You insist that Peter is questioning the coming
Nope! Peter doesn't question the coming. And you won't find anywhere on this thread that shows that I have "asserted" or wrote that he did or has.
From your own mouth:
Post 157 - "
The bible says he didn't show when he promised to show. The Jews complained about this no show, they didn't complain because he did show, now did they, you silly little man."
That would be questioning His coming.
And quit the ad hominems. I don't use them with you. You continually accuse me of lying (i.e., "No you haven't. Stop lying!") and belittle me and state that I'm stupid. I question your ignorance of the subject as warranted by explaining from Scripture your errors. You show you do not understand the message. You think by stating something long enough that it makes it true. I have given evidence of you doing just that.
Now, to the point: You are the one stating that the Bible says He did not show when He promised. That is not what the Bible says. Peter is warning the flock not to be deceived by false teachers and false prophets who will question His coming, just like
Paul warned the church in Thessalonica that some were preaching that His coming, the day of the Lord, and the resurrection had already happened.
2 Thessalonians 2:1-4
2 Now we ask you, brothers and sisters, regarding the [a]coming of our Lord Jesus Christ and our gathering together to Him, 2 that you not be quickly shaken from your [b]composure or be disturbed either by a spirit, or a [c]message, or a letter as if from us, to the effect that the day of the Lord has come. 3 No one is to deceive you in any way! For it will not come unless the [d]apostasy comes first, and the man of lawlessness is revealed, the son of destruction, 4 who opposes and exalts himself above [e]every so-called god or object of worship, so that he takes his seat in the temple of God, displaying himself as being God.
Both Paul and Peter were fighting heresies and false teachings. They warned the believers to be on guard when such false teachers appear among them and questioned His coming or said it had already happened.
Post 166 - "
The scriptures themselves tell us very clearly that Jesus failed to return when he promised he would."
No, they do not. They teach that false teachers and false prophets taught that, but Peter taught that the Lord's coming was near and faithful believers need not be deceived. That is what Peter taught.
Post 166 - "
HERE see for yourself>> "But do not forget this one thing, dear friends: With the Lord a day is like a thousand years, and a thousand years are like a day."2 Peter 3:8
Odd it is that when the promise was made that Jesus forgot to mention this himself. So how can they forget if they weren't told in the first fkn place?
And if is the case then 1000 years after the crucifixion would not put us in AD 66-70, would it? So you can explain that shite for him too if you like."
This is how you conflate and collapse Scripture to make it suit your purpose. You impose your take on the thousand years when in effect, what Peter is saying is not that one day equals a thousand years but one day is like a thousand years in the sense that time is insignificant to an eternal God. He is not slow in keeping His promises but does not want any of the elect to perish but all to come to salvation. That has not happened yet, but Peter makes it plain in his previous letter that the time is near.
1 Peter 4:7 New American Standard Bible (NASB)
7 The end of all things [a]is near; therefore, be of sound judgment and sober spirit for the purpose of [b]prayer.
So Peter is telling these strange in a foreign land to watch and not be dismayed by false reports of false teachings that question Jesus' coming. The DAY will come like a thief in the night when these mockers and scoffers least expect it to come, but these believers should not be caught unaware.
And the following is a ridiculous argument:
Post 166 - "
Not a single written eyewitness account of a return or these disasters that were to accompany the promised return of the Christ "coming on a cloud".
The NT is concerned about the events leading up to the destruction of the city and temple. It is warning the Old Covenant people of the COMING destruction and to repent before it is too late before the judgment comes. God did not consider it necessary to write about what would happen after the judgment. He said that everything necessary for salvation was already contained in these writings.
What is the title of your thread - No show.
Post 4 - "
So it seems then that not a single person alive in 1st century AD (or after) witnessed the Christs promised return in their life time as Christ himself says he would.
It was always going to be the case of apologists such as Peter making excuses to the gullible, ignorant and superstitious of time that would swallow his feeble excuses - hook line and sinker. Peter was a fisherman after all."
***
First, the underlined is the fallacy of special pleading. He is not making excuses. He is warning them not to believe mockers and false teachers. You, Stephen, have not spoken to every person alive in the 1st-century yet speaks for every one of them.
Second, how is this not an example of Peter questioning the Second Coming and saying "no-show?" If what you say is true, in 1 Peter 4:7, he tells the strange in a foreign land (the Jews) that the time of His coming is near, then you say Peter is teaching another thousand years. Which is it?
Post 30 - "
Peter was challenged wasn't he? But he had no explanation for the no show did he,? So instead just like you he swerved the problem with bullshit : lets see what they said and Peter's weasley reply."
They asked;
“Where is this ‘coming’ he promised? Ever since our ancestors died, everything goes on as it has since the beginning of creation.”2Peter 3:4
No explanation for the no-show that had not happened while the city and temple still stood. Like every NT author, Peter is speaking of a soon, near, quick coming judgment, not one thousand years away. You should try reading commentaries on 2 Peter 3 to the significance of what the thousand years symbolized.
Peter never taught a no-show, as you claim. Quite the opposite, he denied what the false prophets and mocker would be saying was true by proving that the Lord was not slow in keeping His promises. He was still coming. And I reminded you of what His coming would mean to these people - how they would understand it as He would return soon.
Post 74 - "
I have claimed that Peter, the lying turncoat, actually tried to explain away Jesus' no show with the bullshit excuse that to "the Lord" a generation was a thousands years."
Nope, He did not. I have repeatedly told you that Peter did not say a day IS one thousand years as you claim.
Post 34 - The thousand years explained.
Post 103 - "
You have to admit that even Peter, not to mention those that took him to task admitted that the Christ hadn't return and this is the reason he was forced to move the goal posts from " a generation " to a thousand years!<<<<< this is the "oldest propaganda trick" that has been peddled for TWO THOUSAND YEARS!!!!"
Peter taught no such thing. Peter understood what a generation meant. You continue to conflate 'is' with 'like' when you cite that verse and now state that a generation is one thousand years to Peter, who moved the biblical definition of what it meant. That is rubbish. He did no such thing. You continue to read into Scripture things it does not teach.
Post 105 - "And so does the bible HERE>>>.
“Where is this ‘coming’ he promised? Ever since
our ancestors died, everything goes on as it has since the beginning of creation.”2Peter 3:4
that^^^^^^^ sounds like a no show to me sunshine."
Here again, this is not what Peter taught or believed - a no-show.
Post 105 - "
Peter, not to mention those that took him to task admitted that the Christ hadn't return and this is the reason he was forced to move the goal posts from " a generation " to a thousand years!<<<<< this is the "oldest propaganda trick" that has been peddled for TWO THOUSAND YEARS!!!!"
Peter admitted that Christ's return was near, as shown by 1 Peter 4:7 and a host of other Scriptures in his epistles. He never once moved the goalposts.
Post 108 - "Peter, not to mention those that took him to task admitted that the Christ hadn't return and this is the reason he was forced to move the goal posts from " a generation " to a thousand years!<<<<< this is the "oldest propaganda trick" that has been peddled for TWO THOUSAND YEARS!!!!"
Peter confirmed that Christ's coming was near. He also confirmed that his life was short, thus indicating he would not be physically alive on earth when Jesus returned.
2 Peter 1:13 (NASB)
13 I consider it right, as long as I am in this earthly [a]dwelling, to stir you up by way of reminder, 14 knowing that the laying aside of my earthly dwelling is imminent, as also our Lord Jesus Christ has made clear to me. What does that mean, moved the goalposts? It means Peter would have questioned what he wrote earlier about the soon, near coming of the Saviour in judgment. You can't have it both ways.
Post 114 - "
And so does the bible. HERE>>>. “Where is this ‘coming’ he promised? Ever since our ancestors died, everything goes on as it has since the beginning of creation.”2Peter 3:4
The bible at 2Peter 3:4 justified my question and my claim."
No, it does not. Peter taught no such thing as a no-show. He said mockers would question His coming, but Peter never denied His near coming.
Post 117 - "
NO! they asked because it HADN'T HAPPENED WHEN JESUS PROMISED IT WOULD HAPPEN?
HERE>>>. “Where is this ‘coming’ he promised? Ever since our ancestors died, everything goes on as it has since the beginning of creation.”2Peter 3:4
The bible at 2Peter 3:4 justified my question and my claim. You are on the ropes sunshine and have proven nothing."
Nope, it does not justify the question or your claims. You are trying to associate what the scoffers and mockers would say with what Peter believed.
