A
discussion on 2Pet 3
Sun, Mar 15, 9:39 PM
Sun, Mar 15, 9:39 PM
sing
Dear
Brethren,
In
2Pet 3, what is the promised coming discussed - Christ coming to judge Israel
in 70AD or His coming at the end of the gospel age? Which is being scoffed at, and
by whom?
Please
say something to stir up my thinking process. Thanks.
Joe
Brother
Sing,
It
is my view that Peter wrote of the final Second Coming. The whole chapter, in
my perspective, simply says too much, far too much, to refer to 70 AD.
Lord
bless
Steve
"coming
to get us"
In
2Pet 3, what is the promised coming discussed?
He's
coming back. He said he would. He's coming back again oh glory to his name
he's coming back again... he's coming back he said he would He's coming back
again ... makes me want to sing... Sing, he's coming back to get us, brother! John
14:1-3, if it were not so, I would have told you!
sing
Brother
Joe, Thank you. Please do elaborate a bit in what ways the chapter is saying
too much to refer to 70AD. I'm inclined
to think that the context makes sense speaking of 70AD.
Joe
Brother Sing, Apologies, but time is short at the moment. Briefly, at the time of Peter’s writing, he was still looking for that new and better kingdom “...wherein dwelleth righteousness.” It had not yet appeared. ?? Do you believe the New Testament righteous kingdom did not begin till 70 AD? Much more could be offered, but this thought surfaced immediately when I read your note.
sing
Brother
Joe, Thanks for that good pointer.
The
answer to that is found in the words of the holy prophets... they prophesied of
the doing away with the old heavens and earth (old theocratic Israel) and the
establishment of the kingdom of heaven wherein righteousness dwells.
Peter's
audience was Jewish believers who were still under the potential snare of the
old geriatric kingdom of unrighteousness and wickedness. As long as the
pernicious old and wicked kingdom had not been abolished, in a sense, the new
and better can't be said to have been fully arrived. The promised coming that
was of immediate and personal relevance to the recipients is something
imminent... a coming that will mean life and death to them... something that is directly conditioned upon
their believing the warning and repenting from their unbelief. Just mulling.
Steve
Steve
Brother Sing, I believe the Scriptures are not nearly so codified and mystical
as that. God
reveals himself unto us in the holy prophets, rather than conceals himself from
us therein. Nevertheless
we, according to his promise, look for new heavens and a new earth, wherein
dwelleth righteousness.
Herein
is my hope...that where He is, there I may be also.
Right
now the LORD OUR RIGHTEOUSNESS dwelleth in the new heavens and new earth
prepared before the foundation of this world. (dwelleth means has dwelled is
dwelling and will dwell)
The
new heavens and new earth Peter spoke of were in existence at the time of his
writings yet he was not in them or he would not be looking for them.
At
least this is my dim clouded view through the lattice.
Josh
Bro.
Sing, Here is an article by David P on the subject but focuses more on
Revelation 21.
God
bless
Royce
Joe
Brother
Sing, Thanks for your reply. You can view the chapter as you wish. Just a quiet
reasoning session between us.
My
problem with the AD70 view has to do with timing. It seems all off. The veil in
the temple was rent at Jesus’ crucifixion, not almost 40 years later at AD70.
The Holy Spirit descended fifty days after the Passover when Jesus was
crucified. And Jesus Himself dated His kingdom transition even earlier.
Luke
16:16 (CWSB)
16
The law and the prophets were until John: since that time the kingdom of God is
preached, and every man presseth into it.
Could
people press into something that didn’t come to be for 40 years yet in the
future?
With
this cumulative New Testament evidence, I can’t push the coming New Testament
kingdom almost 40 years later. It simply doesn’t work for me.
I
do believe that 70 AD is a significant prophetic event that Jesus warned the
disciples to expect in the Olivet Discourse. However, it is easy to put too
much into that event and lose the supreme joy of the Lord’s promised and final—and
yet future when Peter wrote—return. The future tense verbs in Peter’s words in
2 Peter 3 nicely match this event. The Lord’s New Testament kingdom had long
been preached and believed when he wrote the words; it was not still future.
Just my reflections. Hope they help your study.
Lord
bless,
sing
Dear
Brother Joe, Thank you for reasoning with me... please don't give up on me yet.
When the PBs speak unanimously, I must be triple careful else I appear as foolish
and impudent.
About
the timing, it sets me thinking; 2Peter was written to Jewish believers a few
years prior to 70AD, nearly 40 years since the Lord Jesus gave His prophesied
coming to abolish the old theocratic Israel, Matt 24,25.
At
the time when the epistle was written, there were already scoffers scoffing at
the Lord's promised coming that would destroy and end theocratic Israel. There
are fewer difficulties to understand that those Jew were scoffing at the
promised coming of judgment... the judgment prophesied by the holy prophets.
The holy prophets prophesied of the fiery day of wrath coming upon Israel in
cosmic terms... new heavens and earth. The scoffers were familiar with the holy
prophets but they were wilfully ignorant, charged Apostle Peter.
What
was the ground of their scoffing? They reasoned thus, "Israel, since its
creation, has stood until now, through horrendous seasons, but kept and
preserved by the word of the LORD God of Israel; Israel will continue. The
promised coming to judge and end Israel is just too preposterous."
Apostle
Peter was desirous to protect the saints from such smooth words and end up
being slaughtered and roasted by the Romans. This impressive argument of the
scoffers was refuted by Apostle Peter with three truths from the holy prophets
to remind the recipients:
-
Noah's world was judged and purged of the old, "what has made the scoffers
think LORD God wouldn't do the same to Israel? The holy prophets have plainly
prophesied the end of theocratic Israel. The scoffers chose to be willfully ignorant.
-
Divine time perspective differs from that of man, the scoffers are deceived.
-
Divine longsuffering is mistaken for slackness or non-fulfillment of His word,
the scoffers are deceived.
Also,
"... is longsuffering to usward, not willing that any should perish but
that all should come to repentance" make no sense if it is about the second
coming.
I
really wish I can go along with the big crowd but presently I haven't been
given enough light.
I'll
keep reasoning and mulling your wise words. Amen.
Forgive
me if I seem stiff-neck.
Wayne
Brother
Sing, Primitive Baptists are not united completely on this subject. Since a good number of people whose
interpretation of Scripture I greatly trust such as Brethren Joe, Michael G and
many, many more have a different view than I; I rethink my position from time
to time. Those who whole basically the view you express are likely a minority
among Primitive Baptists, there is a sizeable minority of us who hold to the
pre-AD70 timing of the writing of the Book of Revelations and believe that most
of its contents deal with "things which must shortly come to pass"
(Rev. 1:1, etc.). It very well could be that many of the things that are
written was written using "end time" language, but to the most part
dealt with the time that was at hand when it was written. Below is an article I wrote several years ago
on this subject that I believe presents some food for thought:
What
is the Scriptural name or names for eternal glory and the abode of God? It is
called heaven. Jesus said, “I came down from heaven” (John 6:38). Jesus called
it, “my Father’s house” (John 14:2). It is called “paradise” in Luke 23:43 and
2 Corinthians 12:4. It is also called “Abraham’s bosom” (Luke 16:22). Perhaps there
are other names given in Scripture. Many believe it is or will be called the
new heaven, the new earth and/or new Jerusalem. I would like to consider
whether or not these names are referring to eternal heaven. What does the
Scriptures teach?
Let’s
begin with the use of the terms in Isaiah 65. It appears the New Testament
usages draws upon Isa. 65:17-19: “For, behold, I create new heavens and a new
earth: and the former shall not be remembered, nor come into mind. But be ye
glad and rejoice forever in that which I create Jerusalem a rejoicing, and her
people a joy. And I will rejoice in Jerusalem, and joy in my people; and the
voice of weeping shall be no more heard in her, nor the voice of crying.”
We
need to consider the context of these verses in order to know whether or not
this is dealing with a new condition upon planet earth, or with the eternal,
after this life, state. In Romans 10:20, Paul refers to Isaiah 65 to show the
Gentiles were being brought into the blessings of the gospel and how Israel was
rejecting Christ and His gospel: “But Esaias is very bold, and saith, I was
found of them that sought me not; I was made manifest unto them that asked not
after me. But to Israel he saith, All the day long I have stretched forth my
hands unto a disobedient and gainsaying people.” Isaiah 65: 2-15 deals with
God’s judgment and wrath upon rebellious Israel, but is also showing how the
Lord would bless those who repented and obeyed the gospel of Christ. (No doubt
these prophecies had an application to the idolatrous rebellion of Israel in
the days of Isaiah and the time following when the Babylonians brought
destruction upon them, carried them into captivity for 70 years, and how God
restored them to their homeland. But, as Paul made clear, these prophecies are
most surely dealing with New Testament times also.)
Isaiah
65:17-25, in somewhat figurative language, describes the blessed condition that
would exist in the gospel kingdom of heaven, or the new heavens and new earth,
after God’s judgment is poured out upon the old heavens and the old earth. It
should be clear that eternal glory is not under consideration in these verses.
Although a very blessed estate is portrayed, every aspect of it cannot be taken
literally whether you apply this to eternal glory or to the gospel age on
earth. But this new state is so superior to the old law service and the
suffering that occurred under it, that the former state is no longer remembered
or desired. No one who has experienced the blessings of the grace era would
want to return to the old order. In that sense, the old is no longer
remembered! The contrast between the old and the new can be seen in the life of
Paul. The wolf, Saul of Tarsus, was changed so that he became Paul, and then
ate with the lamb he once would have devoured (Isa. 65:25).
To
me, it appears that many assumptions and stretching of the text are required to
equate Isaiah 67:17-25 with the blessed eternal state. The same case applies to
many portions of Rev. 21 and 22. In the eternal state, will God’s children
thirst? (Rev. 21:6). Would the eternal abode have the names of the twelve
tribes of Israel written on the twelve gates and the names of the twelve
apostles on the twelve foundations literally or figuratively? (verses 12,14).
The only One that would receive special recognition in eternal glory would be
Christ. How can the kings of the earth bring their honor and glory into the
eternal city? (verses 24-26). Why would the nations in eternal glory need to
partake of the leaves of the tree of life continually for their healing? (Rev.
22:2). The right to enter into whatever city is under consideration is
conditional! It cannot be eternal glory: “Blessed are they that do his
commandments, that they may have right to the tree of life, and may enter in
through the gates into the city” (Rev. 22:14). This is not the same lesson
being taught in John 5: 29 and Mat. 25:35-40, which gives the characteristics
of God’s sheep rather than conditions for them to become sheep. The term “that
they may have right” is clearly based upon them “doing his commandments” (Rev.
22:14). How about verses 17 and 18? The command or invitation from the Spirit
and the bride most surely has reference to the gospel and the Lord’s church on
earth –not to eternal glory! Why would the Spirit and the bride say come and
take of the water of life to those already enjoying all the glories of eternal
heaven?
It
is true, that we may find it difficult to reconcile the glorious conditions
that are said to exist in the new Jerusalem with the faults in individual
congregations of the Lord’s church and with the fact that people get sick,
suffer pain, sadness and disappointments, and die. But when we realize the
lesson being presented is to show the great contrast in what exists in the
gospel kingdom and that which existed in the old law dispensation, the
difficulty is removed for the most part. Not only was there a continual killing
of animals for sacrifices sometimes in the thousands, but under the strict
enforcement of the law given to Moses, people were killed for violating the
Sabbath and many other sins. Now in the new Jerusalem or grace dispensation, we
find no more death being carried out within the Lord’s church kingdom. The
execution of the death sentence is left to the civil authorities for the most serious
crimes. “For the law was given by Moses, but grace and truth came by Jesus
Christ” (John 1:17).
When
the Lord’s church is operating in the manner it should, it is a most glorious
institution providing many benefits to the obedient children of God. It is
designed to provide a taste of heaven while we live in this present world,
looking forward to that future, blessed eternal state when we are raised in the
likeness of our Lord and Savior, Jesus Christ. Perhaps, one reason it is hard
to accept the idea that the blessed conditions ascribed to new Jerusalem could
be within the Lord’s church on earth, is that we are not seeing the Lord’s
bride in the beauty we should. It is hard to overstate how much better the new
covenant is than was the old: “But now hath he obtained a more excellent
ministry, by how much also he is the mediator of a better covenant, which was
established upon better promises” (Heb. 8:6).
There
are a number of objections to the interpretation that 2 Peter 3 could be
referring to anything other than the physical passing away of the heavens and
the burning up of planet earth (verses7 & 10). It is understandable that
since the destruction of the world by water in the days of Noah was a physical
destruction that one would think that “the heavens and the earth, which are
now, by the same word are kept in store, reserved unto fire against the day of
judgment…” is referring to a physical universal destruction. If it were not for
the teachings on the same subject contained in Isaiah 65, Mat. 24, and the book
of Revelation, I would come to the same conclusion. But, since so much of those
Scriptures are dealing with the literal destruction of Jerusalem with its
physical and figurative implications regarding the complete removal of the
things pertaining to the old law service and its replacement by the new
covenant signified by the glorious new Jerusalem, the imagery of the complete
dissolution of the material creation was in order to teach the profoundness of
the event at hand.
In
order to appreciate the extent of the catastrophe that took place, one needs to
read at least a portion of Josephus’ description of the six-month siege of
Jerusalem in 70 AD. Or, if we do not want to read about the terrible details,
we can just read and believe what Jesus said as He prophesied regarding this
catastrophic event. As He warned of the necessity of believers to flee from
Jerusalem, He stated: “But pray ye that your flight be not in the winter,
neither on the Sabbath day: For then shall be great tribulation, such as was
not since the beginning of the world to this time, no, nor ever shall be” (Mat.
24:20,21). The imagery of the heavens passing away with a great noise, the
elements melting with fervent heat and the earth and its works being burned up
(2 Peter 3:10) is fitting to figuratively describe the greatest catastrophe
that has ever occurred or will ever occur on this earth!
A
close reading of Matthew 24 in light of the other Scriptures regarding the
judgment passed upon Jerusalem in 70 AD, clears up some misconceptions I have
had and most good Bible students still have. The entire chapter pertains to
only a portion of the questions asked by the disciples: “Tell us, when shall
these things be? And what shall be the sign of thy coming, and of the end of
the world?” Jesus does not get to the end of this time world until Matthew
25:31: “When the Son of man shall come in his glory, and all the holy angels
with him, then shall he sit upon the throne of his glory….” It is clearly
stated in Mat. 24:34,35 that all the things mentioned would come to pass quite
soon: “Verily I say unto you, This generation shall not pass, till all these
things be fulfilled. Heaven and earth shall pass away, but my words shall not
pass away.” That heaven and earth passed away figuratively and Biblically
speaking just as described in 2 Peter 3:10.
What
would be the purpose of the grave warnings regarding the coming of the Son of
man as a thief in the night, if it is referring to His bodily coming at the end
of time to raise the dead and execute the final judgment? Our looking for Him
and straightening up our lives would have no bearing on the outcome of that
glorious event. Certainly we should live godly and righteously that we might
honor Him for His love and grace, and enjoy a foretaste of heaven until He
comes to call us home. But there is nothing anyone can do to escape the
consequences of His final coming. It will be most glorious to the sheep (elect)
of God. It will be most dreadful for the goats (the unregenerate wicked). But
the warning of His coming as a thief in the night had a profound bearing on the
well-being of those of His children who took heed to the coming in judgment in
70 AD. We are not looking for another coming in the likeness of 70 AD, but we
would do well to take heed to His commandments that we might save ourselves
from the untoward generation in our day.
A
final note regarding 2 Peter 3 is the matter of repentance. “The Lord is not
slack concerning his promise, as some men count slackness; but is longsuffering
to us-ward, not willing that any should perish, but that all should come to
repentance” (2 Peter 3: 9). The perishing under consideration is not in an
eternal sense, but a perishing of the Lord’s children in time. It is likely
that some of the scoffers were misinformed children of God and might repent.
That being as it may, we know that, Peter is talking about “us”, children of
God who would perish in the soon-coming destruction unless they should repent.
I find nowhere in Scripture where repentance is something we receive in the new
birth. Rather, it is something we are commanded and led to do once we have been
born again. If what I am saying is true in regard to repentance, I believe the
whole idea that 2 Peter 3 is dealing with the end of time and the destruction of
our material universe is refuted.
I
have no illusion that I will convince many, if any, who hold another view
regarding this subject. But I do hope that my good brethren can see and
acknowledge that the view of those of my persuasion have plenty of Scriptural
reasons for coming to the view we hold. As Paul said, consider what I say and
the Lord give thee understanding. I appreciate all who have taken part in this
discussion. At the outset, I questioned whether or not the position I have held
was right or wrong. After reading your views and the views posted from Brother
David Pyles, and taking time to study and meditate upon the matter, I have
become much more convinced that the position held by us 70 ADers is the correct
Biblical view. But I love and appreciate those of you who have a different
opinion as much as I do those who share my views. Our beliefs on this matter
are not to be considered essential for fellowship and the overall unity of our
faith.
There
are plenty of Scriptures that plainly teach the second or final coming of our
Lord Jesus Christ and the resurrection of the just and unjust. Some are the
last portion of Matthew 25, I Corinthians 15, and I Thessalonians 4:13-18.
Yours
in hope.
Joe
Brother
Sing, I will not twist your arm on the point, but, with your indulgence, I will
offer a few more thoughts and then let you enjoy whatever view gives you peace
in the "Far East." Grin. I quote a portion of your last note, and I
will insert some thoughts into that quotation.
sing @ “What was the ground of their scoffing? They reasoned
thus, "Isreal, since its creation, has stood until now, through horrendous
seasons, kept and preserved by the word of the LORD God of Israel; Israel will
continue. The promised coming to judge and end Israel is just too
preposterous."
(Joe
here) Brother Sing, Peter offers the flood as a refutation of the false claim
of scoffers that things continue unchanged from the beginning of the world.
Israel didn't even exist at the time of Noah and the Flood, so this proof would
be irrelevant to Israel's destruction in 70 AD. But to observe that this world
in which we live has not continued unchanged since the creation would indeed
refute their rejection of the Second Coming and the Lord's final judgment.
sing @ “Also, "... is longsuffering to usward, not willing
that any should perish but that all should come to repentance" make no
sense if it is about second coming.”
(Joe
here) Brother Sing, the most common PB view of these words is that the Lord
shall delay His Second Coming and final judgment until all of the elect have
been born again. This idea offers a reasonable defense of the verse.
In
my last post, I raised the problem of timing. If we delay the reality of the
New Testament gospel kingdom and its greater spiritual quality,
"...wherein dwelleth righteousness" until 70 AD, we contradict the
passages I cited, along with many others. The timing of 70 AD remains an
obstacle in my mind to a reasonable and consistent interpretation of 2 Peter 3
to AD 70. Now, dear Brother, you may take or leave my thoughts. I hope they
give you reason to reflect well on our Lord and His longsuffering goodness upon
all of His beloved elect, here in the virus paralyzed US and in the Far East.
Blessings
Joe
Brother
Sing, Pardon the piecemeal. To clarify my problem with the timing/date question.
Jesus specifically stated, “Since that time....” (Luke 16:16) He did not say,
“In forty years the kingdom shall be preached and men shall press into it.” How
can people press into something that didn’t exist for forty years yet future?
In 2 Peter 3, Peter specifically states that he is looking for something yet to
come, so, even then, what he anticipated had not come. From my reading of Acts,
beginning at Pentecost, Jesus’ followers preached Jesus and the resurrection,
and were blessed, richly so, with the fulfilled reality of the New Testament
gospel kingdom. They were not confined to a hiatus that would not be realized
for forty years. In Acts 2:16, Peter
said, “But this is that which was spoken by the prophet Joel.” He did not say,
“This is a forty-year precursor to that which was spoken by the prophet Joel.”
This is the timing/date hurdle that I cannot overcome with your interpretation
of 2 Peter 3. Again, peace and blessings.
sing
Dear
Brother Joe, I'm so thankful for your patience with me, and reason with me. I
can still be reasoned with. Thank you for not twisting my arm; it would be very
hard to type with one hand.
Joe @ “Brother Sing, Peter offers the flood as a refutation of
the false claim of scoffers that things continue unchanged from the beginning
of the world. Israel didn't even exist at the time of Noah and the Flood, so
this proof would be irrelevant to Israel's destruction in 70 AD. But to observe
that this world in which we live has not continued unchanged since the creation
would indeed refute their rejection of the Second Coming and the Lord's final
judgment.”
I
realize that it is a common mistake to think that the scoffers were claiming
that things continue unchanged from the beginning (creation) of the world. They
were not talking about the world; they had their beloved nation Israel in mind.
The scoffers were claiming that since the founding of the theocratic nation of
Israel, things have continued unchanged SINCE the passing away of the fathers.
Verse
4 reads, "Where is the promise of his coming? for since the fathers fell
asleep, all things continue as they were from the beginning of the
creation." I understand the fathers
as referring to the patriarchs of the nation of Israel; SINCE then... all
things have continued, i.e. Israel is still alive and kicking. In context, "the beginning of
creation" refers to the creation of the nation of Israel with the
patriarch. That was the scoffers'
argument - "since the creation of the nation of Israel, ALL THINGS have
continued until now; what makes anyone think the promised coming to end Israel
is believable?"
Peter
countered such reasoning with the parallel judgment in Noah's day - a plain
fact that the scoffers were wilfully ignorantly of. The judgment in Noah's day
was NOT THE END of the world; it is a mistake to make it a parallel to the end
of the world. The world continued with the old wicked generation destroyed... a
good picture of the destruction of Israel in AD70.
Also,
"... is longsuffering to usward, not willing that any should perish but
that all should come to repentance" make no sense if it is about second
coming.
Joe @ Brother Sing, the most common PB view of these words is
that the Lord shall delay His Second Coming and final judgment until all of the
elect have been born again. This idea offers a reasonable defense of the verse.
Having
learned the distinction between eternal salvation and temporal salvation, to
relate "... is longsuffering to usward, not willing that any should perish
but that all should come to repentance" with the idea "the Lord shall
delay His Second Coming and final judgment until all of the elect have been
born again" just DOESN'T make sense. This is the place where it got me all
started to question this passage as speaking of the second coming of Christ.
None
of "usward" should fear to perish at the promised coming if it is the
second coming of Christ; but perishing and repentance are issues of vital
relevance to the "usward" with regard to the coming fiery judgment in
70AD.
Also,
the divine activity of getting the elect to be born again to be saved eternally
is independent of repentance, which is in the realm of temporal salvation.
Joe @ “In my last post, I raised the problem of timing. If we
delay the reality of the New Testament gospel kingdom and its greater spiritual
quality, "...wherein dwelleth righteousness" until 70 AD, we
contradict the passages I cited, along with many others. The timing of 70 AD
remains an obstacle in my mind to a reasonable and consistent interpretation of
2 Peter 3 to AD 70. Now, dear Brother, you may take or leave my thoughts. I
hope they give you reason to reflect well on our Lord and His longsuffering
goodness upon all of His beloved elect, here in the virus paralyzed US and in
the Far East.”
If
we take "wherein dwelleth righteousness" in context, then it is as
long as the old stiffed-necked, wicked, geriatric Israel is around to hound and
trouble the Jewish believers, then the kingdom wherein dwelleth righteousness has
not arrived yet, i.e. is still future. They were still within, though towards
the end of the 40-year transitional reformation.
It is always a blessing to have you as my patient teacher. Blessed. Amen.
sing
Brother
Wayne, Thanks a million and one for sharing your article. The many things you
said on 2Pet 3 have been swirling in my little mind - you have aptly put them
into words. Thank you.
The
thoughts on the passages of Revelations are much appreciated.
I
have often told my congregation what is beautifully expressed by you in these
words, "It is hard to overstate how much better the new covenant is than
was the old." When we fail to put ourselves into the shoes of those under
the old covenants, we tend to miss the sense of Scriptures. 2Pet 3 is a good
example.
May
I have your permission to put that article on my blog, Things New and Old.
Thank
you.
Wayne
Brother Sing, Permission granted
Brother Sing, Permission granted
sing
Brother
Wayne, Thanks.
I
post the link on the church FB here:
https://www.facebook.com/sdcpenang/posts/2572749159633548
Isaiah
65:17
For,
behold, I create new heavens and a new earth: and the former shall not be
remembered, nor come into mind.
2Peter 3:13
Nevertheless
we, according to his promise, look for new heavens and a new earth, wherein
dwelleth righteousness.
Questions
1.
On Isaiah 65:17
- What is the former (i.e. old heavens and earth) referring to?
- What is the former (i.e. old heavens and earth) referring to?
-
What happened to the former?
-
What was Isaiah's prophecy about?
-
Why should the former be not remembered?
- Chronologically, what is the relationship between the creation of the new heavens and a new earth with what shall happen to the former?
- Chronologically, what is the relationship between the creation of the new heavens and a new earth with what shall happen to the former?
2.
On 2Pet 3:13
- What is the new heavens and earth referring to
- What is the new heavens and earth referring to
-
To whom does the pronoun "we" refer?
-
Who promised them what?
-
Has the promise been fulfilled to them at the point of Peter's writing? Has is been fulfilled now? Or it is yet to be fulfilled in the future?
This helpful article may give you some answers.
Wayne
Brother
Joe, To deny the Kingdom of Heaven/Gospel Church was established during the
ministry of our Lord Jesus Christ is to deny the clear teachings of Scripture
as you have indicated. However, as Brother Sing has mentioned there was a
transitional period in which the old law service was completely closed out,
ending with the destruction of the city of worship along with the temple.
The
gospel church, already existing, was endued with great power on the day of
Pentecost and in the times following became a more fully functioning body. The
Apostles and other Christians continued to frequent the Jewish temple (Acts
3:1) and the synagogues. Paul had a desire to "be at Jerusalem at the day
of Pentecost" (Acts 20:16). It seems there were remnants of the old law
worship that many of the Jewish Christians continued to participate in to some
degree. The folding up of the old and bringing in of the New Jerusalem was
completed in 70AD. As John viewed the New Jerusalem coming down from God out of
Heaven, it may not have been an instantaneous coming, but covering the span of
about 40 years.
I
admit that this may seem to be a stretch, but in my opinion, no more than
connecting repentance to the new birth and having the kings of the earth
bringing their glory into eternal heaven as well as bringing "the glory
and honour of the nations into it" (Rev. 21:26).
Regardless
of whether or not we take the new heaven and new earth and new Jerusalem as
eternal glory or the gospel church, there is much symbolic language used. I
still question my views on these matters and realize that I may be wrong.
Thankfully, we have the gospel church today and have great hope of living in
that eternal city not made with hands where there will be no coronavirus!
Yours
in hope
Joe
Brother
Sing and Brother Wayne, I thank both of
you for your gracious disposition in our “Discussion.” At this point, it would
appear that 1) we have shared our thoughts and reasons, and 2) we hold to
different views of 2 Peter 3. I am not inclined at this stage in my life to
have any desire to twist my brothers’ arms, nor to have mine twisted. Grin.
There is a well-worn cliche that seems to apply here. “A man convinced against
his will is of the same opinion still.”
Lord
bless you, both
Bill
Amen,
Bro. Wayne.
