Question about 2 Peter 3:8

[gdemoss]

Gary

Most of them are waiting to be caught up in the air before everything happens, which is not going to happen according to the scriptures.

I have to disagree on this one here as it is being taught within the text of 2 Peter 3. The Lord is not slack in keeping his promises he will not delay his coming. Even if the scoffers mock the believer who are patiently awaiting his coming. For I'm assured that those who have died in the faith by way of the grave. They will be resurrected first then those believers who are still alive on this earth at that time. Will then be caught up in the air with them to meet the Lord in the air forever be with the Lord. Our differences doesn't change the fact that we are both still children of God as we have put our faith in the solid rock being Jesus.

Yeah, my wording could have used a lot more detail in hindsight. I agree whole heartedly that their will in fact be a rapture but what I spoke of are they who are expecting to escape via the catching up before the tribulation comes upon the earth. Those who are kept will be kept through it unscathed and untouched by it and will be alive and remain to meet him in the air.

Gary

[hippias]

It is not a forumula because the Bible doesn't present it as a formula. A lot of really bad theology can come from trying to take what the Bible says and apply it in ways that were not intended by the writers.

shiloh357: Again, why is it impossible that it is a formula? How does the Bible present formulas then?

[Guest shiloh357]

It is not a forumula because the Bible doesn't present it as a formula. A lot of really bad theology can come from trying to take what the Bible says and apply it in ways that were not intended by the writers.

shiloh357: Again, why is it impossible that it is a formula? How does the Bible present formulas then?

If God intended this to be a formula, we would see it spelled out in other places of Scripture. 'we would have other passages either repeating the same thing or pointing to Peter's statement confirming that is a forumlaic pattern to be applied prophetically or whatever. We don't have that. The context doesn't even allow for it to be formulaic.

Peter is simply making the point that God's perspective on time is not like ours. A lot of foolish doctrine is created when people try to fill a verse or passage with meanings that the author did not intend.

[hippias]

It is not a forumula because the Bible doesn't present it as a formula. A lot of really bad theology can come from trying to take what the Bible says and apply it in ways that were not intended by the writers.

shiloh357: Again, why is it impossible that it is a formula? How does the Bible present formulas then?

If God intended this to be a formula, we would see it spelled out in other places of Scripture. 'we would have other passages either repeating the same thing or pointing to Peter's statement confirming that is a forumlaic pattern to be applied prophetically or whatever. We don't have that. The context doesn't even allow for it to be formulaic.

Peter is simply making the point that God's perspective on time is not like ours. A lot of foolish doctrine is created when people try to fill a verse or passage with meanings that the author did not intend.

And I presume you have ample scriptual evidence for your claim that formulas in the bible are presented in this way and only in this way, haven't you, shilo? I am also sure that you can provide numerous examples from the bible for numerical formulas that fit your description, don't you? And even if your claim is well-founded: what do think about psalm number 90:

Lord, Thou hast been our dwelling place in all generations.

2 Before the mountains were brought forth, or ever Thou hadst formed the earth and the world, even from everlasting to everlasting, Thou art God.

3 Thou turnest man to destruction, and sayest, “Return, ye children of men.”

4 For a thousand years in Thy sight are but as yesterday when it is past, and as a watch in the night.

So the statement is repeated elsewhere. Maybe a lot of bad theology can also came from giving one's personal opinions and beliefs presidence over the word of God.

If God inspired Peter to tell that His persepective on time is different from ours, I really don't see a problem if he had given us an exact relation between these two perspectives.

[Guest shiloh357]

It is not a forumula because the Bible doesn't present it as a formula. A lot of really bad theology can come from trying to take what the Bible says and apply it in ways that were not intended by the writers.

shiloh357: Again, why is it impossible that it is a formula? How does the Bible present formulas then?

If God intended this to be a formula, we would see it spelled out in other places of Scripture. 'we would have other passages either repeating the same thing or pointing to Peter's statement confirming that is a forumlaic pattern to be applied prophetically or whatever. We don't have that. The context doesn't even allow for it to be formulaic.

Peter is simply making the point that God's perspective on time is not like ours. A lot of foolish doctrine is created when people try to fill a verse or passage with meanings that the author did not intend.

And I presume you have ample scriptual evidence for your claim that formulas in the bible are presented in this way and only in this way, haven't you, shilo? I am also sure that you can provide numerous examples from the bible for numerical formulas that fit your description, don't you? And even if your claim is well-founded: what do think about psalm number 90:

Lord, Thou hast been our dwelling place in all generations.

2 Before the mountains were brought forth, or ever Thou hadst formed the earth and the world, even from everlasting to everlasting, Thou art God.

3 Thou turnest man to destruction, and sayest, “Return, ye children of men.”

4 For a thousand years in Thy sight are but as yesterday when it is past, and as a watch in the night.

So the statement is repeated elsewhere. Maybe a lot of bad theology can also came from giving one's personal opinions and beliefs presidence over the word of God.

If God inspired Peter to tell that His persepective on time is different from ours, I really don't see a problem if he had given us an exact relation between these two perspectives.

Two problems:

1. Neither the passage in Peter or the Psalms are interconnected. Meaning that Peter doesn't point to this verse as formulaic. What you have is common expression. It's like when God tells the Israelites in Numbers 33 that the Canannites will be thorn in their side if they don't rid the land of them and in 2 Corinthians were Paul uses the term again, "thorn in the flesh" In both cases, with the "thousand years as a day" and with "thorn in the flesh" it is simply case of using a common cultural expression and nothing more.

2. Nowhere does Scripture spell out to us that in God's eye 1,000 years = 24 hours. You are completely missing the point. The context is not about how God tells time. It is about God's mercy for the sinner. What is interpreted as a slowness or delay on God's part is really mercy. You have missed the context and are hell bent on trying to prove me wrong on something so minor, that it is both sad and laughable.

[enoob57]

I have a question concerning the verse in.......

2 Peter 3:8 - But, beloved, be not ignorant of this "one" thing, that "one day" is with the Lord as a thousand years, "and" a thousand years, as "one day".

If only one day to the Lord is 1000 years and a 1000 years to the Lord is just one day. Does this mean that Jesus has only been gone for 2 days? This being 2ooo years after the resurrection of Christ. Another 1000 years would make it 3000 years after the resurrection of Jesus. Then that would mean Jesus has only been gone for 3 days.

Need some

2 days, two hours, two minutes... according to the teaching God Who has never began nor ends but fills this reality as Himself =The only One Who dwells there and

The Only One Who by this truth of Being can testify of this reality does so by sharing His Heart with us in this statement (yours above Scripture)we can not fathom the experience that

God Has so faith must be in order for us to continually to move toward this great truth! However in this truth we can understand the how of His excess is continually going out

of our sight -> all the time for me! It is in this truth that I am most comforted for I realize by His Spirit within me I'm in an infinite exist not just in this place which ends...

So I adjust my focus of what life truly 'IS' and that 'IS' every Word that Has come Down from Him and now I walk according to His ways and leading as they make sense to

the eternal resolve that His Word beings to our lives... It is why long is short and short is long and why high is low and low high...this is merely the experiences of that which

has no bounds therefore no measure except what pleases Him! He has tenderly allowed us this by beginning but we are to eternally grow in His delight of Pleasure (remember)

do not automatically assume the understanding of our pleasure as His for He shows us all the time it is not! Love, Steven

[enoob57]

I believe the point of that verse is to say that time has no meaning to God, as in, He was and always is, and can move through time at His will, with no restraints.

Wouldn't it have been perfectly simply for God if he had wanted to say "that time has no meaning to God" that he had inspired Peter to write "time has no meaning to God" instead that what is actually written?

No because time means everything to God as He brought it into being by 'He saw that it was good'... it is our tutor of beginnings and it skillfully

teaches us many important areas of being in relation to God ... Even God Himself in Christ came and submitted to time

Gal 4:4-7

4 But when the fullness of the time had come, God sent forth His Son, born of a woman, born under the law,

5 to redeem those who were under the law, that we might receive the adoption as sons.

6 And because you are sons, God has sent forth the Spirit of His Son into your hearts, crying out,

"Abba, Father!" 7 Therefore you are no longer a slave but a son, and if a son, then an heir of God through Christ.

NKJV

This in the fullness of time an eternal thanksgiving we shall always bear within our hearts as the foremost of time! Love, Steven

[AnotherSinner]

This message seems to serve as a reminder that God is infinite. Also that all will be in accordance to His time.

Just Another Sinner Without A Clue

Dani

[Openly Curious]

Yes a day is like 1000 years.

There has been about 4000 years "from creation to Jesus," and we're almost at the 6000 year mark. There will be a "Millennial Rest" of 1000 years. for a total of 7000 years from Creation until the end of the Millennial rest.

Is it a coincidence that we have a 7 day week and the earth is almost 6000 years old? I don't think so.

My personal beliefs:

• Significant events have taken place marked by 980 year time spans.
  
• Those 980 years are broken up into two 490 year periods (possibly considered morning and evening time frames per Gen. 1)
  
• Those 490 year periods are broken up into 10 49 year Jubilees.
  
• Those 49 year Jubilees are broken up into 7, seven year sabbatical cycles.
  
  • Shoemaker-Levy 9 happened on a sabbatical year on the 9th of Av.
    
  • 9/11 happened on a sabbatical year. The markets crashed on 9/17 which corresponds to the Shemittah.
    
  • The real estate crisis hit it's climax on a sabbatical year - 2008, and the stock market lost 1.2 TRILLION on the Shemittah of that year.
    
  • 2015 (21 years since the 21 fragments of Shoemaker-Levy9 hit Jupiter) - Only G-d knows what happens in 2015.
    

  Hi TrackerJack, I have been pondering your reply according to the topic of the thread 2 Peter 3:8. While pondering over your reply several thoughts entered into my mind. The first being the comment in which you stated, "There has been about 4000 years from creation to Jesus," I happened to notice what the scoffers had said, "the creation has continued from the beginning of creation" since the fathers fell asleep believing and teaching. That this world is going to continue on forever just as it has been since the beginning of creation. The scoffers will try to deceive those who are awaiting the promise of the Lord's return. . Peter had warned and spoke to the saints saying that the scoffers would come in the last days with that message. Fom the time of the resurrection of Christ from the grave up until this present time we have and are living in the last days. Notice what Peter spoke to the believers that he first wanted them to know and believe firsthand. That the scofferes were "willingly ignorant" they did not believe that the world that was created in the beginnng of creation had been destroyed by a flood in the time of Noah. The people simply did not believe that the Lord would come and destroy the old world that then was from the beginning of creation. The scoffers do not believe there was a flood believing it was some kind of fairy tale. They are willing ignorant of the judgment of God in how he did come and literaly destroyed that world of old. It was because they would not turn from their wichedness at the preaching of Noah who was a preacher of righteousness. Because of that they could not enter into the ark before the the mercy of God came to a close as the final day of their last days came. They could not enter into the ark as God had closed the door efore. This wickedness that Peter spoke about is found in Genesis 6 concerning the men of renown dealing with the angels. Peter addressed this issue with the scoffers found in.....................................

  2 Peter 3-9 - Knowing this first, that there shall come in the last days scoffers, walking after their own lusts....And saying, Where is the promise of his coming? for since the fathers fell asleep, (Abraham, Issac and Jacob), all things continue as they were from the beginning of the creation....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, being overflowed with water, perished: ...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....But, beloved, be "not ignorant of this one thing, that one day is with the Lord as a thousand years as one day. The Lord is not slack concerning his promise, as some men count slackness; but is long suffering toward usward, not willingly that any should perish, but that all should come to repentance...........vs. 10-13)

  With this knowledge that the world that then was created by the word of God in the beginning of creation. Which God spoke into existance wss detroyed and no longer exsist . That world is gone forever that God created in the beginning of creation by his word.

  Now if that world which was created by the word of God in the beginning of creation no longer exist and is not part of this world that exists now. How is it then that you can say, that it has been about 4000 years from "CREATION" to Jesus" ? when the world God created in the beginning of creation was destroyed by a flood. Would it not stand to reason that the years up to Jesus would start from the time Noah came out of the ark into a new world God created? Starting over with just Noah and his family and replenished the new world that is now. Spoken into being by the same word of God. It just makes me very curious how you can determine the years from creation to Jesus when that world was destroyed in the flood????? In this regards would it not be just a "formula" im your beliefs that you mentioned within your reply.

[hippias]

It is not a forumula because the Bible doesn't present it as a formula. A lot of really bad theology can come from trying to take what the Bible says and apply it in ways that were not intended by the writers.

shiloh357: Again, why is it impossible that it is a formula? How does the Bible present formulas then?

If God intended this to be a formula, we would see it spelled out in other places of Scripture. 'we would have other passages either repeating the same thing or pointing to Peter's statement confirming that is a forumlaic pattern to be applied prophetically or whatever. We don't have that. The context doesn't even allow for it to be formulaic.

Peter is simply making the point that God's perspective on time is not like ours. A lot of foolish doctrine is created when people try to fill a verse or passage with meanings that the author did not intend.

And I presume you have ample scriptual evidence for your claim that formulas in the bible are presented in this way and only in this way, haven't you, shilo? I am also sure that you can provide numerous examples from the bible for numerical formulas that fit your description, don't you? And even if your claim is well-founded: what do think about psalm number 90:

Lord, Thou hast been our dwelling place in all generations.

2 Before the mountains were brought forth, or ever Thou hadst formed the earth and the world, even from everlasting to everlasting, Thou art God.

3 Thou turnest man to destruction, and sayest, “Return, ye children of men.”

4 For a thousand years in Thy sight are but as yesterday when it is past, and as a watch in the night.

So the statement is repeated elsewhere. Maybe a lot of bad theology can also came from giving one's personal opinions and beliefs presidence over the word of God.

If God inspired Peter to tell that His persepective on time is different from ours, I really don't see a problem if he had given us an exact relation between these two perspectives.

Two problems:

1. Neither the passage in Peter or the Psalms are interconnected. Meaning that Peter doesn't point to this verse as formulaic. What you have is common expression. It's like when God tells the Israelites in Numbers 33 that the Canannites will be thorn in their side if they don't rid the land of them and in 2 Corinthians were Paul uses the term again, "thorn in the flesh" In both cases, with the "thousand years as a day" and with "thorn in the flesh" it is simply case of using a common cultural expression and nothing more.

2. Nowhere does Scripture spell out to us that in God's eye 1,000 years = 24 hours. You are completely missing the point. The context is not about how God tells time. It is about God's mercy for the sinner. What is interpreted as a slowness or delay on God's part is really mercy. You have missed the context and are hell bent on trying to prove me wrong on something so minor, that it is both sad and laughable.

More problems:

It seems to me that you can't provide any scriptual proof for your claim about how formulas have to be presented in the bible. According to your very own words - post no. 36 - the passage is significant when these words could be found elsewhere in scripture which is the case (psalm 90). To say that the psalm and 2 Peter 2:38 are not interconnected is misleading: Of course they are not both mercy but they display the same relation of God's and ours perspective of time which is the issue of this thread. In addition these very two passages provide the information that you denied to exist: 1000 years= 1 day in God's eye.

Even if the the passage is chiefly about mercy it still contains the statement about relation of time and I don't understand why you belittle this piece of information and others not. One should assume that each word of God should be taken serious. Or can't God generally be trusted with numbers? There are many myths about gods having created the world: By the same argument you could argue that Genesis is meaningless because it is general formulaic pattern that is attributed to all sorts of gods - just the usual nonsensical gibberish people devise about their imagined gods. A theory of formulaic patterns might be applicable to ordinary literature but I am not sure if God who must be regarded as the original source of the words used them too and if He did that He should use those common in the area and times of Peter.

And by the way, the passage is first and foremost about the coming of the Lord, a topic for which it makes perfectly sense to say something about the chronological aspects.