Perspectives:
But, beloved, do not forget
this one thing, that with the Lord one day is as a thousand years, and a
thousand years as one day (2 Peter 3:8)
Futurism
often uses this verse to claim that God does not view time as we do,
therefore we cannot take time statements in the Bible at face-value. How
would you respond?
Response by:
Arthur Melanson,
Jimmy Henry,
Dr. Kelly Nelson Birks
Arthur Melanson
The
verse, 2 Peter 3:8, “But, beloved, do
not forget this one thing, that with the Lord one day is as a thousand
years, and a thousand years as one day,” suffers great abuse.
Many retreat to this verse when confronted with the time statements of
Scripture concerning the first-century return of Jesus Christ. Thus,
when one reads timing statements such as
soon, near, at hand, shortly,
etc., 2 Peter 3:8 is invoked to claim that God does not view time as man
does.
But
Peter defended both the promises of God and the timing thereof against
the scoffers of his day. The scoffers taunted Christians, saying, “Where
is the promise of His coming?” (2 Peter 3:4). Yet Peter says they
willfully forgot that God
promised to destroy the world of Noah’s day, and that
God did what He promised! Then Peter reminds them that God also
promised to destroy the heavens and earth in their day (i.e., the Old
Covenantal system) by fire.
It
is at this juncture that Peter uses the verse we are considering. Note
the context: He is defending the truth of God’s Word, especially the
promises, against those who jeer and mock God’s faithfulness. In
response, Peter ministers to the household of faith as he strengthens
them. He writes that, if God promises to do a certain thing in a day,
the promise is sure, and it will come on time. If God promises to do a
certain thing in a thousand years, the promise is sure, and it will come
on time. It makes no difference to God if the time is a day or a
thousand years; He will be faithful, and He will be on time.
The
very next verse, 2 Peter 3:9, begins, “God is not slack concerning His
promise . . . .” Peter strengthens the sureness of the time
statements in Scripture, rather than negating them. I pray this brief
study will help you see through the errors of men and grasp what Peter
taught concerning God and the faithfulness of His promises.
Jimmy Henry
In
an attempt to explain away the meaning of the clear “time texts” that
declare Jesus’ return was to occur within the generation to whom the
Bible was written, some teachers take Peter’s statement in 2 Peter 3:8
and attempt to prove that God does not measure time as men do. But is
that what Peter was saying? I think not.
The
best interpreter of Scripture is Scripture. Peter was quoting from Psalm
90:4, where David writes, “For a
thousand years in thy sight are but as yesterday when it is past, and as
a watch in the night.” It is true that with God all time is as
nothing, because in the presence of God all is eternity. David wrote in
this same Psalm, “Lord, thou hast been
our dwelling place in all generations. Before the mountains were brought
forth, or ever thou hadst formed the earth and the world, even from
everlasting to everlasting, thou art God.” Since God is the
eternal being, time is irrelevant to Him. However, He deals with men,
who are mortal creatures of time, in a way that they can understand. If
God does not measure time in the same way men do in His message to men,
then He becomes a deceiver and no man can comprehend His works with men.
When
Peter quoted from Psalm 90:4, he was dealing with the scoffers who were
denying the promise of Jesus’ return within that generation. By quoting
Psalm 90:4, Peter was making the point that what seems to be a long
period of time to man is no more than a day to the eternal God. Much
like the phrase “the thousand years” used by John six times in
Revelation 20:1-7, Peter’s use must be symbolic of a period of time in
the first century. It seems to me that the apostle never intended for
this to be some kind of chronological formula by which believers were to
measure human time. I believe he was showing how God perceives time
qualitatively, as well as
quantitatively. Peter first
illustrates God’s quantitative
perception of time by saying that a day with God is as a thousand years;
in other words, God can accomplish a thousand years’ work in a day if He
so chooses. Peter then illustrates God’s
qualitative perception of time
by saying that a thousand years with God is as a day; in other words, he
was saying God is not limited by time as men are.
It
is not unusual for those who hold to Futurism to quote this text as an
argument or excuse for the total disregard of the time texts of
prophetic writings. Even in prophecies where a certain time constraint
is specified (e.g., words like “shortly,” “speedily,” or “at hand”),
Futurists appeal to 2 Peter 3:8 as an arbitrary treatment to justify
their attempt to explain why there is a delay in the fulfillment of what
the text clearly says. When one who believes in fulfilled eschatology
points out that certain predictions had to be fulfilled within the
limited time frame, Futurists reply, “One
day is with the Lord as a thousand years, and a thousand years as one
day.” Peter is not giving
a mathematical formula, that a thousand years equals one day or one day
equals a thousand years. If this is a formula, then how should we
interpret a passage like Genesis 7:17, which says, “. . .
and the flood was forty days upon the
earth.” Are we to understand that the flood lasted forty thousand
years upon the earth? This kind of reasoning is illogical, but it is
the kind of reasoning used by those who quote 2 Peter 3:8 to deny the
literal interpretation of the many time texts in prophetic Scripture.
To
rightly interpret Scripture, we must read every text in its context and
not remove it to some distant time that does not fit the parameters set
forth by our Lord or the apostles. To suggest that God has two weights
and two measures in His dealings with men, and that His mode of
reckoning is ambiguous and variable, is not only unreasonable to me—it
is immoral. To make such a suggestion implies that a day may mean a
thousand years or a thousand years may mean a day. If this is so, then
there is no possible way prophecy can be reasonably interpreted.
The
Scriptures themselves offer no reason to use such a method of
interpretation. God is faithful and He gives no reason to believe that
His dealings with men are anything less than consistent with His
faithfulness. It is clear to me that Peter’s reason for quoting Psalm
90:4 is to assure his readers that what Jesus predicted in Matthew 24
was about to unfold in their lifetime. Peter was assuring his readers
that the Day of the Lord was the Day of Judgment predicted by Jesus and
that it was indeed coming upon that generation. In the balance of this
chapter, Peter uses apocalyptic language (cosmic imagery) to explain how
the Old Covenant age was coming to an end and how the New Covenant age
was soon to appear. Peter was, in reality, speaking about the
destruction of the Jewish leadership or government, which was fulfilled
when the fires of war came upon the nation shortly after he wrote. All
these things were to come in the generation that was contemporary with
our Lord. The time text makes this very clear. As John Noē says, “Why
not just take Jesus at His word?”
Dr. Kelly
Nelson Birks
When people feel threatened by other viewpoints, those threatened will
often manipulate a passage of Scripture so that it appears to support
their own point of view. This is exactly what Futurists do with the
subject of eschatology. The text of 2 Peter 3:8 is no exception, as it
is possibly the most misrepresented text that non-Preterists use when
disputing Preterism. The Futurist, when citing 2 Peter 3:8, conforms the
text to what the Futurist wants it to
say and fails to determine what the
text itself
means. When preparing to teach
or preach on a passage of Scripture, good exegetical and hermeneutical
procedure is adhered to by asking the following questions:
1. What does the text say?
The
text of 2 Peter 3:8 (English Standard Version) reads: “But do not
overlook this one fact, beloved, that with the Lord one day is as a
thousand years, and a thousand years as one day.” This is a basic
proclamation. However, the meaning of the text is understood within its
over-arching context and will not be discovered by simply quoting verse
8 alone. We must, at all costs, avoid the temptation to quote a text out
of its original context as others do in order to validate their opinion
and win the argument at hand.
Typically, when this text is quoted, the argument at hand (with
deference to its original context) is: “Don’t you understand that time
is meaningless to the Lord, and that He can say that His Son can return
at any moment (i.e., ‘soon’ or ‘at hand’) with that ‘moment’ possibly
being thousands of years still in the future?” This type of position
betrays a great sense of desperation. The Bible does not teach spiritual
double-talk. The fact remains that all
of the New Testament books either discuss the Second Coming explicitly
or allude to it; moreover, each book places that coming directly within
a first-century context.
The text of 2 Peter 3:8 has been proclaimed. But read alone we cannot
fully understand the text. This brings us to the second step of biblical
hermeneutics:
2. What does the text mean?
As
was brought out in the first point, context is of primary concern when
it comes to understanding any passage of Scripture. However, our context
for understanding the verse under discussion does not merely contain a
few verses before or after 2 Peter 3:8. Peter laid the ground work for
his teaching on the timing of the Second Coming long before writing his
second epistle. Notice that Peter’s statement about “a thousand years”
is in response to a question—one that is defiantly posed by those whom
Peter calls “scoffers.” Verse 3 states: “. . . knowing this first of
all, that scoffers will come in the last days with scoffing, following
their own sinful desires. They will say, ‘Where is the promise of his
coming?’” Going back to verse 1, we begin to understand the
meaning of verse 8 and the
“thousand years” statement. In order to refute the scoffers and their
defiant question in verse 4, Peter states that he had written another
epistle previously to this same group of recipients, namely, the first
epistle of Peter: “This is now the second letter that I am writing to
you, beloved. In both of them [1 and 2 Peter] I am stirring up your
sincere mind by way of reminder . . . .” (It is true that Peter does not
directly and irrefutably tell us that he is referring to his first
epistle (i.e., 1 Peter); but if he is not, then to what could he
possibly be referring? Since we have both 1 Peter and 2 Peter preserved
for us as canonical Scripture, let us, for argument’s sake, receive the
proposition that here, in 2 Peter 3:1, he is referring to the first
epistle that bears his name.)
At
the end of verse 1, Peter states that he is, by what he is about to say,
attempting to “remind” his readers of something that he had stated to
them in his first epistle. In 2 Peter 3:2, he tells his readers to
“remember the predictions of the holy prophets and the commandment of
the Lord and Savior through your apostles” concerning Christ’s Second
Coming. (We know this because of the immediate reference to the dispute
over the timing of the Second Coming being “scoffed at” by the scoffers
in verse 4.) Thus, both Old and New Testament prophets prophesied
concerning the timing of Christ’s Second Coming, and the Lord Jesus
Himself taught regarding it.
Next, Peter directs us to the timing of the Second Coming in verse 3: “.
. . knowing this first of all [‘first of all,’ meaning that what he is
about to say concerning the timing of Christ’s Second Coming is of
‘first’ importance], that scoffers will come in the last days with
scoffing . . . .” Clearly, the Parousia was predicted to occur within
the period of time which Peter calls “the last days.” My intent is not
to discuss the meaning of the term “last days” (the first-century Jews
believed it represented the last days of the Mosaic system and the
beginning of the reign of the Messiah). Rather, it is my intent to
establish that what Peter called the “last days” was, in fact, the same
generation in which Peter lived and ministered. Thus, the scoffers were
retaliating against the first-century teaching that Christ’s coming was
certainly about to occur in their lifetimes. This is why it is important
to understand why Peter made reference to “reminding” his readers about
what he had stated previously to them in his first epistle concerning
the timing of the last days. Peter makes it abundantly clear in 1 Peter
1:20 that the last days were the time in which Christ himself was first
manifested in the flesh, carried out His ministry, sacrificed Himself on
Calvary’s cross, and was resurrected bodily from the grave. According to
1 Peter 1:20, “He [Christ] was foreknown before the foundation of the
world but was made manifest in the last
times for your sake . . . .” The fact that Christ was upon the
earth during what the Bible calls the
last days or the last times
is made abundantly clear from numerous passages (Gen. 49:1, 10 and Num.
24:17; cf. Mt. 2:1-2; Heb. 1:2, 9:26; and 1 Jn. 2:18). The scoffers’
scoffing was yet another sign that those alive in the first century
were, in fact, living in the last days. Clearly, Peter believed that he
was living and writing in the last days.
Under the inspiration of the Holy Spirit, Peter now states in verse 4
that a person’s “sinful desire” asks the defiant question, “Where is the
promise of His coming?” This is important: if the scoffers are asking
the question of “where” the promise of His coming is, then this
indicates that the scoffers were responding to the first-century
teaching that Christ’s coming was “soon,” “at hand,” and “about to be.”
This very important fact is missed by all Futurists who deny that the
New Testament teaches a first-century Parousia. They are so livid in
their denial of the biblical teaching that they fail to ask themselves
the all-important question: “Why are the scoffers scoffing at the
promise of His coming?” The simple answer is that they understood what
Christians were proclaiming. However, because several years had passed,
and the Temple was still standing, they felt that the promise of His
coming had been proved false. The fact that they were scoffing verifies
that the first-century church proclaimed a first-century Second Coming
of Christ! No other explanation will suffice as to why the scoffers were
scoffing at the first-century timing of Christ’s coming.
With
the above in mind (and without belaboring verses 5-7), let us now answer
the question at hand: “What does 2 Peter 3:8 mean?” While Peter refers
to the fact that, to the Lord, a day is as a thousand years and a
thousand years is as a day, Peter is
not saying that time is a meaningless concept to God and that His
apostles and prophets can say that Christ will come soon, or that His
coming is at hand, while it is still thousands of years away. Rather,
through the God-honoring method of proper biblical hermeneutics, we can
discover precisely what Peter means when he refers to a “thousand
years.” The answer to the meaning of verse 8 is found in verse 9: “The
Lord is not slow to fulfill his promise
. . . .” Verse 8 simply means that God and His promises are not
affected by time as it affects us who live “under the sun” (Ecclesiastes
1:9). Unlike God, we are bound by the tick-tock of the clock. When it
comes to God fulfilling His promise of a first-century Parousia, He is
not bound by the whims and ways of evil, unbelieving man. Note that, in
verse 4, the scoffers asked in their defiant challenge to the confident
expectation of a first-century Parousia, “Where is the
promise of His coming?” And now,
in verse 9, Peter answers his challengers directly: “The Lord is not
slow to fulfill His promise . . . .” Of what “promise” is Peter
speaking? The only “promise” referred to in this context is the
promise of Christ’s expected
first-century coming that was last mentioned in verse 4. Peter says that
to question the validity of what the early church was preaching
concerning the first-century expectation was nothing less than sinful
(verse 3b). Since this is the “only” Second Coming to which the New
Testament documents testify, then it is unreasonable and without
biblical foundation to say that the scoffers were referring to anything
else other than the proclamation of an expected first-century Parousia.
We
are to understand that the phrase of a thousand years being as a day to
God was not given in order to
teach that the Second Coming could happen at any time or that time is
meaningless to God relative to the Second Coming. Rather, we are to
understand that verse 9 teaches us that, when God states what He does
concerning the thousand years, it is meant to proclaim that the Lord is
not “slow” (as the scoffers pronounced) when it comes to fulfilling His
promise of Christ’s
first-century Parousia. Why would someone “scoff” at a promise of a
Second Coming that was still thousands of years in the future? They
could only “scoff” at a Second Coming that was proclaimed to be at hand!
Having settled what the text says and means, we come to our final
question:
3. What am I going to do about it?
The
original intent of Scripture is not fully realized unless it is
applied to one’s life. The
question that remains for every properly exegeted passage of Scripture
is: “What is this text demanding of me? What am I required to do with
this information of a first-century expectation of the Parousia?”
How
about doing for others what I am doing for you, the reader, right now?
Take this information, go over it and over it until you digest it
thoroughly, and then ask God to send people to you who struggle over 2
Peter 3:8. You will be amazed at the number of folks He will send to you
so that you might glorify
Christ’s word in defiance of those who, according to their sinful
desires (2 Peter 3:3), continue to declare a still-future-to-us Second
Coming that is foreign to the text and meaning of Scripture.
