I think you are overlooking several things 2nd Peter 3:3-9 reveals. First you are overlooking this "Where is the promise of His coming? For ever since the fathers fell asleep, all continues just as it was from the beginning of creation.”DBowling wrote:Amen!abelcainsbrother wrote: First off let me say that this not be a reason to divide us as Christians.
Let's start by clarifying which Greek word refers to which English word in 2 Peter 3:5-6.But I'm trying to understand how you claim 2nd Peter 3:5 is reffering to Genesis 1,then in 2nd Peter 3:6 claim these waters that flooded the heavens(cosmos)and the earth and that the earth was formed out of changes to Noah's flood somehow in verse 6. It might be hard for you to imagine the heavens(cosmos) and the earth was flooded that you seem to think is creating new doctrine.But it clearly tells us that the waters the EARTH was formed out of caused the WORLD at that time to be destroyed,and we know from the word heavens this is referring to the cosmos but also the EARTH.
In 2 Peter 3:5
Greek ouranos = English heavens
Greek ge = English earth
In 2 Peter 3:6
Greek kosmos = English world
Neither myself or 2 Peter 3 is claiming that the heavens were flooded.
2 Peter 3:5 tells us 2 things
- By the word of the Lord the heavens (Greek ouranos) existed
- By the word of the Lord the earth (Greek ge) was formed out of water (Peter is referring to Genesis 1:9 here)
2 Peter 3:6 tells us that
- The 'world (Greek kosmos) at that time' was destroyed, being flooded by water (Peter is referring to Genesis 6-9 here and the known world at the time of Noah refers to the land of Mesopotamia)
The world is covered with water in Genesis 1:2. I think we both agree with that.And yet the earth is flooded in Genesis 1:2 that you think is creating new doctrine? In Genesis 1:2 the earth is covered with waters,then on day 2 God divides the waters and we see the earth is formed out of these waters. So I don't see how you can claim this is creating new doctrine.
The 'new doctrine' I was referring to was the assertion that Peter was referring to a flood other than Noah's Flood in 2 Peter 3:6.
Peter is referring to the flood that is mentioned by the OT Scriptures in Genesis and in the teachings of Jesus.
"The world at that time" (ie the land of Mesopotamia) was destroyed by Noah's Flood in Genesis 6-9.This world was not destroyed in Noah's flood,so I don't understand why you claim it was
Peter doesn't claim that the heavens (ouranos) were flooded.It seems to me that because you can't conceive of a flood of the universe and you think there is no evidence then it is creating doctrine,but Peter used the word cosmos for a reason when the word heavens is used,and the heavens existed long ago and the earth also.
The reason I don't think the universe was flooded is because Scripture never claims it was.
Peter used the work kosmos because that is the Greek word for world.
And Peter qualified his use of the word world/cosmos with the phrase "at that time" to indicate that the world that he was talking about was the known world at the time of Noah, which we know today as the land of Mesopotamia.
In 2 Peter 3:3-9 Peter is talking about the same thing that Jesus was talking about in Matthew 24:37-39.This means there was a former heavens and earth that perished with water but the present heavens and earth will be destroyed by fire and since the heavens and earth were not effected in Niah's flood I don't see how you cannot see it is talking about a former heavens and earth and world that perished in water.
Genesis never says anything about the heavens and earth perishing in water.
Jesus never says anything about the heavens and earth perishing in water.
And nowhere in 2 Peter 3 does Peter claim that the heavens and earth perished by water.
The thing that was destroyed by water in 2 Peter 3:6 was the known world at the time of Noah.
In Christ
You want to believe all continues just as it was from the beginning over billions of years.
Next "For when they maintain this, it escapes their notice that by the word of God the heavens existed long ago and the earth was formed out of water and by water,
For those who teach all continues as it was from the beginning of creation - Genesis 1:1 -For when they maintain this,it escapes their notice that by the word of God the heavens existed long ago and the earth was formed out of water and by water, this happened in Genesis 1, but it is also explaining why those who believe all things have continued since the beginning of the creation are wrong and then starts stating why it has'nt continued from the beginning of the creation by saying "through which the world at that time "at that time" is a look back,was destroyed,being flooded with water. It is explaining why it escapes the notice of those who claim "For ever since the fathers fell asleep,all continues just as it was from the beginning of creation and why they are wrong.
In other words since we know all things have not continued on since the beginning of the creation we have a break or a gap of time when it has not continued on since the beginning of the creation.And since it mentions the earth being formed out of water through which the former world perished the only other flood we can find is Genesis 1:2 which you acknowledge the earth has water on it,yet reject a flood? So we know based on Genesis 1:2 inwhich we have water on it and the fact the earth was formed out of water there was a world before it that was destroyed.
There is no other alternative to go by in the bible.We only have Genesis 1 when the earth is formed out of water by flood waters or Noah's flood but I've already explained why Noah's flood won't work.
This means you are overlooking an event that prevented all things continuing on just as it was from the beginning of the creation. There was an event that prevented this from continuing on that has been overlooked and this is Peter's whole point.Yet you keep making this apply to Noah's flood eventhough this world continued on,unlike when the former earth and world were destroyed. It matters not what translation we use 2nd Peter 3:3-9 is still pointing us to Genesis 1 and not Noah's flood or both.