I have to point out what Peter said in 2 Peter 3:5-7 again because that establishes the context of what he wrote in 2 Peter 3:10-12.
3 Above all, you must understand that in the last days scoffers will come, scoffing and following their own evil desires. 4 They will say, “Where is this ‘coming’ he promised? Ever since our ancestors died, everything goes on as it has since the beginning of creation.” 5 But they deliberately forget that long ago by God’s word the heavens came into being and the earth was formed out of water and by water. 6 By these waters also the world of that time was deluged and destroyed. 7 By the same word the present heavens and earth are reserved for fire, being kept for the day of judgment and destruction of the ungodly.
First, Peter references the flood waters that flooded the earth and destroyed all of the ungodly in the world. So, he referenced a past global, physical event. No room for debate here, right? I would hope not. Then, he said what he did in verse 7 which I quoted above. To me, it's very clear that he compared a past global, physical event to a future global, physical event. What basis is there for seeing it any other way? And if seen this way, it should be clear that what he was saying there is that just as the flood waters covered the entire surface of the earth and destroyed all of the ungodly in the past, the same will happen in the future, only this time by fire. Please address this. If you disagree, please tell me exactly how you interpret that passage.
Yes, I agree, but what is that fire? Jesus will destroy the man of sin with the breath of His mouth (the Holy Spirit) and the brightness of His coming (2 Tess.2:8).
I.O.W, by fire. So what is that fire that Peter is talking about? The substance we know and understand as fire, or the Holy Spirit (the breath of Christ's mouth)? We don't know yet, because it has not occurred yet.
Sorry to be a broken record, but I believe 2 Peter 3:5-7 makes it clear that his emphasis was on physical destruction and the fire that will come down on the earth (and that will affect the heavens and the elements as well) which will destroy all of the ungodly (unsaved). And, that will result in the destruction of the works of humans as well since the point of it all is to end up with "new heavens and a new earth where righteousness dwells" (2 Peter 3:13).
Do the rudiments and principles (stoichieon) of this fallen world have any part in the destruction? If you believe they do, then we agree, because you sad that the works of men will be destroyed by the fire (whatever the fire consists of).
@WPM pointed out that the word used for "earth" is ge, which is different to kosmos, and refers to the earth itself. Peter says the earth AND its works in it will be destroyed, but the earth has no works of itself, so that means it's the works of humans. But we both agree that it's not the complete annihilation of the planet but it is something bigger than anything that came before or will ever come again after. A complete change. Though we both struggle to put it into words I have the same understanding of that as you, I think.
And yes, the earth cannot be changed into a NHNE unless it "dies" in the same way that no one can be resurrected from the dead without dying. I get that.
That simply does not matter. The fact of the matter is that the Greek words have multiple definitions and not just one. So, how they are used in other verses does not dictate how they need to be used in 2 Peter 3:10-12. It's good to compare how they are used elsewhere, but that alone does not dictate what they should mean in any given verse. It depends on the context.
I admit you could be right but I won't pretend I'm convinced, either way, that the stoichion and ergon is referring to the earth itself. In fact it still does not make sense to me, especially given the fact that the rudiments of this world and works of humans indeed will be destroyed by the "fire".
Is it something you have said to me directly before? I don't read all your posts to ewq and other people. Anyway, it doesn't matter.
I don't know. In the back of my mind I remember saying that to you, and actually posting scriptures that show - almost word for word - those mentioned in Revelation as coming out of great tribulation (at the close of this age) as receiving the exact same blessings and having the exact same "environment" (for want of a better word) as those in the NHNE (among other scriptures that prove the same thing). I.O.W no thousand-year wait between the return of Christ and the NHNE - and no premil believes there will be mortals in the NHNE (at least I hope not).
But like you say, it doesn't matter.
I don't see how Adam has anything to do with this. In the future, those who are changed and have immortal bodies will have an immortal body like only Christ has now. How can they later die? We know Christ cannot die again. So, I am completely baffled about your view on this.
I doubt I will ever find anyone agreeing with me on that. I stand alone. Christ is Creator. Adam and the sons of Adam are creature, resurrected or not. Only Christ the Creator is immortal in the sense you understand immortality, not Adam the creature, nor the sons of Adam, resurrected or not. The proof is that we are all sons of Adam according to the flesh - sons of Adam whose body was immortal before he sinned and began to die, being prevented from eating the fruit of the tree of life (but not in the sense of the immortality of Christ, our Creator).
Yet Adam died, and his death came to all mankind until the last Adam became a life-giving Spirit.
I do not believe the creature was ever (before the fall of Adam) nor ever will be immortal in the sense of Christ the Creator's immortality. Christ is alive forevermore. He will never die again. The 2nd death is only for those who had part in the resurrection (Christ's resurrection), which is THE resurrection of mankind (Adam).
"You shall surely die". "You shall not surely die". Yet he died, though his body had been immortal up to that point.
Anyway, I don't expect you to agree with me. I doubt I will ever meet anyone who does.
We don't agree on the timing of the 2nd death:
Only for those whose names are not written in the book of life. The unsaved dead will all be resurrected at the same time and then judged and cast into the lake of fire. But, no one who Paul says in 1 Cor 15:51-52 will be changed to have immortal bodies will be among them.
I'm a premillennialist (just not like any other premillennialist whose statements and assertions I ever heard or read anywhere), so we don't agree on the timing for the 2nd death.
There will be physical destruction at that time, as other scripture like Matthew 24:35-39 and 2 Peter 3:10-12 make clear, but that destruction is described in a figurative way in Revelation 19 whereas it is described literally in 2 Peter 3:10-12. You say you disagree with this, but then didn't say why or comment any further. Can you please explain why you take Revelation 19:15-18 literally
No I don't disagree. I'm almost 100% sure I said after your 2nd post about that, that I do agree that it's metaphor in Revelation 19.
But the metaphor's purpose is to show us the extent of the death, the death toll. Nothing more. What I don't agree on is that the metaphor of Revelation 19 and the extent of the death it points to, has anything to do with the destruction of the earth being mentioned in 2 Peter 3:10. The one (2 Peter 3:10) might come immediately after the other (Revelation 19), I don't know for sure (note, I don't know for sure), but I don't see how, if 2 Peter 3:10 is referring to the destruction of the planet, and Revelation 19 only to the death of humans, we can put the two passages together as though they are "most certainly" talking about one and the same thing. I believe Revelation 19 is referring to the battle of Armageddon. I don't believe that 2 Peter 3:10 is necessarily taking place at the same time - but for sure, if not at the same time, then immediately afterwards. Same day.
Do you believe that Jesus will be slaying people with a literal sword coming out of His mouth when He returns?
No, I don't take Revelation 19:11-19 literally. I never have. I was trying to make the point that the one refers to dead bodies and the other to the complete destruction of the current order. I don't somehow see humans left to kill by the time 2 Peter 3:10 is taking place. It will all have been done in the battle of Armageddon, immediately before 2 Peter 3:10 takes place. Same day.