It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.


Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.


Fire in 2 Peter is not an End times event

page: 1

log in


posted on Mar, 15 2013 @ 06:15 PM
2 Peter 3
New King James Version (NKJV)
10 But the day of the Lord will come as a thief in the night, in which the heavens will pass away with a great noise, and the elements will melt with fervent heat; both the earth and the works that are in it will be burned up.[c] 11 Therefore, since all these things will be dissolved, what manner of persons ought you to be in holy conduct and godliness, 12 looking for and hastening the coming of the day of God, because of which the heavens will be dissolved, being on fire, and the elements will melt with fervent heat? 13 Nevertheless we, according to His promise, look for new heavens and a new earth in which righteousness dwells.


Speaking of the Day of the Lord doesn't necessarily mean speaking of Second Coming. Do you see anything said about the Second Coming of the Lord? Nothing! In the second coming we have Armageddon and Jesus coming, winning over the false christ and establishing the millennium kingdom ON Earth.

What is descried in Peter is pretty much the opposite - we are taken out of the earth that is consumed by fire.

Rapture theories quickly grasp on that and say it is the rapture before the Great Trib. But how then the entire earth is burnt with fire, as if it is flood? This is not quite in Revelation.

I assume Peter speaks of an event different from the End time sequences of events, that precede it for hundreds or thousands of years. The way the Flood happened without being a part of the Apocalypse. That puts a future timeframe for the Apocalypse to happen. There are such voices, one of the most prominent today is the Russian patriarch Kirill that the Apocalypse could and must be postponed, and that God's design is not to be fulfilled in some 2-5000 years (the time since the Flood) but longer. And that we will not understand God's design for the human race until we are transferred to the new heaven and new earth.

The use of word heaen is tricky, because the time all that is written, there is only one word in Latin and in the Latin derived languages for both heaven and sky - cielo. Without the knowledge of the space, interstellar or gaactic. In Russian it is also one word, nebo, meaning both heaven and sky (atmosphere). Today's read should add also the word space. So speaking of new heaven might well be of new configuration of stars constellations. New heaven means there is old heaven now. And what is our "heaven'sky" if not the stars we see there?
New earth definitely should be determined as new planet home of humanity, an exoplanet or super earth as the modern astronomers say.

For practical purposes I understand the new earth as a new planet (and how otherwise), the much speculated rapture - as spaceship rescue by angels who also have devices such as spaceships necessary for us the humans (as they were necessary for Elijah to leave planet Earth). The survived humanity will have the task to 1. continue itself biologically on the new planet, 2. preserve and spread the faith in the Gospel of Jesus Christ and the sacraments of the Church, 3. perhaps to be space missionary in the host planet and beyond. I say perhaps, because the angels-et who will provide the physical meaning of salvation - the spaceships, know of Jesus and serve Jesus. But perhaps there are other beings in the wider galaxy that do not know yet.

After all those things are finished the earth cleansed by fire (spoken in many modern apparitions, approved in Akita, and others not approved as Chastisement but without speaking of Second Coming - Grabandal and others). It is clearly seen a timeline different from that given in Revelation. A timeline with planetary chastisement event much greater than the Flood, that leaves few survivors (perhaps only the rescued ones) but that does not bring the Antichrist on Earth. The modifications of some modern prophets that the antichrist comes on Earth shortly before the Chastisement and is killed by the Chastisement, do not match the Apocalypse speaking of Armageddon and Jesus' armies coming, instead of any planetary chastisement. The difference is obvious. Also the restoration of Earth after a fire covering all of it (by whatever cause - from space or earth interior) will take hundreds if not thousands of years. it will be a slow process and the geology proves it happened before. The Earth ultimately will be fit for life and repopulated in peace. Until the old-new kingdoms emerge and make the events in the Revelation.

The Fatima era of peace is granted to humanity but it is not said it will be on planet Earth, it could be elsewhere for those saved ones.

Please check that theory of mine how reliable it sounds in your own End times scenarios. We may be thousands years ahead of the End times and still the life on Earth may be destroyed in 2013 similar and more severe than the Flood, with survivors only those who accept the God's angels rescue. Don't worry for plants and animals, their specimens are already rescued.

posted on Mar, 15 2013 @ 06:19 PM
reply to post by 2012newstart

It is worth looking over what "the Day of the Lord" means in the Old Testament and what "the Day of the Lord Jesus" means in the New Testament.
The interpretation of this reference should not be separated from the other references.

posted on Mar, 15 2013 @ 06:49 PM
reply to post by 2012newstart

I'm fairly certain that the "day of the Lord" is not literally one day, but a thousand years. Reason? Read 2 verses prior to the scripture you linked;

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.

It is in context, after all. Now, am I suggesting the universe will burn and melt for a thousand years? Not so, I simply believe that the literally meaning of the elements burning up (and the end of this universe), will occur at the END of the Millennial Reign with Christ.

As always, I could be wrong, but that is just simply how I perceive it.

Study and test everything, brothers. God bless.

posted on Mar, 16 2013 @ 04:25 AM
If you are right and I not, then we should have imminent End times on Earth with the election of the last possible successor of Peter. (I don't believe he has anything in common with the false prophet who will deny Christ, not affirm belief in him). Without a pause in prophecy timeline, such as the pause in Daniel between 69th and 70th week, a pause that we are still in, without a new pause we head straight intot he End time. And because we don't know IF this is the decision of God, we should leave the door open for other interpretations of the holy scripture. Including the one offered by the Russian patriarch Kirill who sees a possibility of postponement of the Apocalypse and the temporal defeat of the antichrist in our times (whoever he might be) as it already happened with Hitler and Napoleon. Without saying that the Russian patriarch sees or knows everything or is the one who is right in that, I think there could be more parentheses (pauses) in prophecy line, if we establish as a matter of fact at least one big such pause (nearly 2000 years pause that is bigger than the first part of prophecy itself).

posted on Mar, 16 2013 @ 06:31 AM

Originally posted by 2012newstart
... with the election of the last possible successor of Peter.

We have no Biblical reason for believing that this is the case.
Wait to see if he has a successor.
If he does, then the "Malachy prophecy" will be as wrong as the "21st December 2012" predictions were proved to be.

posted on Mar, 16 2013 @ 09:55 AM
Wait and see? Wait what?
For Biblical proof search youtube, it is full of exellent analyses why the end times are now.

I propose not something contrary to that, but something in addition to that, a new parenthesis in prophecy (or enlarged old one) that the saved humankind will spend on the "new earth".

No I am not gonna wait and see. I will act according to circumstances, not waiting seer, scholar or hierarchy to tell me what to do. God speaks to His people.

posted on Mar, 16 2013 @ 10:04 AM
reply to post by 2012newstart

i applaud your thinking
- i m not against you
just adding a thought:

the ' being on fire ' refers to the "ignition of another dimension "
which isnt His '
but evils

= the first white horse of the 4

it will be a most evil dimension, for those who are His '
but a dimension of " peace and unity ", for those who will get ruled by evil.

posted on Mar, 16 2013 @ 10:05 AM
..the symbolical use of 'fire '
is because indeed another Dimension is soon to be Ignited

new topics

top topics


log in