"Daniel answered in the presence of the king, and said, The secret which the king hath demanded cannot the wise men, the astrologers, the magicians, the soothsayers, shew unto the king; But there is a God in heaven that revealeth secrets, and maketh known to the king Nebuchadnezzar what shall be in the latter days. Thy dream, and the visions of thy head upon thy bed, are these;" (Dan 2:27);
(Dan 7:29-39 omitted for brevity; please read carefully the entire chapter by simply clicking on the tool tip);
"And the fourth kingdom shall be strong as iron: forasmuch as iron breaketh in pieces and subdueth all things: and as iron that breaketh all these, shall it break in pieces and bruise. And whereas thou sawest the feet and toes, part of potters' clay, and part of iron, the kingdom shall be divided; but there shall be in it of the strength of the iron, forasmuch as thou sawest the iron mixed with miry clay. And as the toes of the feet were part of iron, and part of clay, so the kingdom shall be partly strong, and partly broken. And whereas thou sawest iron mixed with miry clay, they shall mingle themselves with the seed of men: but they shall not cleave one to another, even as iron is not mixed with clay. And in the days of these kings shall the God of heaven set up a kingdom, which shall never be destroyed: and the kingdom shall not be left to other people, but it shall break in pieces and consume all these kingdoms, and it shall stand for ever," (Dan 2:40-44).
Please notice here, in this prophecy which all of you church of Christ preachers call upon to prove the time frame in which the everlasting Messianic kingdom would be established, i.e., in the last days which everybody acknowledges was during the days of the 4th kingdom, which we know, and agree to be the Roman Empire. Right? The days of the Herods and the Caesars, Right? No question about it; a text we've used for decades to prove the time frame in which the church was established, right? Now, consider this: (Some verses omitted for brevity: please read the entire chapter)
"Daniel spake and said, I saw in my vision by night, and, behold, the four winds of the heaven strove upon the great sea. And four great beasts came up from the sea, diverse one from another...After this I saw in the night visions, and behold a fourth beast, dreadful and terrible, and strong exceedingly; and it had great iron teeth: it devoured and brake in pieces, and stamped the residue with the feet of it: and it was diverse from all the beasts that were before it; and it had ten horns. I considered the horns, and, behold, there came up among them another little horn, before whom there were three of the first horns plucked up by the roots: and, behold, in this horn were eyes like the eyes of man, and a mouth speaking great things. I beheld till the thrones were cast down, and the Ancient of days did sit, whose garment was white as snow, and the hair of his head like the pure wool: his throne was like the fiery flame, and his wheels as burning fire. A fiery stream issued and came forth from before him: thousand thousands ministered unto him, and ten thousand times ten thousand stood before him: the judgment was set, and the books were opened ... I saw in the night visions, and, behold, one like the Son of man came with the clouds of heaven, and came to the Ancient of days, and they brought him near before him. And there was given him dominion, and glory, and a kingdom, that all people, nations, and languages, should serve him: his dominion is an everlasting dominion, which shall not pass away, and his kingdom that which shall not be destroyed," (Dan 7:2-14).
In the interpretation of the dream (Dan 7:16), this 4th beast, is identified by the angel to be the 4th kingdom, notice: "Thus he said, The fourth beast shall be the fourth kingdom upon earth…" (Dan 7:23).
Since it is the case that in chapter 2, the everlasting kingdom comes during the days of the 4th kingdom, i.e., during the days of the Herods and Caesars in the 1st century;
Since it is the case that in chapter 7, the same everlasting kingdom comes during the same days of the same 4th kingdom, i.e., during the days of the Herods and Caesars, in the 1st century;
Then the inescapable fact is, it would be during the days of the 4th kingdom that the Son of man would come with the clouds of heaven, with His angels, at the judgment, to receive the everlasting kingdom.
The typical response to this syllogistic argument has consistently been that the phrase, "the Son of man...came to the Ancient of days," refers to Christ's ascension, rather than the presuppositional theory of Christ returning visibly in the clouds at the assumed end of time. This cannot be true, and here's why:
►Looking at a summary of chapter 7, verses 1-14 are Daniel's dream/vision; verses 17-27 are the interpretation;
►In Daniel 7:1-7, he sees 4 great beasts, which are 4 kings, or kingdoms (Dan 7:17);
►Daniel's interest is in the 4th beast (Dan 7:19), which is the 4th kingdom upon the earth (Dan 7:23);
►The 4th beast had 10 horns (Dan 7:7), which are 10 kings (Dan 7:24);
►Among the 10 horns/kings, a little horn/king sprang up (Dan 7:8) which subdued 3 of the first 10 horns/kings (Dan 7:24);
►This little horn/king made war against, and persecuted the saints (Dan 7:21), for 3 ½ years (Dan 7:25);
►This war/persecution against the saints was PRIOR to, and ended with the coming of the Son of man (Dan 7:9-14 & Dan 7:22);
►The focus of the interpretation of this vision is the time of the judgment of the little horn/king.
Since the little horn made war with, and wore out the saints for 3 ½ years prior to the coming of the Son of man on the clouds of heaven, then it is irrefutably true that Daniel 7 cannot be predictive of the Ascension, nor can it be a referent to Pentecost for the same reason.
Since Daniel 7:9-14 is the only prophecy of the Son of man coming with the clouds of heaven, with his angels, at the judgment, at the time of His reception of the everlasting dominion/kingdom;
Since Jesus cites this prophecy of the Son of man coming in/with the clouds of heaven, with the angels, verbatim, in the Olivet Discourse (Mat 24:30-31), applying its fulfillment specifically to/at the destruction of Jerusalem;
Then the inescapable fact is, by Jesus' own application, this one-and-only prophecy of the Son of man coming with the clouds of heaven was fulfilled in the first century with the fall of Jerusalem and the Jewish temple.
Jesus was not talking about what would happen two thousand years later in our generation, or in our future; rather, He was predicting what would happen when the Jewish temple would be destroyed.
Jesus clearly said that all these things would be fulfilled during the generation which would witness every stone of the temple being thrown down, then it’s unquestionable that we live in a different generation from the one in which our Lord predicted these events would occur; therefore, it is not appropriate to take a statement that Jesus made in Matthew 24-25, Mark 13 and Luke 21, and apply them to our generation because they do not fit the time frame.
Jesus said, "Immediately after the tribulation of those days shall the sun be darkened, and the moon shall not give her light, and the stars shall fall from heaven, and the powers of the heavens shall be shaken" (Mat 24:29). Some mistake this language to refer to the (assumed) end of time, however, this is not true.
Jesus' very next words were, "And then..." And "when"? "Immediately after the tribulation of those days..." which cannot be referring to the assumed end of time, and must be referring to Jesus' generation, in which the Son of man would come in the clouds of heaven with His angels.
Since the Son-of-man-coming on the clouds of heaven, with His angels, of Matthew 24:30, by our Lord's own application, would be the fulfillment of the one-and-only Son-of-man coming predicted in Daniel 7, in Jesus' generation, then the burden of proof lies with our Futurist brethren to demonstrate from Moses and the prophets, that the coming of the Son of man/Lord in Matthew 10:23, Matthew 16:27, Matthew 26:64, 1 Corinthians 11:26, 1 Thessalonians 3:13, 1 Thessalonians 4:15, 2 Thessalonians 1:7, Hebrews 10:37, James 5:8 and Revelation 1:7, is not the same coming, when they are all posited specifically to occur during the lifetime of the 1st century saints.
"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 24:21).
While Jesus conflates the fulfillment of a number of prophecies in the Olivet Discourse, it is beyond question that He draws heavily from Daniel 12, citing, "the abomination of desolation spoken of by Daniel the prophet," (Mat 24:15); likewise, there can be no question that the end Jesus speaks of in verses 4, 6, 13, & 14, is the same the end Daniel speaks of in verses 4, 6, 8, & 13, and Daniel predicts the time of the end (Dan 12:4), not the end of time!
Remembering that it is not appropriate to take statements which Jesus made in the Olivet Discourse and apply them to our generation because they do not fit the time frame, let's consider some of the prophecies of Daniel 12.
"And at that time shall Michael stand up, the great prince which standeth for the children of thy people: and there shall be a time of trouble, such as never was since there was a nation even to that same time: (Dan 12:1).
As mentioned above, no one can successfully refute the fact that Jesus, in specifically naming the prophet Daniel, is quoting the prophet's time-of-trouble prediction, and adds, "no, nor ever shall be" (Mat 24:21), indicating that this would be an unparalleled one-time event. Many have no struggle comprehending that Jesus posits Daniel's time-of-trouble prophecy with the fall of Jerusalem in AD 70; however, as we continue with the context of the Danielic prophecy, it becomes devastating to the futurist's paradigm, because the very next word is, "and …" which is a conjunction, i.e., it joins what Daniel is about to say, with what he has just said.
"and at that time …" At what time? At the "time of trouble, such as never was since there was a nation even to that same time," which Jesus applies to the impending destruction of Jerusalem; "and at that time thy people shall be delivered, every one that shall be found written in the book."
Did you catch that? Daniel, looking forward hundreds of years, predicts a coming time of trouble for his people, i.e., the Jews, such as had never occurred; Jesus applies the fulfillment of that prophecy specifically to fall of Jerusalem; Daniel said, "and at that time," which by Jesus' own application of the Danielic context posits the judgment, at that time, i.e., the fall of Jerusalem in AD 70! But wait, there's more: again, Daniel continues with the conjunction "and," indicating that what he's about to say next is likewise connected to what he has just said; "And many of them that sleep in the dust of the earth shall awake, some to everlasting life, and some to shame and everlasting contempt," (Dan 12:2).
Daniel's prophecy of the great tribulation, the resurrection of the just and the unjust, coupled with the judgment of Old Covenant Israel (Daniel's people), being specifically posited by our Lord at the destruction of Jerusalem is devastating to the amillennial/futurist paradigm which is so prevalent throughout the churches of Christ! Like Daniel's one-and-only prophecy of the Son of man coming with the clouds of heaven, being quoted and applied by Jesus to the fall of Jerusalem and the consummation of the Jewish age, this Danielic prophecy of the resurrection of the just and the unjust is the only—ONLY—prophecy of "a" resurrection of both the just and the unjust; and when brethren deny that this was fulfilled in the demise of Judaism as per Jesus' own application, they are denying the very words of our Savior!
One of the typical objections to the exegetical facts which I have just demonstrated, is the suggestion that this prophecy was fulfilled when some of the saints arose following the resurrection of Jesus, and went into the city, (Mat 27:52-53). The fallacy of this assertion is, only saints arose, i.e., there were no unjust resurrected; and, Paul quotes Daniel 12:2 during his ministry stating that it was about to occur:
"But this I confess unto thee, that after the way which they call heresy, so worship I the God of my fathers, believing all things which are written in the law and in the prophets: And have hope toward God, which they themselves also allow, that there shall ←[mello] be a resurrection of the dead, both of the just and unjust," (Acts 24:14-15). See the present tense verb mello explained here.
So to reiterate, since it is not appropriate to take a statement that Jesus made in the Olivet Discourse and apply them to our generation because they do not fit the time frame, and since Jesus posits both of these one-and-only prophecies of the Son of man coming in the clouds of heaven (Dan 7:13-14), and the resurrection of the just and the unjust (Dan 12:1-2), to the AD 70 destruction of Jerusalem, and it is Jesus Himself who applies the fulfillment in the time frame of His generation, then the inescapable conclusion is, we cannot, apply these prophecies to our generation, or future generations, because they do not fit the Divinely-stated time frame.
When the disciples asked Jesus, "and what shall be the sign of thy coming..." (Mat 24:3), the Greek term rendered coming is (παρουσία) parousia, which is defined as, "a being near, that is, advent (often, return; specifically of Christ to punish Jerusalem, or finally the wicked); (by implication) physical aspect:" (Strong's).
This term is used 24 times in the New Testament, 17 of which are used exclusively of the coming of Christ; and, all 17 usages associated with Christ's return include either the definite article (the) or a Personal pronoun specifically identifying Christ's parousia.
The import of Holy Spirit's usage of this term is most often overlooked, and, many times is purposely obfuscated, due the inescapable fact that parousia is always singular, i.e., the inspired texts only speak of the parousia, which specifies one parousia, and never multiple parousias; therefore, when speaking of the parousia of Christ, the Biblical texts are emphatic in stating one parousia of Christ, and such is the case with the question of the disciples when they asked, "what shall be the sign of thy parousia," i.e., they were asking Him when His parousia would occur, and what sign there would be to indicate His parousia. It is a serious hermeneutical blunder to disregard the fact that Jesus was asked specifically about His parousia, and Matthew 24-25, Mark 13, and Luke 21 are the records of His discussion of His parousia.
Jesus said, "For as the lightning comes from the east and flashes to the west, so also will the coming←[parousia] of the Son of Man be," (Mat 24:27), which demonstrates that He is still explaining His parousia in this text.
As I have demonstrated, exegetically, Jesus was asked about His parousia, and He was explaining His parousia in Mat 24:3-34, many will admit this applies to the 1st century time frame, which means that the Son of man came with the clouds of heaven, with His angels, at the great sound of a trumpet, to gather together His elect (Mat 24:30-34), in His generation, however, they will assert that, "We know that the coming of Christ did not always mean His second coming," but I ask, how do they draw this conclusion? They attempt to corroborate their assertion by citing, "No man knows the day nor the hour..." (Mat 24:36). While it is true that Jesus, in His incarnate state of human flesh did not know the day nor the hour, all Futurists disregard the fact that Jesus specifically identified the century, and the generation in which His parousia would take place. They, then, import the end of time into this discussion when the end of time is not what the disciples asked about. The KJV is misleading because of its translation of the Greek term aion as the English word "world" in Matthew 24:3. The Greek term "aion" which means "age, or period of time" in this context refers to the Jewish age." The only end asked about, and the only end under discussion is the end of the age represented by the Jewish temple, i.e., the end of the Jewish age.
Jesus had just told them, "But pray ye that your flight be not in the winter, neither on the sabbath day," (Mat 24:20), therefore, to make, "No man knows the day nor the hour..." mean the end of the world (kosmos) becomes self-contradictory to their own admissions, and lacks any exegetical support within the context, near, or remote!
There are at least two exegetical facts which irrefutably confute this typical assertion:
1) We find that after this alleged transition verse (Mat 24:36), Jesus is still discussing His parousia!
"But as the days of Noe were, so shall also the coming←[parousia] of the Son of man be. For as in the days that were before the flood they were eating and drinking, marrying and giving in marriage, until the day that Noe entered into the ark, And knew not until the flood came, and took them all away; so shall also the coming←[parousia] of the Son of man be," (Mat 24:37-39).
So, in context, the disciples asked Jesus about His parousia in verse 3, and we find that He is explaining the parousia not only in verse 27, but also in verses 37-39 after—AFTER—the imaginary transition verse.
Since it is the case that the parousia which is under discussion in the text which most Futurists admit applies to the 1st century generation;
Since it is the case that the parousia is still under discussion after verse 36;
Then the inescapable conclusion is, it requires contextual bias and a blatant disregard for the linguistics to insert the end of time/world into this context, in the attempt to create a second parousia!
2) When we harmonize an exegesis of Jesus' discussion of His approaching kingdom in Luke 17:20-37, it becomes an inescapable fact that Jesus cannot be speaking of the assumed end of time/world in Matthew 24:36-51 - Mat 25:1-46. In response to the specific question of when the kingdom would come, Jesus replied, "The kingdom of God cometh not with observation: Neither shall they say, Lo here! or, lo there! for, behold, the kingdom of God is within you," (Luk 17:20-21).
As Jesus continues this discussion with His disciples of His approaching kingdom, notice that He elucidates the identical constituent elements recorded in Luke's narrative, which are also found later in Jesus' discourse in the Mount of Olives:
"...The days will come, when ye shall desire to see one of the days of the Son of man, and ye shall not see it. And they shall say to you, See here; or, see there: go not after them, nor follow them," (Luk 17:22-23);
"Then if any man shall say unto you, Lo, here is Christ, or there; believe it not. For there shall arise false Christs, and false prophets, and shall shew great signs and wonders; insomuch that, if it were possible, they shall deceive the very elect. Behold, I have told you before. Wherefore if they shall say unto you, Behold, he is in the desert; go not forth: behold, he is in the secret chambers; believe it not,"(Mat 24:23-26);
"For as the lightning, that lighteneth out of the one part under heaven, shineth unto the other part under heaven; so shall also the Son of man be in his day," (Luk 17:24);
"For as the lightning cometh out of the east, and shineth even unto the west; so shall also the coming of the Son of man be," (Mat 24:27);
Please note the synonymy of the Son of man in His day referring to the coming of the kingdom, and the parousia of the Son of man, posited at the siege and deatruction of Jerusalem and her temple in A.D. 70, which, as Jesus said to His disciples, "So likewise ye, when ye see these things come to pass, know ye that the kingdom of God is nigh at hand" (Luk 21:31).
"But first must he suffer many things, and be rejected of this generation. And as it was in the days of Noe, so shall it be also in the days of the Son of man," (Luk 17:25-26);
"But as the days of Noe were, so shall also the coming of the Son of man be," (Mat 24:37);
Please take particular note here in Luke's record, and observe that Jesus, by His own words, and by His own application likens the days of the Son of man to the days of Noah, while in His discussion on the Mount of Olives, He placed this days of Noah element after—AFTER—the alleged transition verse of Mat 24:36! See the problem? Not only is Jesus still elaborating on the parousia after verse 36, He states the same constituent element in specific reference to the coming of His kingdom in Luke 17. This exegetical fact eviscerates the idea of there being a transition verse in the Olivet discourse, but let's continue.
"They did eat, they drank, they married wives, they were given in marriage, until the day that Noe entered into the ark, and the flood came, and destroyed them all (Luk 17:27).
"For as in the days that were before the flood they were eating and drinking, marrying and giving in marriage, until the day that Noe entered into the ark, And knew not until the flood came, and took them all away; so shall also the coming←[parousia] of the Son of man be," (Mat 24:38-39).
Once again, we find Jesus, by His own words, and by His own application applying the example of Noah's day, both in Luke's account and the Olivet Discourse, after the alleged transition verse, in specific response to the question of when the kingdom would come, and not the end of time/world!
"Likewise also as it was in the days of Lot; they did eat, they drank, they bought, they sold, they planted, they builded; But the same day that Lot went out of Sodom it rained fire and brimstone from heaven, and destroyed them all. Even thus shall it be in the day when the Son of man is revealed. In that day, he which shall be upon the housetop, and his stuff in the house, let him not come down to take it away: and he that is in the field, let him likewise not return back," (Luk 17:27-31);
"Then let them which be in Judaea flee into the mountains: Let him which is on the housetop not come down to take any thing out of his house: Neither let him which is in the field return back to take his clothes," (Mat 24:16-18);
"But when ye shall see the abomination of desolation, spoken of by Daniel the prophet, standing where it ought not, (let him that readeth understand,) then let them that be in Judaea flee to the mountains: And let him that is on the housetop not go down into the house, neither enter therein, to take any thing out of his house: And let him that is in the field not turn back again for to take up his garment," (Mark 13:14-16).
While the element of Lot is not mentioned in the Olivet Discourse, I find it highly interesting that Jesus illustrates the impending day of the Lord with the constituent elements of Noah and Lot; and, that Peter uses the same elements of Noah and Lot in his illustration of the impending parousia of the day of the Lord!! (2 Pet 2:4-6; 2 Pet 3:4; 2 Pet 3:12).
"Remember Lot's wife. Whosoever shall seek to save his life shall lose it; and whosoever shall lose his life shall preserve it," (Luk 17:32-33). Another incredibly interesting connection comes to light here in Jesus' statement, "and whosoever shall lose his life shall preserve it," being in response to the specific question of when the kingdom would come, i.e., Jesus said the same thing in the three parallel texts of Matthew 16:25-28, Mark 8:35-38 - Mark 9:1, and Luke 9:24-27, which is another instance where Jesus is speaking of the Son of man that was about to come in the glory of the Father, with his angels, to reward every man according to his works, just like in the Olivet Discourse.
"I tell you, in that night there shall be two men in one bed; the one shall be taken, and the other shall be left. Two women shall be grinding together; the one shall be taken, and the other left. Two men shall be in the field; the one shall be taken, and the other left," (Luk 17:34-36).
"Then shall two be in the field; the one shall be taken, and the other left. Two women shall be grinding at the mill; the one shall be taken, and the other left," (cf. Mat 24:40-41).
We have here the third instance of Jesus answering specifically when the kingdom would come, in Luke's record, corresponding to what He said in the Olivet Discourse AFTER the alleged transition verse. Consistent hermeneutics demands that these texts are speaking of the same event. The idea of a transition at verse at Matthew 24:36 was born out of desperation and eisegesis, rather than sound exegesis and consistent hermeneutics!
"And they answered and said unto him, Where, Lord? And he said unto them, Wheresoever the body is, thither will the eagles be gathered together," (Luk 17:37);
"For wheresoever the carcase is, there will the eagles be gathered together," (Mat 24:28).
Another fact which emerges from this exegesis, is that Luke's record of Jesus' discussion addresses the coming of the kingdom, and is unquestionably parallel with the Olivet Discourse, which necessitates that the kingdom would come when the temple was destroyed, and this agrees perfectly with Jesus' statement, "So likewise ye, when ye see these things come to pass, know ye that the kingdom of God is nigh at hand," (Luk 21:31). Since Jesus said, "this generation shall not pass away until all these things be fulfilled," (Mat 24:34; cf. parallel in Luk 21:32), then Jesus was not talking about what would happen two thousand or more years later, but what would happen when the temple was destroyed, then it cannot be argued that the kingdom came in its fullness on Pentecost day! The kingdom was preached that it was at hand by John, Jesus, the 12 disciples, and the 70; the kingdom was inaugurated/born on Pentecost day; was in its growth phase (cf. Isa 66:8ff; 1 Cor 13:8ff; Eph 2:19ff) throughout the ministry of the apostles, and came in its fullness when the greatest enemy of the church ended, i.e., Judaism.
Now, let's consider some exegesis within the text and context of Peter's epistles. Peter said that God was, "…ready to judge the quick and the dead," (1 Pet 4:5). Peter, who was "in the church at Babylon" (1 Pet 5:13), also said, "the end of all things is at hand," (1 Pet 4:7).
Peter continues by saying that, "THE [ho—the definite article] TIME [kairos—the set or appointed time] IS come ["HAS come" NKJV, aorist tense] for THE [ho—the definite article] JUDGMENT to begin…" (1 Pet 4:17).
What does this mean? The definite article (the) identifies a specific person, event, time, place, etc., such as, "a day," would be different than, "the day," and, "judgment," denotes generalization, where as, "the judgment," refers to one specific judgment, and since Peter would later write that he was reminding his readers of what Moses and the prophets had spoken, then, "the judgment" he has in view would be what was predicted in the law and the prophets. This is profoundly important, as well as consistently ignored, that if Peter is predicting the conflagration of material creation, then it is to be found in Moses and the prophets. I challenge the reader to find that prediction anywhere in the Old Testament.
Peter would also write that, "We have also a more sure word of prophecy…" (2 Pet 1:19). Then, in chapter 2, Peter says, "And spared not the old world, but saved Noah the eighth person, a preacher of righteousness, bringing in the flood upon the world of the ungodly," (2 Pet 2:5).
Remember that we have noticed above that Jesus, in explaining when the kingdom would come, used the examples of Noah, then Lot, and notice that Peter repeats the same pattern here in his Preface to chapter 3.
Notice here, that the agent, or means of destruction was the flood; note that the flood destroyed the world of the ungodly, literally, but the physical planet did not cease to exist, nor did time end. This was an in-history event, not a history-ending event! It was the ungodly and their world which was destroyed.
Next, as Peter continues, he says, "And turning the cities of Sodom and Gomorrha into ashes condemned them with an overthrow, making them an ensample unto those that after should live ungodly," (2 Pet 2:6).
Note here in Peter's second example, that the agent of destruction was fire—the 1st was water—the 2nd was fire. Note the pattern!! Notice that the fire destroyed the world (i.e., the cities of Sodom & Gomorrha) of the ungodly, literally, but the physical planet did not cease to exist, nor did time end. This was an in-history event, not a history-ending event! It was the ungodly and their world which was destroyed.
In verses 7-9, Peter points out the deliverance of righteous Lot, and coupling these two examples, he says, "The Lord knoweth how to deliver the godly out of temptations, and to reserve the unjust unto [the] day of judgment to be punished," (2 Pet 2:9).
(Through bias, the KJV translators inserted the definite article here in the text where it is not in the original. The literal translations (LITV, MLV, YLT, APB+, IGNT+, KJ3) read, "unto a day of judgment," i.e., the destruction of Sodom & Gomorrah was "a" judgment, not "the" judgment.)
Remember, Peter said God was "ready to judge the quick and the dead," (1 Pet 4:5). Noah was delivered while the world was destroyed by water; Lot was delivered while their world was destroyed by fire; note the pattern!!; however, in both instances, the physical earth did not cease to exist, nor did time end: these were in-time events, not time-ending events.
Peter then continues by saying, "This second epistle, beloved, I now write unto you; in both which I stir up your pure minds by way of remembrance: That ye may be mindful of the words which were spoken before by the holy prophets, and of the commandment of us the apostles of the Lord and Saviour," (2 Pet 3:1-2).
Now, this is where scholars and Bible students alike make a huge theological blunder, i.e., they ignore the fact that Peter clearly states here, that the day of the Lord he is predicting, is the day of the Lord foretold by the holy prophets. This is why I stated above that if Peter is predicting the end of material creation, then we must be able to locate that prophecy in the Old Testament; but, we'll stay within the text of Peter's epistles for now. Peter continues by saying, "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, all things continue as they were from the beginning of the creation," (2 Pet 3:3-4). We simply cannot ignore that the "promise of His coming," here is "prophecy of His parousia," which makes this the same "Son of man coming" as in the Olivet Discourse, since the parousia of the Olivet Discourse was looming in Peter's immediate future!
Continuing then, Peter says, "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←[kosmos] that then was, being overflowed with water, perished," (2 Pet 3:5-6).
Now, if you believe this refers to Noah's flood, and I'm quite certain you do, then you must admit that the destruction of the heavens and the earth of these 2 verses is parallel with Peter's example of the same in-history event described in the previous chapter: an event in which the physical planet did not cease to exist, nor did time end; and, the world (kosmos, the heavens & the earth) which was destroyed, by water, was the world of the ungodly.
Alright, let's continue within the text of Peter's epistle: "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," (2 Pet 3:7).
In this context, the heavens and the earth which are now (Peter's "now," not our "now!") cannot be the same heavens and earth which were destroyed by water, because, well, they were destroyed in the great deluge. The heavens and the earth which are now are a second set of heavens and earth. Do you see the identical pattern here in chapter 3 as Peter used in the previous chapter? In chapter 2, the first destruction of the world was by water, and the second destruction of the contextual world was by fire. Here in chapter 3, Peter builds upon the examples he has just illustrated by duplicating the same pattern:
Ch.2—Noah's world destroyed by water;
Ch.2—Ungodly men destroyed;
Ch.2—The world of Sodom & Gomorrah destroyed by fire;
Ch.2—Ungodly men destroyed;
Ch.3— Noah's KOSMOS (heavens & earth) destroyed by water;
Ch.3—The world (heavens and earth) which are NOW, are reserved unto fire;
Ch.3—Against the perdition of ungodly men.
Ch.2—Noah's kosmos destroyed by water: universe & time continued;
Ch.2—The 'world' of Sodom & Gomorrah destroyed by fire: universe & time continued;
Note the pattern!!
Ch.3—Noah's kosmos (heavens & earth) destroyed by water: universe & time continued;
Ch.3—The world (heavens and earth) which are NOW, are reserved unto fire…, so, universe & time, does what? What is the pattern?
Ch.3—The "crooked and perverse generation" (Deu 32:5, 22) would be destroyed;
Ch.3—Righteous delivered: "Wherefore we according to his promise look for a new heaven and a new earth wherein dwells righteousness…"
Do you see the hermeneutical inconsistency man has created in Peter's inspired pattern, by interpreting chapter 3 to mean that the universe & time will cease to exist? The futurist paradigm destroys Peter's inspired pattern! The heavens and earth which are now (Peter's "now"), cannot refer to the physical planet, because the heavens and earth of Peter's previous two examples was not referring to the physical planet. The only way to remain consistent in translating this literally/physically, is to say that earth will be purged with fire, leaving the physical planet and time to continue on just as in the two examples Peter gives, which is Jehovah’s Witnesses’ doctrine, and, which would also force a literal/physical meaning on the new heavens and new earth, and I'm pretty sure our brethren don't want the new heavens & earth to be physical? There is no logic, consistency, nor hermeneutic for interpreting this example differently than the previous two examples.
Also, consider:
1) The angels that sinned were reserved unto judgment; (2 Pet 2:4)
2) The antediluvians were reserved unto judgment; (2 Pet 2:5)
3) The Sodomites were reserved unto judgment; (2 Pet 2:6)
Then Peter says, "The Lord knows how to deliver the godly out of temptation, and to keep the unjust←[#'s 1-3] for a day of judgment, being punished," (2 Pet 2:9, KJ3), BUT, he had just said, "And through covetousness shall they←[the false teachers of 2 Pet 2:1] with feigned words make merchandise of you: whose judgment now of a long time lingereth not, and their damnation slumbereth not," (2 Pet 2:3). Brethren, within the context of Peter's epistle, "whose judgment" of a long time NOW (as Peter is putting ink to parchment) lingers not?" "whose damnation" slumbered no longer? Was that your judgment and mine? Did you and I sin during Noah's time? Were you and I, or, our children the false teachers of this text?? Is this referring to my, or your damnation; were you and I delivered out of the temptations of Sodom and Gomorrah? Peter is using these examples to establish what he is going to say next in chapter 3.
After Peter establishes this pattern in chapter 2, he proceeds to build on it in chapter 3 where he refers to the scoffers who were asking, "where is the promise of His coming," to which he answers, "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. The Lord is not slack concerning his promise, as some men←[the scoffers] count slackness; but is longsuffering to us-ward, not willing that any should perish, but that all should come to repentance. But the day of the Lord will come..." (2 Pet 3:8-10).
Since Peter stated clearly that he was reminding his audience of the day of the Lord predicted by the holy prophets, let's observe one such prediction, of which everyone in the churches of Christ is familiar with, i.e., Joel's prediction of the day of the Lord, because Peter cites Joel on Pentecost day saying, "this is that which was spoken by the prophet Joel..." but if we back up in Joel's text, we find that he had already mentioned the day of the Lord, notice: "Blow ye the trumpet in Zion, and sound an alarm in my holy mountain: let all the inhabitants of the land tremble: for the day of the LORD cometh, for it is nigh at hand; A day of darkness and of gloominess, a day of clouds and of thick darkness, as the morning spread upon the mountains: a great people and a strong; there hath not been ever the like, neither shall be any more after it, even to the years of many generations," (Joel 2:1-2).
Does this sound familiar? It should, because in Jesus' prediction of the Son of man coming with the clouds of heaven, with His angels, in the Olivet Discourse, He conflates the prophecies from Daniel 12:1-2 and Joel 2:10-11; 2:31; 3:15-16
"The earth shall quake before them; the heavens shall tremble: the sun and the moon shall be dark, and the stars shall withdraw their shining: [cf. Mat 24:29] And the LORD shall utter his voice before his army: [cf. Luk 21:20-22] for his camp is very great: for he is strong that executeth his word: for the day of the LORD is great and very terrible; and who can abide it?" (Joel 2:10-11).
"But the day of the Lord will come as a thief in the night←[same motif as in the Olivet Discourse]; in the which the heavens shall pass away..." (2 Pet 3:10; cf. Mat 5:17-18; 24:35).
Jesus said, "Think not that I am come to destroy the law, or the prophets: I am not come to destroy, but to fulfil. For verily I say unto you, Till heaven and earth pass, one jot or one tittle shall in no wise pass from the law, till all be fulfilled," (Mat 5:17-18).
I know of no one in the churches of Christ who doesn't understand that the law of Moses is not operative today, therefore, I would ask, when did heaven and earth pass away? If heaven and earth of the Matthew 5 text has not passed away, then the law of Moses remains in effect, every jot and tittle. There simply is no way around this fact!
"But the day of the Lord will come as a thief in the night, in the which the heavens shall pass away with a great noise, and the elements←[stoicheion] shall melt with fervent heat, the earth also and the works that are therein shall be burned up. Seeing then that all these things shall be dissolved, what manner of persons ought ye to be in all holy conversation and godliness, Looking for and hasting unto the coming←[the parousia] of the day of God, wherein the heavens being on fire shall be dissolved, and the elements←[stoicheion] shall melt with fervent heat? Nevertheless we, according to his promise←[prophecy of the "holy prophets" 2 Pet 3:1-2], look for new heavens and a new earth, wherein dwelleth righteousness."
Now, let's take another look at verse 11 of this text: "But the day of the Lord will come as a thief in the night, in the which the heavens shall pass away with a great noise, and the elements←[stoicheion] shall melt with fervent heat, the earth also and the works that are therein shall be burned up. Seeing then that all these things shall be dissolved, what manner of persons ought ye to be in all holy conversation and godliness..." What has been overlooked, ignored, and is being obfuscated is the phrase "shall be dissolved" (KJV) which is translated from the plural Greek verb lyomenōn (λυομένων) which is in the Present Tense! Present Participle Middle or Passive voice! Now folks, those of you who are adamant that this text is predicting a future-to-us conflagration of the material universe and the end of time, then you must deal with the question of why Holy Spirit used the verb in its present tense form, i.e., why would Holy Spirit inspire Peter to say that "all these things" are being dissolved, if this would not transpire for thousands of years in the future? You see, the fact Peter says that "all these things are being dissolved" thoroughly eviscerates the typical notion that this text predicts the end of the space / time continuum.
Since Peter asked Jesus about His parousia in Mat 24:3, and since Jesus explained His parousia to Peter, then where is the exegesis for saying the parousia Peter speaks of here is not the SAME parousia Jesus explained to Peter upon the Mount of Olives? If the parousia of Mat 24:3 is not the same parousia of this text, then there is/was to be more than one parousia of the Son of man at the day of the Lord. Jesus said His parousia would occur in His generation, when they would see Jerusalem surrounded by armies, which Jesus applies to the 1st century generation; since this in-history event was in Peter's immediate future, and since Peter said he was hasting—how Jesus told Zacchaeus to come down from the Sycamore tree—unto the parousia of the Lord, then the only exegetical conclusion which can be drawn is that this text refers to the parousia/coming of the Son of man in the clouds with His angels, at the great sound of a trumpet, at the shaking of the heavens and earth (Mat 24:29-31; cf. Heb 12:22-23; 12:26-28; Hag 2:6-7; 2:21-22; Luk 21:31), at the fall of Jerusalem.
Now, let’s consider the eyewitness testimony of a Pharisee who was captured by the Romans, and lived through the Jewish war, and was allowed to record the tragedy of that great destruction of Jerusalem.
"As for the inside, Moses parted its length into three partitions. At the distance of ten cubits from the most secret end, Moses placed four pillars, the workmanship of which was the very same with that of the rest; and they stood upon the like bases with them, each a small matter distant from his fellow. Now the room within those pillars was the most holy place; but the rest of the room was the tabernacle, which was open for the priests. However, this proportion of the measures of the tabernacle proved to be an imitation of the system of the world; for that third part thereof which was within the four pillars, to which the priests were not admitted, is, as it were, a heaven peculiar to God. But the space of the twenty cubits, is, as it were, sea and land, on which men live, and so this part is peculiar to the priests only. But at the front, where the entrance was made, they placed pillars of gold, that stood on bases of brass, in number seven; but then they spread over the tabernacle veils of fine linen and purple, and blue, and scarlet colors, embroidered. The first veil was ten cubits every way, and this they spread over the pillars which parted the temple, and kept the most holy place concealed within; and this veil was that which made this part not visible to any. Now the whole temple was called The Holy Place: but that part which was within the four pillars, and to which none were admitted, was called The Holy of Holies. This veil was very ornamental, and embroidered with all sorts of flowers which the earth produces; and there were interwoven into it all sorts of variety that might be an ornament, excepting the forms of animals. Another veil there was which covered the five pillars that were at the entrance," (Ant. 3:6:4)
"…if any one do but consider the fabric of the tabernacle, and take a view of the garments of the high priest, and of those vessels which we make use of in our sacred ministration, he will find that our legislator was a divine man, and that we are unjustly reproached by others; for if any one do without prejudice, and with judgment, look upon these things, he will find they were every one made in way of imitation and representation of the universe. When Moses distinguished the tabernacle into three parts, (15) and allowed two of them to the priests, as a place accessible and common, he denoted the land and the sea, these being of general access to all; but he set apart the third division for God, because heaven is inaccessible to men. And when he ordered twelve loaves to be set on the table, he denoted the year, as distinguished into so many months. By branching out the candlestick into seventy parts, he secretly intimated the Decani, or seventy divisions of the planets; and as to the seven lamps upon the candlesticks, they referred to the course of the planets, of which that is the number. The veils, too, which were composed of four things, they declared the four elements; for the fine linen was proper to signify the earth, because the flax grows out of the earth; the purple signified the sea, because that color is dyed by the blood of a sea shell-fish; the blue is fit to signify the air; and the scarlet will naturally be an indication of fire," (Ant. 3:7:7 emphasis added, RR).
This is highly—HIGHLY—interesting that in Hebrew thought and customs, the tabernacle had 2 veils, which were separated by 40 cubits in New Testament times: just grab the implications of that! The first veil was rent at Christ's death, and the second, 40 years later, destroyed in the siege and destruction of Jerusalem. It was 40 years (a Biblical generation, Heb 3:8-10) from the beginning of Christ's ministry to the consummation of the Jewish age.
Then, we see that the tabernacle was commonly referred to as heaven, earth, and land & sea, so, when you read Rev 21:1-3, which says, "And I saw a new heaven and a new earth: for the first heaven and the first earth were passed away; and there was no more sea," this fits, hand-in-glove, perfectly—PERFECTLY—in that the first heaven and earth, in Hebraic thought, refers to the temple cultus, and there was no more sea, because Titus razed the temple!
But, the easy way to dodge the force of this exegesis is to say, "Josephus is not inspired text," which is true; but, what if—just what if—we could corroborate this with inspired text? Might our brethren come a little closer to seeing that it is an exegetical conclusion to say that Revelation is fulfilled, and 2 Peter chapter 3 is not talking about the end of the universe?
First, since Josephus speaks of Moses making the tabernacle, look at this:
"18 Whereupon neither the first testament was dedicated without blood. 19 For when Moses had spoken every precept to all the people according to the law, he took the blood of calves and of goats, with water, and scarlet wool, and hyssop, and sprinkled both the book, and all the people, 20 Saying, This is the blood of the testament which God hath enjoined unto you. 21 Moreover he sprinkled with blood both the tabernacle, and all the vessels of the ministry. 22 And almost all things are by the law purged with blood; and without shedding of blood is no remission. 23 It was therefore necessary that the patterns of things in the heavens should be purified with these; but the heavenly things themselves with better sacrifices than these. 24 For Christ is not entered into the holy places made with hands, which are the figures of the true; but into heaven itself, now to appear in the presence of God for us:" (Heb 9:18-24).
Do you see the contrast in v.23 between the heavenly things and the patterns of things in the heavens? And that the patterns of things in the heavens were purged with the blood of calves and goats? See that? Here is Paul calling the Jewish tabernacle the heavens. If you don't see it, read it again, because it's impossible that anything in the heavens, where Christ went, to have been purged with the blood of bulls and goats!!
"And he made a molten sea, ten cubits from the one brim to the other: it was round all about, and his height was five cubits: and a line of thirty cubits did compass it round about. And under the brim of it round about there were knops compassing it, ten in a cubit, compassing the sea round about: the knops were cast in two rows, when it was cast. It stood upon twelve oxen, three looking toward the north, and three looking toward the west, and three looking toward the south, and three looking toward the east: and the sea was set above upon them, and all their hinder parts were inward. And it was an hand breadth thick, and the brim thereof was wrought like the brim of a cup, with flowers of lilies: it contained two thousand baths," (1 Kings 7:23-26).
"Moreover he made an altar of brass, twenty cubits the length thereof, and twenty cubits the breadth thereof, and ten cubits the height thereof. Also he made a molten sea of ten cubits from brim to brim, round in compass, and five cubits the height thereof; and a line of thirty cubits did compass it round about," (2 Chronicles 4:1-3).
"Then Nebuzaradan the captain of the guard carried away captive certain of the poor of the people, and the residue of the people that remained in the city, and those that fell away, that fell to the king of Babylon, and the rest of the multitude. But Nebuzaradan the captain of the guard left certain of the poor of the land for vinedressers and for husbandmen. Also the pillars of brass that were in the house of the LORD, and the bases, and the brasen sea that was in the house of the LORD, the Chaldeans brake, and carried all the brass of them to Babylon. The caldrons also, and the shovels, and the snuffers, and the bowls, and the spoons, and all the vessels of brass wherewith they ministered, took they away. And the basons, and the firepans, and the bowls, and the caldrons, and the candlesticks, and the spoons, and the cups; that which was of gold in gold, and that which was of silver in silver, took the captain of the guard away. The two pillars, one sea, and twelve brasen bulls that were under the bases, which king Solomon had made in the house of the LORD: the brass of all these vessels was without weight," (Jer 52:15-20).
I reiterate, this fits like a hand in a glove! When John said the first heavens and earth had passed away, and there was no more sea, he was describing the passing away of the first covenant, remember, the first one, which was growing old, becoming obsolete, and was ready to vanish away (Heb 8:13)? The first covenant along with the temple has been destroyed, when John sees, concurrently, the new heavens, the new earth, and the new Jerusalem, coming down from God out of heaven. This does not fit the Futurist's paradigm, because they have the new heavens, the new earth, the new Jerusalem, which is the bride of Christ, coming down out of heaven to…, nothing, because in the Futurist's paradigm, the earth has been dissolved and burned up, thus, there being no more literal waters in the oceans! The Futurist's paradigm also has the church not coming until the 'end of time.' That's the typical church of Christ doctrine!
Since Peter says he is looking for the new heavens and earth;
Since John sees the new heavens and earth with the first heavens and earth has passed away;
Since Jesus said heaven and earth shall pass away, in His generation, (Mat 24:35) at the fulfilling of every jot and tittle of the law and the prophets;
Then our brethren should stop ignoring the fact that 2 Peter chapter 3 is not referring to the destruction of the physical/material kosmos, in a history-ending event, at the assumed end of time.
The Greek term rendered "elements" (KJV) in 2 Peter 3, is the Greek term (στοιχεῖον) stoicheion which is used 7 times in the NT; twice in this passage.
1) any first thing, from which the others belonging to some series or composite whole take their rise, an element, first principal;
1a) the letters of the alphabet as the elements of speech, not however the written characters, but the spoken sounds;
1b) the elements from which all things have come, the material causes of the universe;
1c) 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;1d) the elements, rudiments, primary and fundamental principles of any art, science, or discipline;
1d1) i.e. of mathematics, Euclid’s geometry.
Neuter of a presumed derivative of the base of G4748; something orderly in arrangement, that is, (by implication) a serial (basal, fundamental, initial) constituent (literally), proposition (figuratively): - element, principle, rudiment.
stoicheion; from the same as G4748; one of a row, hence a letter (of the alphabet), by ext. the elements (of knowledge): — elemental things (2), elementary principles (2), elementary *(1), elements (2), principles (1). (NASEC);
"The elements (ta stoicheia). Old word (from stoichos a row), in Plato in this sense, in other senses also in N.T. as the alphabet, ceremonial regulations."
"The elements (στοιχεῖα) Derived from στοῖχος, a row, and meaning [emphasis RR] originally one of a row or series; hence a component or element. The name for the letters of the alphabet, as being set in rows. Applied [emphasis RR] to the four elements - fire, air, earth, water; and in later times to the planets and signs of the zodiac. It is used in all ethical sense in other passages."
Note the "meaning" vs., what it is "applied to," i.e., because it's being "applied" to "fire, air, earth, & water" does not redefine the original "meaning" and therefore is merely an opinion, which most Bible students pararot as they are either unaware of, or simply disregard the contextual definition.
If we look at the other 5 texts where we find this term, it becomes readily obvious that in all those passages, stoicheion refers specifically to the Old Testament's ceremonial laws.
"Even so we, when we were children, were in bondage under the elements of the world:" (Gal 4:3);
"But now, after that ye have known God, or rather are known of God, how turn ye again to the weak and beggarly elements, whereunto ye desire again to be in bondage?" (Gal 4:9);
"Beware lest any man spoil you through philosophy and vain deceit, after the tradition of men, after the rudiments of the world, and not after Christ," (Col 2:8);
"Wherefore if ye be dead with Christ from the rudiments of the world, why, as though living in the world, are ye subject to ordinances," (Col 2:20);
"For when for the time ye ought to be teachers, ye have need that one teach you again which be the first principles of the oracles of God; and are become such as have need of milk, and not of strong meat," (Heb 5:12).
Since this term is used consistently—yea—exclusively, in reference to elemental principles & laws, it cannot be forced to mean something else in 2 Peter 3 which is totally foreign to its consistent usage in all other places, especially when considering that such a concept of the destruction of the material universe was never in Hebrew thought, nor prophecy. If we practice what we preach, i.e., "speak where the Bible speaks, and be silent where the Bible is silent," and, "allow the scripture to be its own commentary and dictionary," then there is no hermeneutic: there is no example of stoicheion referring to material creation, nor is there ever an instance of any type of Hebraic language, hyperbolic, metaphoric, apocalyptic or otherwise, which resulted in the end of the universe.
That said, what, specifically, does John identify the new heavens and earth (which Peter was looking for) as in this passage:
"And I saw a new heaven and a new earth: for the first heaven and the first earth were passed away; and there was no more sea. And I John saw the holy city, new Jerusalem, coming down from God out of heaven, prepared as a BRIDE adorned for her husband," (Rev 21:1-2).
What is the bride of Christ brethren?! What is the new Jerusalem called in Hebrews 12:22-24? That's right, the church!
Since there was only one New Creation predicted in the holy prophets (Isa 65:17-19), from which Holy Spirit guides Peter to remind his readers; and, since this new heavens and earth is the new Jerusalem, the bride of Christ, then it simply can't be argued that the prediction of the new heavens and new earth is not fulfilled, since all agree that the church is presently with us today. Since the bringing in of the New Creation follows the passing away of the "first heavens and earth," (Rev 20:11), and seeing that the physical planet still exists, then the unavoidable conclusion is, contextually, the "first heavens and earth;" "the heavens and earth which are now," which Peter said was about to melt with fervent heat at the day of the Lord's parousia, can only mean the utter destruction of earthly tabernacle and Judaism, the arch-enemy of the church at that time, in that generation!
To be good stewards of God's word, we must ignore the voices of calculated deceit and obfuscation, and observe the original language in which the Biblical writers spoke and wrote; audience relevance, i.e., the context, both near and remote; the linguistics; and, study what this type of language consistently meant throughout the Hebrew scriptures; what it meant to the 1st century audience to whom it was written, based on the fulfilling of all the law and the prophets, every jot and every tittle.