Thanks Jack, for the reply.
Maybe I need to explain a little further where I'm coming from. I am fairly new to NCT and I am thrilled to have found a forum about it. The only theological predisposition or baggage that I bring with me is the rejection of my former theological beliefs and practices of Roman Catholicism, Pentecostal/Charismaticism and Dispensationalism. I am eager to learn and share with "like minded believers." I enjoy discussing and debating various theological concepts within the context of love.
This "alternate" view that I've presented on 2 Pet 3 is very new (two weeks) to me. I've only presented it for discussion, not to cause dissension or promote some heresy. I guess I've assumed that there would be some partial preterists on the list that may have some insight into this section of scripture that is so new to me from this perspective.
I have always until very recently looked at this passage only futuristically. But lately we've been re-examining passages in light of "what did it mean to the first audience," like the time texts "at hand" in Rev 1:3, 22:10, or "shortly" in Rev 1:1, or 22:6.
I believe that "this generation" in the Olivet discourse of Mat 23:36,24:34 refers to those saints before 70 A.D.,and many would agree that Mat 24, for the most part, was fulfilled at that time but, that it might also be a picture or thumbnail sketch of the final culmination (future)-so, there may be a double fulfillment.
What I'm wondering could this "double fulfillment" idea be applied to 2 Pet 3? Could "last days" of 3:3 be the last days of the old covenant? Terminating in the judgement of 70 A.D.?
You wrote, "It behooves us to not only be aware of the theological baggage we bring to a passage, but also to be conscious of and careful of the impact such baggage may have on our submission to the text. We are always in danger of "reading in" what is not there."
Strangely, I was told essentially this same thing by the man who presented the idea that a far off, futuristic explanation of this text might be doing just that - reading in what is not there, (if we consider the audience and how it was meant to apply to them.)
Of course we too, are the audience and certainly this text is as meaningful to us today as it was to them, but considering the historical events of 70 A.D., one could conclude that the destruction of the temple system (a type of 'heaven and earth' to the Jews) did melt with fervent heat and the works therein were burned up. Likewise, a 'new heaven and earth', (the New Covenant), was instituted 'according to his promise, wherein dwelleth righteousness'. As in the days of Noah, where the physical earth did not perish but the wicked systems of earth and all that lived therein were utterly destroyed.
And if Daniel 9:24 applies to the verses in 2 Pet.3:12,13 as many suggest,
Dan 9:24
Seventy weeks are determined upon thy people and upon thy holy city, to finish the transgression, and to make an end of sins, and to make reconciliation for iniquity, and to bring in everlasting righteousness, and to seal up the vision and prophecy, and to anoint the most Holy. KJV
2 Peter 3:12-13
12 Looking for and hasting unto the coming of the day of God, wherein the heavens being on fire shall be dissolved, and the elements shall melt with fervent heat?
13 Nevertheless we, according to his promise, look for new heavens and a new earth, wherein dwelleth righteousness.
KJV
then the question is 'Were the last three purposes mentioned in v. 24 fulfilled by the establishment of the New Covenant or do they remain to be fulfilled at the end of time?'
And how might Matthew 5:18 apply if we consider the first possibility?
Matt 5:18
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. KJV
You see, I am not trying to fall into heresy, only rightly understand if we have been allowing our 'baggage' to skew the implications of the message, both to it's original hearers and to us. In many ways it is logical that the admonishment to both 'be diligent' and 'beware' was and is applicable to us all, then and now. I have always and still do apply these scriptures to the last day, but I don't see the harm in allowing that it may have had a fulfillment in the lifetime of those listening as well. It doesn't diminish our responsibility to live for and look toward the final return of Christ. Hallelujah!
This could be way off but I thought it was an interesting possibility.
Anyway, I don't intend on opening up a theological 'can of worms,' just looking for some eschatological stimulation.
In His Grip,
Bob
Mt. Judea, AR
----- Original Message -----
From: <JACKJEFF@...>
To: <soundofgrace@...>
Sent: Saturday, November 27, 2004 9:00 AM
Subject: [soundofgrace] Re: 2 Pet 3 - Jack to Bob Cauley
> Bob Cauley: Welcome to the Sound List! May your time with the list be profitable and edifying.
>
> << We are continually amazed at the depth of understanding we have when looking at Scripture through the light of NCT. We have recently been studying 2 Pet 3 from a partial preterist perspective. Anybody have any insights or comments about this section of Scripture? For example could "last days" in v. 3 be referring to the last days of the old covenant? Could vss. 10-13 be referring to 70 A.D.? Could "new heavens" and "new earth" be referring to the "New Covenant." Just wondering? >>
>
> I believe that you must greatly minimize the import of this passage in order to press it into a partial preterist mold. If the perspective can be somehow set aside for the sake of objectivity, so that things which conflict with it may be fairly considered, this passage points in quite a different direction. Taken at face value, along with the many previous passages which 2 Pet. 3 draws from and builds on, both in the OT and in the teachings of Christ, the focus seems evidently to be that of a future destruction of the heavens and earth we now know. To come out of this passage with any other understanding may be traced to coming into it with a theological predisposition which does not fit the demands of the text.
>
> This did not take place at any time in the past. The only other event even close to this magnitude was the flood in Noah's day. The only microcosmic predecessor of a similar nature was the destruction of the cities of the plain, Sodom and Gomorrah in Abraham's day. To reduce the language of this passage to the destruction of Jerusalem in 70 A.D. is to render the significance of this passage beneath either of these two previous events. Yet this entire passage demands that we conduct our lives now based on what we look for God to do in the future. And the events focused on in the future are all directly connected to the Second Advent of the Messiah in the context.
>
> I believe the "New Heavens" and the "New Earth" refer to the final culmination of stage of the fulfillment of the New Covenant promises. The New Covenant was instituted at the Cross, but is being implemented in stages or phases, of which we are only in the first. The last and final stage, that of complete fulfillment awaits the New Heavens and New Earth which this passage speaks of. The New Covenant may rightly be said to be the covenant of the New Heavens and New Earth in which all things will be made new. We remain strangers and pilgrims here until that day.
>
> Final comments:
>
> I personally am at a loss to see any connections in the text of 2 Pet. 3 to the events of 70 A.D. Without clear contextual warrant no such connection should be made. I would conclude that the partial preterist understanding is exegetically untenable.
>
> It behooves us to not only be aware of the theological baggage we bring to a passage, but also to be conscious of and careful of the impact such baggage may have on our submission to the text. We are always in danger of "reading in" what is not there.
>
> It is also very, very important that we not be found guilty of the sin of Hymenaeus and Philetus, that of teaching that a prophecy has been fulfilled when it has not yet come to pass (2 Tim. 2:14-19). This error is dealt with by the Apostle as one equal to that of false prophecy itself.
>
> Soli Deo Gloria,
>
> John T. "Jack" Jeffery
>
> --
> Read the Sound of Grace pages at
> http://www.soundofgrace.com
>
> To unsubscribe, send ANY message to: soundofgrace-unsubscribe@...
>
> To view our online archive go to our web page at
> http://www.associate.com/groups/soundofgrace
>
>
>
--
Read the Sound of Grace pages at
http://www.soundofgrace.com
To unsubscribe, send ANY message to: soundofgrace-unsubscribe@...
To view our online archive go to our web page at
http://www.associate.com/groups/soundofgrace