would have heard growing up in the synagogue. Language that was straight from their scriptures.

And I hate to say it but the majority of Christianity today does not have the Old Testament tucked away in their head. Matter of fact most of them barely know their New Testament. So is it so strange to think that passages like 2 Peter 3 could be misunderstood. We live in a world much different from the one first century Jews grew up in.

Quite frankly we've got no business even opening up a New Testament until we have the Old Testament memorized. I feel that this is the reason that so many believers today come up with so many erroneous interpretations of New Testament passages.

8) Mike
Last edited by Guest on Wed Dec 31, 1969 7:00 pm, edited 0 times in total.
Reason:
Soon means later, Near means far, and at hand means countless thousands of years off in the future.

Hermeneutics 101, Dallas Theological Seminary

_rvornberg
Posts: 34
Joined: Thu Nov 02, 2006 12:23 pm

Post by _rvornberg » Fri Nov 10, 2006 1:25 am

Mike this may be the Preterist " hot potato, " I don't know.

I meantioned it before but never got a reply to it. The context of the passage doesn't allow for that take on it. I just am not seeing it.

I could be wrong. I'm willing to admit if I am. Can someone shed light on this.

2Pe 3:1 This is now, beloved, the second letter I am writing to you in which I am stirring up your sincere mind by way of reminder,

2Pe 3:2 hothat you should remember the words spoken beforehand by the ly prophets and the commandment of the Lord and Savior {spoken} by your apostles.

2Pe 3:3 Know this first of all, that in the last days mockers will come with {their} mocking, following after their own lusts,

2Pe 3:4 and saying, "Where is the promise of His coming? For {ever} since the fathers fell asleep, all continues just as it was from the beginning of creation." ( I don't see anything different )

2Pe 3:5 For when they maintain this, it escapes their notice that by the word of God {the} heavens existed long ago and {the} earth was formed out of water and by water,

2Pe 3:6 through which the world at that time was destroyed, being flooded with water. Genesis 7:17-24

2Pe 3:7 But by His word the present heavens and earth are being reserved for fire, kept for the day of judgment and destruction of ungodly men.

So let me get this straight. Your saying that Peter here now switches to talking about the old and new covenant?

2Pe 3:8 But do not let this one {fact} escape your notice, beloved, that with the Lord one day is like a thousand years, and a thousand years like one day.

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

2Pe 3:10 But the day of the Lord will come like a thief, in which the heavens will pass away with a roar and the elements will be destroyed with intense heat, and the earth and its works will be burned up.

2Pe 3:11 Since all these things are to be destroyed in this way, what sort of people ought you to be in holy conduct and godliness,

So they should walk in holy conduct because the new covenant is about to be suddenly come in? I thought it already had? ACT 2

2Pe 3:12 looking for and hastening the coming of the day of God, because of which the heavens will be destroyed by burning, and the elements will melt with intense heat!

2Pe 3:13 But according to His promise we are looking for new heavens and a new earth, [u]in which righteousness dwells[/u].

What is different? Maybe in America.


2Pe 3:14 Therefore, beloved, since you look for these things, be diligent to be found by Him in peace, spotless and blameless,

2Pe 3:15 and regard the patience of our Lord {as} salvation; just as also our beloved brother Paul, according to the wisdom given him, wrote to you,

2Pe 3:16 as also in all {his} letters, speaking in them of these things, in which are some things hard to understand, which the untaught and unstable distort, as {they do} also the rest of the Scriptures, to their own destruction.

2Pe 3:17 You therefore, beloved, knowing this beforehand, be on your guard so that you are not carried away by the error of unprincipled men and fall from your own steadfastness,

2Pe 3:18 but grow in the grace and knowledge of our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ. To Him {be} the glory, both now and to the day of eternity. Amen.
Last edited by Guest on Wed Dec 31, 1969 7:00 pm, edited 0 times in total.
Reason:

User avatar
_Mort_Coyle
Posts: 239
Joined: Tue Jun 14, 2005 12:28 am
Location: Seattle, WA

Post by _Mort_Coyle » Fri Nov 10, 2006 2:14 am

I've posted this before, but what the heck...

Looking for New Heavens and a New Earth
PARTS ONE AND TWO
By David Chilton, M.Div., Ph.D.

A basic principle of the Reformation was the priesthood of all believers. Not only could sinners receive the merits of Jesus Christ directly, but they also were given the high and holy privilege to study the Bible directly. Private interpretation does not mean interpretive autonomy. Scripture must be used to interpret Scripture. Nowhere is this principle more vividly illustrated than in a study of 2 Peter 3 and its language of a "new heaven and a new earth."
________________________________________

According to St. Peter's second epistle, Christ and the apostles had warned that apostasy would accelerate toward the end of the "last days" (2 Pet. 3:2-4; cf. Jude 17-19) - the forty-year period between Christ's as-cension and the destruction of the Old Covenant Temple in A.D. 70. [1] He makes it clear that these latter-day "mockers" were Covenant apostates: familiar with Old Testament history and prophecy, they were Jews who had abandoned the Abrahamic Covenant by rejecting Christ. As Jesus had repeatedly warned (cf. Matt. 12:38-45; 16:1-4;23:29-39), upon this evil and perverse generation would come the great "Day of Judgment" foretold in the prophets, a "destruction of ungodly men" like that suffered by the wicked of Noah's day (2 Pet.3:5-7).

Throughout His ministry Jesus drew this analogy (see Matthew 24:37-39 and Luke17:26-27). Just as God destroyed the "world" of the antediluvian era by the Flood, so would the "world" of first-century Israel be destroyed by fire in the fall of Jerusalem.

St. Peter describes this judgment as the destruction of "the present heavens and earth" (v. 7), making way for "new heavens and a new earth" (v. 10). Because of what may be called the "collapsing-universe" terminology used in this passage, many have mistakenly assumed that St. Peter is speaking of the final end of the physical heaven and earth, rather than the dissolution of the Old Covenant world order. The great seventeenth-century Puritan theologian John Owen answered this view by referring to the Bible's very characteristic metaphorical usage of the terms heavens and earth, as in Isaiah's description of the Mosaic Covenant:

But I am the LORD thy God, that divided the sea, whose waves roared: The LORD of hosts is his name. And I have put my words in thy mouth, and I have covered thee in the shadow of mine hand, that I may plant the heavens and lay the foundations of the earth, and say unto Zion, Thou art my people (Isa. 51:15 -16).

John Owen writes:

The time when the work here mentioned, of planting the heavens, and laying the foundation of the earth, was performed by God, was when he "divided the sea" (Isa. 51:15), and gave the law (v. 16), and said to Zion, "Thou art my people" - that is, when he took the children of Israel out of Egypt, and formed them in the wilderness into a church and state. Then he planted the heavens, and laid the foundation of the earth - made the new world; that is, brought forth order, and government, and beauty, from the confusion wherein before they were. This is the planting of the heavens, and laying the foundation of the earth in the world. And hence it is, that when mention is made of the destruction of a state and government, it is in that language that seems to set forth the end of the world. So Isaiah 34:4; which is yet but the destruction of the state of Edom. The like is also affirmed of the Roman empire, Revelation 6:14; which the Jews constantly affirmed to be intended by Edom in the prophets. And in our Saviour Christ's prediction of the destruction of Jerusalem, Matthew 24, he sets it out by expressions of the same importance. It is evident then, that, in the prophetical idiom and manner of speech, by "heavens" and "earth," the civil and religious state and combination of men in the world, and the men of them, are often understood. So were the heavens and earth that world which was then destroyed by the flood. [2]

Another Old Testament text, among many that could be mentioned, is Jeremiah 4:23-31, which speaks of the imminent fall of Jerusalem (587 B.C.) in similar language of decreation:

I looked on the earth, and behold, it was formless and void; and to the heavens, and they had no light....For thus says the LORD, the whole land shall be a desolation [referring to the curse of Lev.26:31-33; see its fulfillment in Matt.24:15!], yet I will not execute a complete destruction. For this the earth shall mourn, and the heavens above be dark....

New Creation Language
From the very beginning, God's covenant with Israel had been expressed in terms of a new creation: Moses described Israel's salvation in the wilderness in terms of the Spirit of God hovering over a waste, just as in the original creation of heaven and earth (Deut. 32:10-11; cf. Gen. 1:2). [3] In the Exodus, as at the original creation, God divided light and darkness (Ex. 14:20), divided the waters from the waters to bring forth the dry land (Ex. 14:21-22), and planted His people in His holy mountain (Ex. 15:17). God's miraculous formation of Israel was thus an image of Creation, a redemptive recapitulation of the making of heaven and earth. The Old Covenant order, in which the entire world was organized around the central sanctuary of the Jerusalem Temple, could quite appropriately be described, before its final dissolution, as "the present heavens and earth."

The Mosaic Economy
The 19th-century expositor John Brown wrote:

A person at all familiar with the phraseology of the Old Testament scriptures knows that the dissolution of the Mosaic economy, and the establishment of the Christian, is often spoken of as the removing of the old earth and heavens, and the creation of a new earth and heavens....The period of the close of the one dispensation, and the commencement of the other, is spoken of as 'the last days' and 'the end of the world'; and is described as such a shaking of the earth and heavens, as should lead to the removal of the things which were shaken (Hag. 2:6; Heb. 12:26-27). [4]

Therefore, says Owen,

On this foundation I affirm that the heavens and earth here intended in this prophecy of Peter, the coming of the Lord, the day of judgment and perdition of ungodly men, mentioned in the destruction of that heaven and earth, do all of them relate, not to the last and final judgment of the world, but to that utter desolation and destruction that was to be made of the Judaical church and state - i.e., the Fall of Jerusalem in A.D. 70. [5]
This interpretation is confirmed by St. Peter's further information: In this imminent "Day of the Lord" which was about to come upon the first-century world "like a thief" (cf. Matt. 24:42-43; I Thess. 5:2; Rev.3:3), "the elements will be destroyed with intense heat" (v. 10; cf. v. 12).

Elementary Principles
What are these elements? So-called "literalists" lightly and carelessly assume that the apostle is speaking about physics, using the term to mean atoms (or perhaps subatomic particles), the actual physical components of the universe. What these "literalists" fail to recognize is that although the word elements (stoicheia) is used several times in the New Testament, it is never used in connection with the physical universe! (In this respect, the very misleading comments of the New Geneva Study Bible on this passage [inserted below by JEGjr] violate its own interpretive dictum that "Scripture interprets Scripture." For possible meanings of this term, it cites pagan Greek philosophers and astrologers - but never the Bible's own use of the term!) Kittel's Theological Dictionary of New Testament Words observes that while in pagan literature the Greek word stoicheia is used in a number of different ways (referring to the "four elements" of the physical world, or to the "notes" on a musical scale, or to the "principles" of geometry or logic), the New Testament writers use the term "in a new way, describing the stoicheia as weak and beggarly. In a transferred sense, the stoicheia are the things on which pre-Christian existence rests, especially in pre-Christian religion. These things are impotent; they bring bondage instead of freedom." [6]

Study notes for II Peter 3:10 from the New Geneva Study Bible; and MacArthur Study Bible:

NGSB (p.1983) elements. Greek stoicheia, a term used for (a) the elements making up the world (according to the philosophers these were earth, air, fire, and water)...

MacArthur Study Bible (p.1959) the heavens will pass away with a great noise. The "heavens" refer to the physical universe. The "great noise" connotes whistling or a crackling sound as of objects being consumed by flames. God will incinerate the universe, probably in an atomic reaction that disintegrates all matter as we know it (vv.7, 11, 12, 13). the elements will melt with fervent heat. The "elements" are the atomic components into which matter is ultimately divisible, which make up the composition of all the created matter. Peter means that the atoms, neutrons, protons, and electrons are all going to disintegrate (v.11).

Throughout the New Testament, the word "elements" (stoicheia) is always used in connection with the Old Covenant order. St. Paul used the term in his stinging rebuke to the Galatian Christians who were tempted to forsake the freedom of the New Covenant for an Old Covenant-style legalism. Describing Old Covenant rituals and ceremonies, he says "we were in bondage under the elements (stoicheia) of this world....How is it that you turn again to the weak and beggarly elements (stoicheia), to which you desire again to be in bondage? You observe days and months and seasons and years..." (Gal. 4:3, 9-10). He warns the Colossians: "Beware lest anyone cheat you through philosophy and empty deceit, according to the basic principles (stoicheia) of the world, and not according to Christ....Therefore, if you died with Christ to the basic principles (stoicheia) of the world, why, as though living in the world, do you subject yourselves to regulations - 'Do not touch, do not taste, do not handle"' (Col. 2:8,20-21).

The writer to the Hebrews chided them: "For though by this time you ought to be teachers, you have need again for someone to teach you the elements (stoicheia) of the oracles of God, and you have come to need milk and not solid food" (Heb. 5:12). In context, the writer to the Hebrews is clearly speaking of Old Covenant truths particularly since he connects it with the term oracles of God, an expression used elsewhere in the New Testament for the provisional, Old Covenant revelation (see Acts 7:38; Rom.3:2). These citations from Galatians, Colossians, and Hebrews comprise all the other occurrences in the New Testament of that word "elements" (stoichea). Not one refers to the "elements" of the physical world or universe; all are speaking of the "elements" of the Old Covenant system, which, as the apostles wrote just before the approaching destruction of the Old Covenant Temple in A.D. 70, was "becoming obsolete and growing old" and "ready to vanish away" (Heb.8:13).

St. Peter uses the same term in exactly the same way. Throughout the Greek New Testament, the word elements (stoicheia) always means ethics, not physics; the foundational "elements" of a religious system that was doomed to pass away in a fiery judgment.

The Time Factor
In fact, St. Peter was quite specific about the fact that he was not referring to an event thousands of years in their future, but to something that was already taking place:

But the day of the Lord will come as a thief in the night, in which the heavens will pass away with a great noise, and the elements (stoicheia) will melt with fervent heat; both the earth and the works that are in it will be burned up. Therefore, since all these things are being dissolved, what manner of persons ought you to be in holy conduct and godliness, because of which the heavens will be dissolved, being on fire, and the elements (stoicheia) are being melted with fervent heat? (2 Pet. 3:10-12)

Contrary to the misleading renderings of translators blinded by their presuppositions, St. Peter insists that the dissolution of "the present heaven and earth" - the Old Covenant system with its obligatory rituals and bloody sacrifices - was already beginning to occur: the "universe" of the Old Covenant was coming apart, never to be revived:

When did prophet and vision cease from Israel? Was it not when Christ came, the Holy one of holies? It is, in fact, a sign and notable proof of the coming of the Word that Jerusalem no longer stands, neither is prophet raised up, nor vision revealed among them. And it is natural that it should be so, for when He that was signified had come, what need was there any longer of any to signify Him? And when the Truth had come, what further need was there of the shadow?...And the kingdom of Jerusalem ceased at the same time, kings were to be anointed among them only until the Holy of holies had been anointed. [7]

St. Peter's message, John Owen argues, is that:

...the heavens and earth that God himself planted - the sun, moon, and stars of the judaical polity and church - the whole old world of worship and worshippers, that stand out in their obstinancy against the Lord Christ - shall be sensibly dissolved and destroyed. [8]

Notes

[1] For a defense of this position, see my Paradise Restored: A Biblical Theology of Dominion (Tyier,TX: Dominion Press, 1985), 112-22. The fact is that every time Scripture uses the term "last days" (and similar expressions) it means, not the end of the physical universe, but the period from AD 30 to AD 70 - the period during which the Apostles were preaching and writing, the "last days" of Old Covenant Israel before it was forever destroyed in the destruction of the Temple (and consequently the annihilation of the Old Covenant sacrificial system). See Acts 2:16-21; I Tim. 4:1-3; 2 Tim. 3:1-9; Hebrews 1:1-2; 8:13; 9:26; James 5:7-9; I Peter 1:20;4:7; I John 2:18; Jude 17-19. See also Gary DeMar,Last Days Madness: The Obsession of the Modern Church (Atlanta, GA: American Vision, 1993).

[2] John Owen, "Providential Changes, An Argument for Universal Holiness," in William H. Goold, ed., The Works of John Owen, 16 vols. (London: The Banner of Truth Trust, 1965-68),9:134.

[3] See Chilton, Paradise Restored, 59.

[4] John Brown, Discourses and Sayings of Our Lord (Edinburgh: The Banner of Truth Trust, [1852] 1990), 1:171-72.

[5] Brown, Discourses and Sayings of Our Lord ,1:171-72.

[6] Gerhard Kittel and Gerhard Friedrich, eds.,Theological Dictionary of the New Testament (abridged in one volume), Geoffrey W. Bromiley, ed. (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1985), 1088.

[7] St. Athanasius, On the Incarnation of the Word of God (New York: Macmillan, 1946), [40] 61-62.8. Owen, "Providential Changes, An Argumentfor Universal Holiness," 9: 135.

[8] Owen, "Providential Changes, An Argument for Universal Holiness," 9: 135.


PART TWO

As we saw [above], Puritan theologian John Owen argued that the teaching of 2 Peter 3 about the coming "Day of the Lord" was not about the end of the physical universe, but of the Old Covenant and the nation of Israel. He points out that the term "heavens and earth" are often used in the Old Testament as a symbolic expression for God's covenantal creation, Israel (see Isa. 51:15-20; Jer. 4:23-31). Owen writes:

"the heavens and earth that God himself planted - the sun, moon, and stars of the judaical polity and church - the whole old world of worship and worshippers, that stand out in their obstinacy against the Lord Christ shall be sensibly dissolved and destroyed." [1]

Owen offers two further reasons ("of many that might be insisted on from the text," he says) for adopting the A.D. 70 interpretation of 2 Peter 3. First, he observes,"whatever is here mentioned was to have its particular influence on the men of that generation." [2] That is a crucial point, which must be clearly recognized in any honest assessment of the apostle's meaning. St. Peter is especially concerned that his first-century readers remember the apostolic warnings about "the last days" (vv. 2-3; cf. I Tim.4:1-6; 2 Tim. 3:1-9). During these times, the Jewish scoffers of his day, clearly familiar with the Biblical prophecies of judgment, were refusing to heed those warnings (vv. 3-5). He exhorts his readers to live holy lives in the light of this imminent judgment (vv. 11, 14); and it is these early Christians who are repeatedly mentioned as actively "looking for and hastening" the judgment (vv. 12, 13, 14). It is precisely the nearness of the approaching conflagration that St. Peter cites as a motive to diligence in godly living!

An obvious objection to such an exposition is to refer to what is probably the most well-known, most-misunderstood text in St. Peter's brief epistle: "But, beloved, do not forget this one thing, that with the Lord one day is as a thousand years, and a thousand years as one day" (2 Pet. 3:8). This means, it is said, that "God's arithmetic is different from ours," so that when Scripture uses terms like "near" and "shortly" (e.g., Rev. 1:1-3) or "at hand" (e.g., James 5:5-7), it doesn't intend to give the impression of soon-approaching events, but of events possibly thousands of years in the future!

Milton Terry refuted this seemingly plausible but spurious theory:

The language is a poetical citation from Psalm 90:4, and is adduced to show that the lapse of time does not invalidate the promises of God....But this is very different from saying that when the everlasting God promises something shortly, and declares that it is close at hand, He may mean that it is a thousand years in the future. Whatever He has promised indefinitely He may take a thousand years or more to fulfill; but what He affirms to be at the door let no man declare to be far away. [3]

J. Stuart Russell wrote with biting disdain:

Few passages have suffered more from misconstruction than this, which has been made to speak a language inconsistent with its obvious intention, and even incompatible with a strict regard to veracity. There is probably an allusion here to the words of the Psalmist, in which he contrasts the brevity of human life with the eternity of the divine existence....But surely it would be the height of absurdity to regard this sublime poetic image as a calculus for the divine measurement of time, or as giving us warrant for wholly disregarding definitions of time in the predictions and promises of God.

Yet it is not unusual to quote these words as an argument or excuse for the total disregard for the element of time in the prophetic writings. Even in cases where a certain time is specified in the prediction, or where such limitations as 'shortly,' or 'speedily,' or 'at hand' are expressed, the passage before us is appealed to in justification of an arbitrary treatment of such notes of time, so that soon may mean late, and near may mean distant, and short may mean long, and vice versa....

It is surely unnecessary to repudiate in the strongest manner such a non-natural method of interpreting the language of Scripture. It is worse than ungrammatical and unreasonable, it is immoral. It is to suggest that God has two weights and measures in His dealings with men, and that in His mode of reckoning there is ambiguity and variableness which will make it impossible to tell 'What manner of time the Spirit of Christ in the prophets may signify' [cf. I Pet. 1:11]...

The Scriptures themselves, however, give no countenance to such a method of interpretation. Faithfulness is one of the attributes most frequently ascribed to the 'covenant-keeping God,' and the divine faithfulness is that which the apostle in this very passage affirms....The apostle does not say that when the Lord promises a thing for today He may not fullfil His promise for a thousand years: that would be slackness; that would be a breach of promise. He does not say that because God is infinite and everlasting, therefore He reckons with a different arithmetic from ours, or speaks to us in double sense, or uses two different weights and measures in His dealings with mankind. The very reverse is the truth....

It is evident that the object of the apostle in this passage is to give his readers the strongest assurance that the impending catastrophe of the last days were on the very eve of fulfillment. The veracity and faithfulness of God were the guarantees of the punctual performance of the promise. To have intimated that time was a variable quantity in the promise of God would have been to stultify and neutralize his own teaching, which was that 'the Lord is not slack concerning His promise.' [4]

Continuing his analysis, John Owen cites verse 13: "But according to His promise we are looking for new heavens and a new earth, in which righteousness dwells." Owen asks: "What is that promise? Where may we find it?" Good question. Do you know the answer? Where in the Old Testament does God promise a New Heaven and Earth? Incidentally, this raises a wider, fascinating issue: When the New Testament quotes or cites an Old Testament text, it's often a good idea to hunt down the original context, see what it meant in its original context, and then see the "spin" the New Testament writer places on it. (For example, Isaiah's prophecy of a gigantic highway-construction project [Isa. 40:3-5] is not interpreted literally in the New Testament, but metaphorically, of the preaching ministry of John the Baptist [Luke 3:4-6]. And Isaiah's prophecy of a "golden age" when the wolf dwells peaceably with the lamb [Isa. 11:1-10] is condensed and cited by St. Paul as a present fulfillment, in the New Covenant age [Rom. 15:12]!)

But John Owen, this Puritan scholar, knows his Bible better than most of the rest of us, and he tells us exactly where the Old Testament foretells a "new heaven and earth":

What is that promise? Where may we find it? Why, we have it in the very words and letter, Isaiah 65:17. Now, when shall this be that God will create these "new heavens and new earth, wherein dwelleth righteousness"? Saith Peter, It shall be after the coming of the Lord, after that judgment and destruction of ungodly men, who obey not the gospel, that I foretell, But now it is evident, from this place of Isaiah, with chapter 66:21-22, that this is a prophecy of gospel times only; and that the planting of these new heavens is nothing but the creation of gospel ordinances, to endure forever. The same thing is so expressed in Hebrews 12:26-28. [5]

Owen is right on target, asking the question that so many expositors fail to ask: Where had God promised to bring "new heavens and a new earth"? The answer, as Owen correctly states, is only in Isaiah 65 and 66 - passages which clearly prophesy the period of the Gospel, brought in by the work of Christ. According to Isaiah himself, this "New Creation" cannot possibly be the eternal state, since it contains birth and death, building and planting (65:20-23). The "new heavens and earth" promised to the Church comprise the age of the New Covenant - the Gospel's triumph, when all mankind will come to bow down before the Lord (66: 22-23). John Bray writes: "This passage is a grand description of the gospel age after Christ came in judgment in 70 A.D. and took away the old heavens and the old earth. We now have the new heavens and the new earth of the gospel age." [6] St. Peter's encouragement to the Church of his day was to be patient, to wait for God's judgment to destroy those who were persecuting the faith and impeding its progress. "The end of all things is at hand," he had written earlier (I Pet. 4:7).

John Brown commented:

"The end of all things" here is the entire end of the Jewish economy in the destruction of the temple and city of Jerusalem, and the dispersal of the holy people. That was at hand; for this epistle seems to have been written a very short while before these events took place....It is quite plain that in our Lord's predictions, the expressions "the end" and probably "the end of the world" [KJV wrongly translates Mtt.24:3 as "world." Should be "age" - "...and the end of the age" NOT "...end of the world." JEGjr] are used in reference to the entire dissolution of the Jewish economy (cf. Matt.24:3, 6, 14, 34; Rom. 13:11-12; James 5:8-9). [7]
Once the Lord came to destroy the scaffolding of the Old Covenant structure, the New Covenant Temple would be left in its place, and the victorious march of the Church would be unstoppable. According to God's predestined design, the world will be converted; the earth's treasures will be brought into the City of God, as the Paradise Mandate (Gen. 1:27-28; Matt. 28:18-20) is consummated (Rev. 21:1-27).

This is why the apostles constantly affirmed that the age of consummation had already been implemented by the resurrection and ascension of Christ, who poured out the Holy Spirit. St. Paul, writing of the redeemed individual, says that "if any man is in Christ, he is a new creation; the old things have passed away; behold, all things have become new" (2 Cor. 5:17). St. John, recording his vision says the same thing: "And I saw a new heaven and a new earth....The first things have passed away....Behold, I am making all things new" (Rev. 21:1-5). The writer to the Hebrews comforts his first-century readers with the assurance that they have already arrived at "the City of the living God, the heavenly Jerusalem" (Heb. 12:22; cf. Gal. 26-28; Rev. 21). Even as the old "heaven and earth" were being shaken to rubble, the early Christians were "receiving a Kingdom which cannot be shaken," the eternal Kingdom of God brought in by His Son (Heb. 12:26-28).

Milton Terry wrote:

The language of 2 Pet. 3:10-12 is taken mainly from Isa. 34:4, and is limited to the parousia, like the language of Matt. 24:29. Then the Lord made "not only the land but also the heaven" to tremble (Heb. 12:26), and removed the things that were shaken in order to establish a kingdom which cannot be moved. [8]

It is crucial to note that the apostle continually points his readers' attention, not to events that were to take place thousands of years in the future, but to events that were already beginning to take place. Otherwise,his closing words make no sense at all: "Therefore, beloved, looking forward to these things, be diligent to be found by Him in peace, without spot and blameless....You, therefore, beloved, since you know these things beforehand, beware lest you fal lfrom your own steadfastness..." (2 Pet.3:14-17). If these things refer to a late-20th-century thermonuclear holocaust, why would the inspired apostle direct such a serious exhortation against "falling from steadfastness" to thousands of readers who would never live to see the things he foretold? A cardinal rule of Biblical interpretation is that Scripture must interpret Scripture; and, particularly, that the New Testament is God's own inspired commentary on the meaning of the Old Testament.

Once the old had been swept away, St. Peter declared, the Age of Christ would be fully established, an era "in which righteousness dwells" (2 Pet. 3:13). The distinguishing characteristic of the new era, in stark contrast to what preceded it, would be righteousness - increasing righteousness, as the Gospel would be set free in its mission to the nations. There have been many battles throughout Church history, of course, and many battles lie ahead. But these must not blind us to the very real progress that the Gospel has made and continues to make in the world. The New World Order of the Lord Jesus Christ has arrived; and, according to God's own promise, the saving knowledge of Him will fill the earth, as the waters cover the sea (Isa. 11:9).

Notes

[1] John Owen, "Providential Changes, an Argument for Universal Holiness," in The Works of John Owen, 16 vols. (Edinburgh: Banner of Truth Trust), 9:135.

[2] "Providential Changes, an Argument for Universal Holiness," 134.

[3] Milton Terry, Biblical Hermeneutices: A Treatise on the Interpretation of the Old and New Testaments (Grand Rapids: Zondervan,1974), 406.

[4] J. Stuart Russell, The Parousia (Bradford,PA: Kingdom Publications, n.d.), 321-23.

[5] "Providential Changes, an Argument for Universal Holiness," 134-35.

[6] John L. Bray, Heaven and Earth Shall Pass Away (Lakeland, FL: John L. Bray Ministries,1995), 26.

[7] Quoted in Roderick Campbell, Israel and the New Covenant (Philadelphia, PA: Presbyterian and Reformed, 1954), 107.

[8] Terry, Biblical Hermeneutics, 489.
Last edited by Guest on Wed Dec 31, 1969 7:00 pm, edited 0 times in total.
Reason:

_rvornberg
Posts: 34
Joined: Thu Nov 02, 2006 12:23 pm

Post by _rvornberg » Fri Nov 10, 2006 2:23 am

The word stoichion is NEVER used in the Bible to speak of hydrogen, oxygen and helium.
stoicheion

1) any first thing, from which the others belonging to some series or composite whole take their rise, an element, first principal

a) the letters of the alphabet as the elements of speech, not however the written characters, but the spoken sounds

b) the elements from which all things have come, the material causes of the universe

c) the heavenly bodies, either as parts of the heavens or (as others think) because in them the elements of man, life and destiny were supposed to reside

d) the elements, rudiments, primary and fundamental principles of any art, science, or discipline

1) i.e. of mathematics, Euclid's geometry

Mike yes it has.

2Pe 3:10 But the day of the Lord will come like a thief, in which the heavens will pass away with a roar and the elements will be destroyed with intense heat, and the earth and its works will be burned up.

2Pe 3:12 looking for and hastening the coming of the day of God, because of which the heavens will be destroyed by burning, and the elements will melt with intense heat!

I can come up with other examples of the greek word used in different ways. You know this.
Last edited by Guest on Wed Dec 31, 1969 7:00 pm, edited 0 times in total.
Reason:

_Sean
Posts: 636
Joined: Wed Mar 31, 2004 3:42 am
Location: Smithton, IL

Post by _Sean » Fri Nov 10, 2006 7:23 am

I still don't get it. Peter likens the "fire" judgement with the "water" judgement that killed them all who were not on the ark. It seems like they all died, not just some people. Why would Peter liken the judgement in 70AD to the flood?

You mentioned because they persecuted the Church. That's not stopped with 70AD, so if that was the point of Peter's discussion I can imagine unbelievers saying "is that all you got God"?

The fact is in the OT Jerusalem faced a similar seige by Babylon and it was also called a day of the lord where heavenly bodies (maybe nations) would be shaken up.

I think Peter is pointing to the final judgement when all Jesus enemies are put under His feet. Can you say that there are no more enemies left? Is everyone on earth is calling on the name of the lord and living in righteousness?

I just don't get it I guess. :?
Last edited by Guest on Wed Dec 31, 1969 7:00 pm, edited 0 times in total.
Reason:
By this all men will know that you are my disciples, if you have love for one another. (John 13:35)

_Ely
Posts: 232
Joined: Fri Apr 21, 2006 4:28 pm
Location: UK

Post by _Ely » Fri Nov 10, 2006 9:03 am

Mort, I've skimmed through that voluminous article (to the detriment of the lesson planning I'm supposed to be doing). I noticed a couple of things.

The article quotes John Owen thus:
"Isaiah's prophecy of a gigantic highway-construction project [Isa. 40:3-5] is not interpreted literally in the New Testament, but metaphorically, of the preaching ministry of John the Baptist [Luke 3:4-6]. And Isaiah's prophecy of a "golden age" when the wolf dwells peaceably with the lamb [Isa. 11:1-10] is condensed and cited by St. Paul as a present fulfillment, in the New Covenant age [Rom. 15:12]!)"
1. Whoever says that Isaiah 40:3-5 must be interpreted in literal manner? Not any premillennialist that I know of. This appears to be a textbook straw man argument which is thus of no use to his argument.

2. Paul's partial quotation of Isaiah 11 in Romans 15:12 does not indicate that the whole chapter was being fulfilled (so as to preclude a literal fulfillment) in Paul's own day. Let's first look at the Isaiah passage (I've highlighted the bits which Paul seems to be quoting)


1 There shall come forth a Rod from the stem of Jesse, And a Branch shall grow out of his roots. 2 The Spirit of the LORD shall rest upon Him, The Spirit of wisdom and understanding, The Spirit of counsel and might, The Spirit of knowledge and of the fear of the LORD. 3 His delight is in the fear of the LORD, And He shall not judge by the sight of His eyes, Nor decide by the hearing of His ears; 4 But with righteousness He shall judge the poor, And decide with equity for the meek of the earth; He shall strike the earth with the rod of His mouth, And with the breath of His lips He shall slay the wicked. 5 Righteousness shall be the belt of His loins, And faithfulness the belt of His waist. 6 “ The wolf also shall dwell with the lamb, The leopard shall lie down with the young goat, The calf and the young lion and the fatling together; And a little child shall lead them. 7 The cow and the bear shall graze; Their young ones shall lie down together; And the lion shall eat straw like the ox. 8 The nursing child shall play by the cobra’s hole, And the weaned child shall put his hand in the viper’s den. 9 They shall not hurt nor destroy in all My holy mountain, For the earth shall be full of the knowledge of the LORD As the waters cover the sea. 10 “ And in that day there shall be a Root of Jesse, Who shall stand as a banner to the people; For the Gentiles shall seek Him, And His resting place shall be glorious.”


Now let's look at Paul's words in Romans 15:8-12:

"8 Now I say that Jesus Christ has become a servant to the circumcision for the truth of God...

Jesus certainly became a servant at the cross if not before, at His incarnation. Why did He become a servant? Two reasons, firstly:

"to confirm the promises made to the fathers"

To "confirm" means "to make sure, to re-affirm" something. It doesn't mean to bring to pass. So the reason why Jesus became a servant to the Circumcision was to "make sure, to re-affirm" the promises made to the fathers. This does not mean that the promises were all brought to pass in Jesus' Incarnation or at the cross (or the ascension). This has bearing on how we interpret the promises themselves.

The other reason He became a servant was:

"and that the Gentiles might glorify God for His mercy"

Which is what they were doing in Paul's day and they continued to do so for 2000-odd years and we are doing today, Hallelujah!

Then Paul says:

"as it is written"


He then quotes three OT passages, Psalm 18:49, Deuteronomy 32:43, Psalm 117:1 and (crucially) Isaiah 11, 1 and 10.

What does this phrase "as it is written" mean? Sometimes, when a NT writer uses this phrase, he is saying that a present situation fulfils the OT passage leaving no scope for a yet-future fulfillment (e.g. John 12:14-15). However, sometimes, the phrase is used to indicate that there is a similarity, or agreement between a present situation and the one indicated in the OT passage (e.g. Romans 2:23, 8:36).

As a non-premillennialist, John Owen notes the inclusion of Isaiah 11:1 and 10 and reasons "see, all that stuff about the wolf lying down with the lamb and children playing with deadly snakes was being fulfilled in Paul's day, so it was obviously not meant to be taken literally." But this conclusion is not required, or even suggested, IMO.

I believe that when Paul quotes these passages, he is saying that the reality of Gentiles glorifying God for His mercy agrees with the tenor of the OT passages. With regard to Isaiah 11, I believe Paul is saying: "Jesus Christ is indeed the root of Jesse whom Isaiah spoke of. He is now calling out people from among the Gentiles as His own. This agrees with the fact that when He returns to Earth, all the nations will rally to His glorious resting place on His holy mount Zion and when the whole Earth will be filled with the knowledge of the LORD, as Isaiah foretold."

Call it fancy footwork if you like, I'm open to being shown the my errors. But at the moment, I don't see why this passage, and other similar citations of OT "Kingdom passages" in NT requires us to relinquish a consistent (not the straw man wooden) literal understanding of the original prophecies in favour of an allegorical one.


New Heavens and New Earth?
If Romans 15:12 is proof that Isaiah 11 was being completely fulfilled in Paul's day (so as to preclude any future, literal fulfilment), then the New Heavens and New Earth described in Isaiah 65:25 had already come in Paul's day too (this passage is a clear reference to Isaiah 11:6-9 and is surely talking about the same thing).

If this be true, then the New Heavens and New Earth in 2 Peter 3 must have likewise already been in existence at the time of Romans' writing. But if this be the case, then why does Peter indicate that he was still awaiting the New Heavens and New Earth, (spoken of by the prophets)?

Ely
Last edited by Guest on Wed Dec 31, 1969 7:00 pm, edited 0 times in total.
Reason:
"Looking for the blessed hope and glorious appearing of our great God and Saviour, Christ Jesus" Titus 2:13
www.lasttrumpet.com
www.pfrs.org

_psychohmike
Posts: 32
Joined: Sun Nov 05, 2006 1:41 pm
Location: lakewood, Ca.

Circular reasoning

Post by _psychohmike » Fri Nov 10, 2006 9:43 am

rvornberg wrote:
The word stoichion is NEVER used in the Bible to speak of hydrogen, oxygen and helium.
stoicheion

1) any first thing, from which the others belonging to some series or composite whole take their rise, an element, first principal

a) the letters of the alphabet as the elements of speech, not however the written characters, but the spoken sounds

b) the elements from which all things have come, the material causes of the universe

c) the heavenly bodies, either as parts of the heavens or (as others think) because in them the elements of man, life and destiny were supposed to reside

d) the elements, rudiments, primary and fundamental principles of any art, science, or discipline

1) i.e. of mathematics, Euclid's geometry

Mike yes it has.

2Pe 3:10 But the day of the Lord will come like a thief, in which the heavens will pass away with a roar and the elements will be destroyed with intense heat, and the earth and its works will be burned up.

2Pe 3:12 looking for and hastening the coming of the day of God, because of which the heavens will be destroyed by burning, and the elements will melt with intense heat!

I can come up with other examples of the greek word used in different ways. You know this.
Ron you are using circular reasoning. Go anywhere outside of 2 Peter 3 and find the word stoichion used in their common language of that day...Koine Greek. You will find that there is not one instance in the greek where the word means elements in the fashion that you are claiming.

Gotta go to work

8) Mike
Last edited by Guest on Wed Dec 31, 1969 7:00 pm, edited 0 times in total.
Reason:
Soon means later, Near means far, and at hand means countless thousands of years off in the future.

Hermeneutics 101, Dallas Theological Seminary

_Jim from covina
Posts: 37
Joined: Mon Sep 04, 2006 11:22 am

Post by _Jim from covina » Fri Nov 10, 2006 10:41 am

HELLO Sean...........im confused, you said......

I still don't get it. Peter likens the "fire" judgement with the "water" judgement that killed them all who were not on the ark

IN what way does Peter liken the "fire judgment with the "water" judgment? I dont see in those verses anywhere where peter is saying that the flood judgment will be what we are to expect in the future, or that it is to wipe out all the people, etc. Is there a clear connection of those two, or are you assuming this, based on your belief that "elements" mean something else than they are usually used in the n.t.???


jim d
Last edited by Guest on Wed Dec 31, 1969 7:00 pm, edited 0 times in total.
Reason:

Post Reply

Return to “Eschatology”