RevTestament
New member
Except when God says otherwise...
Ezekiel 4:6
6 And when thou hast accomplished them, lie again on thy right side, and thou shalt bear the iniquity of the house of Judah forty days: I have appointed thee each day for a year.
2 Peter 3's word choice on existence and creation
- Thread starter Interplanner
- Start date
Except when God says otherwise...
Ezekiel 4:6
6 And when thou hast accomplished them, lie again on thy right side, and thou shalt bear the iniquity of the house of Judah forty days: I have appointed thee each day for a year.
Interplanner
Well-known member
RevT,
I don't want to get involved with Ezek's symbolism any more than I can help it.
Gen 1 with 2 Pet 3 are quite different from a summary like Ex 20 which was meant to reinforce that God is creator, not provide every detail.
God had Peter use the verb to exist for the heavens, and to be formed for the earth--and that out of water and through water (which had to be in existence) when summarizing creation. After that, sure, it is a 6 day work, but before that is my attention in this thread.
NickM can call these guys morons when he's read them:
Wakefield. GOD'S BATTLE WITH THE SEA-MONSTER
Waltke (former Hebrew, Regent College). CREATION AND CHAOS.
Cassuto. FROM ADAM TO NOAH.
Ross (astrophysics, U of Toronto) CREATION AND TIME.
RevTestament
New member
Ok I don't want to derail your thread, just thought I'd point out some things - sometimes God seems to provide "definitions" for scriptural prophetic words like in Ezekiel.
I'm curious as to why you don't mention what Peter says in verse 8:
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.
What if anything do you think he is trying to say? Is he giving us a different reckoning of time or just being obtuse?
Interplanner
Well-known member
Remember the intention of the passage. Some people in Judaism and others thought that the 2nd coming of Christ was a myth. (If you think he's referring to the 1st coming, that's pretty involved, but I can see why). To them, the 1st coming was not that much of an interuption of 'all things going on the same from the beginning.' But Christ and the apostles had spoken of a violent destruction of Jerusalem and a total change of the whole earth right after it. In that generation.
2 Peter was probably from the early 60s so some 30 years have gone by. Where's the event?
Peter answers this by saying God can be as patient as he likes, to save more people.
He says the earth was 'formless' way after the existence of the heavens, and 'formless and void' was known to be a sign of God's judgement, Jer 4:23. So apparently God was patient with the earth from the distant past but finally judged it, resulting in 'formless and void.' God then created the present form of the world from that very quickly.
I more inclined to see the above than that he's stretching out creation days to 1000 years each, because Peter meant it about his patience before destroying something and making new. Note that at the end of the destruction by fire of the current world there is a swift transition to the NHNE.
We really have this three times in 2 Pet 3:
1, the earth from the same creation time long ago as the heavens, destroyed--made formless and void--then formed new out of and through that water.
2, that world after the 6 days is the same as the flood's world. That world was also destroyed by water. He means the habitable surface, not the whole thing. (Notice Peter's emphasis on God's patience in 1 Peter 3:20 about the flood; same theme here).
3, this world after the flood will be consumed by fire, melted down, and there will be a NHNE.
RevTestament
New member
I was not necessarily implying that Peter meant the world was created in 6000 yrs. I think what he is saying is a guide to NT prophecy however, revealing things about the seals, etc.
OK,
but in the post as a whole you seem to have a strange mix of interpretations, which I am not sure I can decipher or care to. I am not a preterist. I don't believe the "generation" Jesus spoke of was referring to a 40 year period. I view it more as a generation of the earth. It may be said you are summing up 3 of them. Perhaps one the things Peter is trying to say is that the generation is since Noah? I have a different interpretation of these matters, I am just trying to understand what you are saying, and I don't see it from Genesis.
Interplanner
Well-known member
But he mentions all three: creation, flood and judgement.
What would you say is the intention of 2 Pet 3? Isn't it written to answer to scoffing that God is patient and doesn't hurry to destroy what he disapproves?
If that is it, then we are led to contemplate: how does this show in the creation which was the forming of a destroyed mass into what we have today? Were there things there before creation? What could have gone wrong?
btw, on generation in Jesus' usage: there are many clear inications that it is that generation which ended in the destruction of Israel. Lk 23: 'weep for your children (the ones they were nursing then) for then men shall ask for the mountains to fall on them...'
Interplanner
Well-known member
Well, guys, I've tried to get you on to this discussion by links at the other 3 discussions on evolution and creation. I still assert that a person has to square away 'formless and void' before they really decide what to do with Genesis 1.
Or 70 weeks, which is not being used here. Gen 1 establishes it. The evening and the morning were the first day.
The words of a nonbeliever. All you have to do is believe God. You don't have to figure out what it really means.
6days
New member
interplanner said:
That not really true, right?
I was just pointing out that you are reading things into the text that aren't there. 'Ekpali' simply means 'long ago' and has nothing to do with time before "the beginning."
Here was what I posted:
Peter 3:5But they deliberately forget that long ago (Ekpali) by God’s word) the heavens came into being and the earth was formed out of water and by water."
Compare... same word.
2 Peter 2:3*"In their greed they will make up clever lies to get hold of your money. But God condemned them long ago(Ekpali), and their destruction will not be delayed."
Interplanner...You are following teachings of a false disciple, Hugh Ross. He distorts, twists and compromises on God's Word. He does not use proper hermeneutics / exegetical interpretation of Scripture. Instead he starts with the idea that the earth is old, and then he tries to insert that idea into Scripture. ... For example there is absolutely nothing in*2 Peter 3:5*that suggests the earth is older than when God created in the first chapter of Genesis.
If we use an exegetical approach (scripture to help interpret scripture) to that verse.... we can find the same Greek words for 'long ago' in*2 Peter 2:3. It became clear the word is not referring to some time preceding creation. The verse is talking about false prophets. (Hmmmmmmm. ...)
Also... let's look at the Greek word you are hanging your hat on...Ekpali. The prefix of the word 'ek' means "out of" or "from". And, 'pali' means "old". How old is old ('pali') in scripture? You can find the word 6 times in the NT, and it's usually associated with human activity....never once referring to a time before Genesis 1.
Interplanner
Well-known member
It doesn't work that way 6days. How many years do you have in NT Greek?
There were false prophets identified a long time ago and then some by Paul, Peter and John. See the contrast?
The heavens existed a long time and then earth was formed (aorist, unmodified) later, out of existing and unorgranized material.
I already explained that Ross is only source; but he hasn't grappled with 'formless and void' that I know of.
You haven't grappled with Jer 4:23 which is 50% of our information about 'formless and void' and f&v is 50% of our Biblical information about the universe before day 1! Get up to speed, man.
I have a high view of Wakefield's and Waltke's literary work on ancient near east cosmologies. That matters more to me than Ross, because he's trying to do justice to the geo-physical evidence without spending as much time on the literary as he coudl. Rabbi Cassuto was a master at finding things about the composition of Genesis that matter; the section title guy.
Literary stuff matters. Here in my area, the NW of the US, there are the native American cosmologies (and sub-stories on the origin of evil). The local Suquamish also have a creator who speaks things into existence. He is called the form-changer, or transformer in other translations. He gave this ability to humans, plants and animals, but they deceived each other too much with it, so he withdrew it and they have been fixed since then in their kinds.
You might be upset to think anything of such accounts, but actually there is more corroborated about the Bible than destroyed by it. It is even moreso among the Tlingit near Juneau Alaska, and the official historic plaque in that city, the capital of Alaska, retells more material like Genesis than almost all evolutionists combined in the lower 48.
This is where you have to know what C.S. Lewis said about such material. "These (fragmented echoes of the Bible) have to be out there;" he said, "it would be a very disturbing thing if they were not." --"The Myth That Became Fact," in GOD IN THE DOCK. What he meant was that there is total rationality to the Biblical explanation, but in its evil, mankind continues to change something about it.
There were false prophets identified a long time ago and then some by Paul, Peter and John. See the contrast?
The heavens existed a long time and then earth was formed (aorist, unmodified) later, out of existing and unorgranized material.
I already explained that Ross is only source; but he hasn't grappled with 'formless and void' that I know of.
You haven't grappled with Jer 4:23 which is 50% of our information about 'formless and void' and f&v is 50% of our Biblical information about the universe before day 1! Get up to speed, man.
I have a high view of Wakefield's and Waltke's literary work on ancient near east cosmologies. That matters more to me than Ross, because he's trying to do justice to the geo-physical evidence without spending as much time on the literary as he coudl. Rabbi Cassuto was a master at finding things about the composition of Genesis that matter; the section title guy.
Literary stuff matters. Here in my area, the NW of the US, there are the native American cosmologies (and sub-stories on the origin of evil). The local Suquamish also have a creator who speaks things into existence. He is called the form-changer, or transformer in other translations. He gave this ability to humans, plants and animals, but they deceived each other too much with it, so he withdrew it and they have been fixed since then in their kinds.
You might be upset to think anything of such accounts, but actually there is more corroborated about the Bible than destroyed by it. It is even moreso among the Tlingit near Juneau Alaska, and the official historic plaque in that city, the capital of Alaska, retells more material like Genesis than almost all evolutionists combined in the lower 48.
This is where you have to know what C.S. Lewis said about such material. "These (fragmented echoes of the Bible) have to be out there;" he said, "it would be a very disturbing thing if they were not." --"The Myth That Became Fact," in GOD IN THE DOCK. What he meant was that there is total rationality to the Biblical explanation, but in its evil, mankind continues to change something about it.