The 1 Day and the 1000 Years

[John of Japan]

Quite often, those who believe in spiritualising prophetic Scripture come to this passage in 2 Peter 3 and say that it doesn't mean a literal day and years, so therefore we can take Rev. 20's 1000 years figuratively. Here is the Scripture (obviously referring to the 2nd Coming):

"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. 9 The Lord is not slack concerning his promise, as some men count slackness; but is longsuffering to us-ward, not willing that any should perish, but that all should come to repentance. 10 But the day of the Lord will come as a thief in the night; in the which the heavens shall pass away with a great noise, and the elements shall melt with fervent heat, the earth also and the works that are therein shall be burned up."

However, the passage makes much more sense as a literal day and literal years. First of all, note that Peter is doing theology proper here. God created time and space (the space-time continuum), so he therefore exists outside of it. The opposite view is called "open theism." This view regards God as a "risk taker." "Although he may have a plan for how he will bring things to pass, not knowing future actions of free moral agents, he often has to change his plans in light of unforeseen developments" (Millard Erickson, Christian Theology, 3rd ed., p. 369).

Now, if the 1 day and 1000 years Peter is talking about are symbolic, the passage makes no sense, thus: "One figurative day is with the Lord as a figurative thousand years, and a figurative thousand years is as a figurative day." See? That makes no sense. It also begs the question, what figure of speech is at play here? Is it a metaphor, or a simile, or an idiom, or hyperbole, or what?

 

[loDebar]

Time only occurs in the physical world, a countdown in effect. The verse shows that time is not relative in Heaven

 

[Reformed1689]

This verse also gets used terribly to argue for the Gap Theory, the Day Age Theory, and Evolution in general for the creation account. It's poor exegesis.

In the English translation, notice the little word "as" is there and not the word "is".

 

[loDebar]

This verse also gets used terribly to argue for the Gap Theory, the Day Age Theory, and Evolution in general for the creation account. It's poor exegesis.

In the English translation, notice the little word "as" is there and not the word "is".

We are in a period of mercy, pardon offered to the condemned. This period will end, Time will end. The opportunity for salvation will end.

Rev 10:6

And sware by him that liveth for ever and ever, who created heaven, and the things that therein are, and the earth, and the things that therein are, and the sea, and the things which are therein, that there should be time no longer: or
chronos ou eti

 

[John of Japan]

Time only occurs in the physical world, a countdown in effect. The verse shows that time is not relative in Heaven

Does it not also show that a literal day with Christ is as a literal 1000 years, and vice versa?

 

[John of Japan]

This verse also gets used terribly to argue for the Gap Theory, the Day Age Theory, and Evolution in general for the creation account. It's poor exegesis.

I'm not arguing for any of these three theories, and indeed, oppose all three of them. So what is your point r.e. the OP?

In the English translation, notice the little word "as" is there and not the word "is".

The Greek word is hos, which is used in comparisons. So what is your point in regards to the OP?

 

[loDebar]

Does it not also show that a literal day with Christ is as a literal 1000 years, and vice versa?

There is no night , so "day" is not our day.

I think it shows there is no time there. The comparison is of one day to a thousand years and vice versa shows time is irrelevant.

The same with space. Space and time are for use in this physical world

 

[Lodic]

2 Peter 3:8 uses a metaphor to compare God's perspective of time to ours. The Book of Revelation contains more symbolism than any other book in the Bible. We see a lot of symbols, such as a woman sitting on a dragon, stars coming down to earth, etc. Revelation 20 says that Satan will be bound by a chain, but this is obviously symbolic. So, the question is,

Is it a metaphor, or a simile, or an idiom, or hyperbole, or what?

.
I'm no language expert, but my guess is the "1,000" years is also used metaphorically to identify this period of time.

However, the passage makes much more sense as a literal day and literal years. First of all, note that Peter is doing theology proper here. God created time and space (the space-time continuum), so he therefore exists outside of it. The opposite view is called "open theism." This view regards God as a "risk taker."

Could you elaborate on how the "symbolic" view regards God as a "risk taker"? Whether the time in question is literal or symbolic, it is still a period of time He has deemed to pass according to His plan.

 

[John of Japan]

There is no night , so "day" is not our day.

I think it shows there is no time there. The comparison is of one day to a thousand years and vice versa shows time is irrelevant.

The same with space. Space and time are for use in this physical world

You are not answering the OP. So does the verse refer to a literal day and literal years, or not?

 

[John of Japan]

2 Peter 3:8 uses a metaphor to compare God's perspective of time to ours. The Book of Revelation contains more symbolism than any other book in the Bible. We see a lot of symbols, such as a woman sitting on a dragon, stars coming down to earth, etc. Revelation 20 says that Satan will be bound by a chain, but this is obviously symbolic. So, the question is,
.
I'm no language expert, but my guess is the "1,000" years is also used metaphorically to identify this period of time.

When you say "metaphorically" do you mean an actual metaphor? This is my problem with your view. Preterists insist on "metaphorical" (also called allegorical or spiritual) interpretation of prophecy. However, they get vague and ambiguous when you discuss actual figures of speech.

Here is a definition of "metaphor" for you: "Figure of speech in which a word or expression normally used of one kind of object, action, etc. is extended to another" (P. H. Matthews, Oxford Concise Dictionary of Linguistics, p. 243). So if the day and years are metaphors, what exactly are they referring to?

Could you elaborate on how the "symbolic" view regards God as a "risk taker"? Whether the time in question is literal or symbolic, it is still a period of time He has deemed to pass according to His plan.

I did not say that. I said the open theism view regards God as a "risk taker." My point was that if you believe that God is bound by days and years, you are approaching open theism. However, if you do not believe that God is bound by time, then you must interpret the day and years of the Peter passage literally.

 

[Lodic]

When you say "metaphorically" do you mean an actual metaphor? This is my problem with your view. Preterists insist on "metaphorical" (also called allegorical or spiritual) interpretation of prophecy. However, they get vague and ambiguous when you discuss actual figures of speech.

Here is a definition of "metaphor" for you: "Figure of speech in which a word or expression normally used of one kind of object, action, etc. is extended to another" (P. H. Matthews, Oxford Concise Dictionary of Linguistics, p. 243). So if the day and years are metaphors, what exactly are they referring to?

I did not say that. I said the open theism view regards God as a "risk taker." My point was that if you believe that God is bound by days and years, you are approaching open theism. However, if you do not believe that God is bound by time, then you must interpret the day and years of the Peter passage literally.

Now you are making me wish I'd paid more attention in English class . I believe the 1,000 years is a metaphor referring to an undetermined, but probably very long, period of time.

Thank you for the clarification regard "risk taker". You are right - God is certainly not bound by days and years any more than by geography. Having said that, I don't quite understand your last statement. How does the way one views the 1,000 years affect whether one believes God is bound by time?

 

[HankD]

When it comes to God, time is relative.

Psalm 90:4 For a thousand years in thy sight are but as yesterday when it is past, and as a watch in the night.

 

[Reformed1689]

I'm not arguing for any of these three theories, and indeed, oppose all three of them. So what is your point r.e. the OP?

The Greek word is hos, which is used in comparisons. So what is your point in regards to the OP?

My point is it is not trying to literally say 1 day is 1000 years.

 

[John of Japan]

Now you are making me wish I'd paid more attention in English class . I believe the 1,000 years is a metaphor referring to an undetermined, but probably very long, period of time.

Like I said, preterists are vague and ambiguous. With a metaphor, you don't get vagueness, you get specific data. For example consider the metaphors of Eph. 6 and the armor of God. All of them are immediately explained and quite obvious. Yet you have not come up with a definite meaning for the supposed metaphor of 1000 years, much less the "day" reference. What is the "day" in this passage if it is a metaphor? Remember, it is the same as the 1000 years to God.

Thank you for the clarification regard "risk taker". You are right - God is certainly not bound by days and years any more than by geography. Having said that, I don't quite understand your last statement. How does the way one views the 1,000 years affect whether one believes God is bound by time?

My point was that if God is outside of the space time continuum looking in, then the "day" and "thousand years" must be literal. Otherwise, the passage makes no sense. Why would God be looking into time at two metaphors which are the same to Him?

 

[John of Japan]

My point is it is not trying to literally say 1 day is 1000 years.

Is that one literal day and 1000 literal years?

 

[loDebar]

You are not answering the OP. So does the verse refer to a literal day and literal years, or not?

neither, showing the use of time in Heaven is meaningless

 

[John of Japan]

When it comes to God, time is relative.

Psalm 90:4 For a thousand years in thy sight are but as yesterday when it is past, and as a watch in the night.

But to God time is still literal, since He invented it.

 

[loDebar]

Like I said, preterists are vague and ambiguous. With a metaphor, you don't get vagueness, you get specific data. For example consider the metaphors of Eph. 6 and the armor of God. All of them are immediately explained and quite obvious. Yet you have not come up with a definite meaning for the supposed metaphor of 1000 years, much less the "day" reference. What is the "day" in this passage if it is a metaphor? Remember, it is the same as the 1000 years to God.

My point was that if God is outside of the space time continuum looking in, then the "day" and "thousand years" must be literal. Otherwise, the passage makes no sense. Why would God be looking into time at two metaphors which are the same to Him?

The verse is to us, " brothers" not God to consider the comparison

 

[John of Japan]

neither, showing the use of time in Heaven is meaningless

But Heaven is a physical place created by God, is it not? Can God only look at His creation from a literal Heaven, or does He exist outside of His literal creation? The reference nowhere mentions Heaven. A day and a year are both His creations in Genesis. Time is the 4th dimension, and therefore literal.

Furthermore, if the one day and the 1000 years are a metaphor, what do they stand for?

 

[John of Japan]

The verse is to us, " brothers" not God to consider the comparison

Huh?