2 Peter 3:8: should the verse be taken as "literal" or "metaphoric"?

[gnostic]

In another thread - How did Jesus break the Sabbath by healing? - Ken Brown and I were sidetracking the topic, so I thought I would start a new topic on the subject.*

As I understand it, some Christians take Peter's verse quite literally:

But do not ignore this one fact, beloved, that with the Lord one day is like a thousand years, and a thousand years are like one day.

For the sake of comparison, I have included second translation below, from KJV:

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.

Should the verse be taken "literally" as some Christians do?
Or is the verse meant to be taken as metaphor?​

To me, it is only meant to be symbolic or metaphoric because the verse uses the word "like" or "as" (depending on the translation you are reading). Both of these words are commonly used in SIMILE.

Here are couple of definitions to "simile":

grammar : a phrase that uses the words like or as to describe someone or something by comparing it with someone or something else that is similar.

a figure of speech comparing two unlike things that is often introduced by like or as (as in cheeks like roses) — compare metaphor.

The verse say "that with the Lord one day is like a thousand years, and a thousand years are like one day.": it doesn't say - "that with the Lord one day is a thousand years, and a thousand years are one day."

If the verse left out "like" after "is" or "are", then I would agree it should be read literally. But it is not. The verse uses "is like" or "are like", therefore they should be treated like similes.

What do you think?

 

[savagewind]

I have suspected it is a metaphor for how long it is believed men have lived their lives. God will guide you for as long as you live. Few people are able to imagine living more than 1000 years.

 

[Jayhawker Soule]

From Wikipedia …

Composition

According to the Epistle itself, it was composed by the Apostle Peter, an eyewitness to Jesus' ministry. It criticizes "false teachers" who distort the authentic, apostolic tradition, and predicts judgment for them. 2 Peter explains that God has delayed the Second Coming of Christ so that more people will have the chance to reject evil and find salvation. It calls on Christians to wait patiently for the parousia and to study scripture.

The date of composition has proven to be very difficult to determine. Commentaries and reference books have placed 2 Peter in almost every decade from 60 to 160AD.

Challenging authorship

Although 2 Peter internally purports to be a work of the apostle, most biblical scholars have concluded that Peter is not the author and consider the epistle pseudepigraphical. Reasons for this include its linguistic differences from 1 Peter, its apparent use of Jude, possible allusions to 2nd-century gnosticism, encouragement in the wake of a delayed parousia, and weak external support.

The questions of authorship and date are closely related. Self-evidently if Peter the Apostle wrote this epistle then it must have been written prior to his death in c 65–67AD. The letter refers to the Pauline epistles and so must post-date at least some of them, regardless of authorship, thus a date before 60 is not probable.

Many scholars generally consider the epistle to be written between c 100–150AD and so contend that it is pseudepigraphical. For an argument for a late date see Harris. For a 'middle date' see Bauckham who opts for a date between 80–90AD as most probable. For an early date and (usually) for a defense of the Apostle Peter's authorship see Kruger, Zahn, Spitta, Bigg, and Green. Jeremy Duff argues that the various strands of evidence "point towards the period 60–130 CE, with some reason to favour 80–90 CE."

Canonical acceptance

Acceptance of the letter into the canon did not occur without some difficulty; however, "nowhere did doubts about the letter's authorship take the form of definitive rejection."

Whether any particular verse was intended as metaphor or literal fact is, perhaps, an interesting topic for speculation. But a more fundamental question might be: Why should anything asserted as literal fact by the author of 2 Peter be presumed to be true simply by virtue of that assertion?

 

[Sleeppy]

God is eternal; the totality of all time. What does time mean to Him? Literally, everything. If God did not will, time would not exist.. But, God wills, and each instant is holy.

 

[Muffled]

In another thread - How did Jesus break the Sabbath by healing? - Ken Brown and I were sidetracking the topic, so I thought I would start a new topic on the subject.*

As I understand it, some Christians take Peter's verse quite literally:

For the sake of comparison, I have included second translation below, from KJV:

Should the verse be taken "literally" as some Christians do?
Or is the verse meant to be taken as metaphor?
​

To me, it is only meant to be symbolic or metaphoric because the verse uses the word "like" or "as" (depending on the translation you are reading). Both of these words are commonly used in SIMILE.

Here are couple of definitions to "simile":



The verse say "that with the Lord one day is like a thousand years, and a thousand years are like one day.": it doesn't say - "that with the Lord one day is a thousand years, and a thousand years are one day."

If the verse left out "like" after "is" or "are", then I would agree it should be read literally. But it is not. The verse uses "is like" or "are like", therefore they should be treated like similes.

What do you think?

How is a thousand years like a day? I believe it isn't.

I believe God exists in all of time so it is not like us who live one day at a time God lives all the days in a thousand years always.

 

[gnostic]

Since both of the below quotes are saying basically the same thing, then I will just make one reply, here.

God is eternal; the totality of all time. What does time mean to Him? Literally, everything. If God did not will, time would not exist.. But, God wills, and each instant is holy.

How is a thousand years like a day? I believe it isn't.

I believe God exists in all of time so it is not like us who live one day at a time God lives all the days in a thousand years always.

If God and heaven exist (but I'm not saying they do exist, so this reply is largely hypothetical), then God wouldn't even measure time in days or years or even thousand of years (which mean Peter is talking rhetorical garbage).

Day, in ancient time, were measure of period of cycle of sunset to sunset (like the way Jews do) or sunrise to sunrise. We get daylight and night due to the Earth's rotation on its polar axis, in reference to the Sun. We get months either through dividing the year by the moon cycles (lunar calendar) or by dividing the year between one winter solstice to the next (or from spring equinox to the next).

All of these mean of measuring time (days, months or years), are all based on the Earth's reference point to the Sun, moon or stars.

Would God even use days, months or years to measure time in heaven? Would heaven even have night or evening?

I don't we could possibly know, and I certainly don't Peter would know what go on in heaven, unless he has been there, like myths of Enoch or Muhammad. Peter's talk of day = millennium is basically rubbish.

Even worse is that some people actually believe what Peter say, as literal, and tried to link the day being a thousand years to Genesis 1, six days of creation, which would mean 6000 years.

But if you read Genesis 1, for each day of creation, I think it is talking of literal day, since it referred to the 1st day to the 6th day, as cycle of evening and morning:

And there was evening and there was morning... (follow by) the xth day​

An evening and a morning doesn't equal to 1000 years, and only fools would believe that it does.

 

[Shiranui117]

My understanding of the verse is that it shows God's eternality--He transcends time, and is not bound by it. He does not perceive time linearly as we do.

 

[Willamena]

It seems reasonably figurative, like the thousand steps or the thousand words.

Figures of Speech

 

[InvestigateTruth]

In another thread - How did Jesus break the Sabbath by healing? - Ken Brown and I were sidetracking the topic, so I thought I would start a new topic on the subject.*

As I understand it, some Christians take Peter's verse quite literally:

For the sake of comparison, I have included second translation below, from KJV:

Should the verse be taken "literally" as some Christians do?
Or is the verse meant to be taken as metaphor?​

To me, it is only meant to be symbolic or metaphoric because the verse uses the word "like" or "as" (depending on the translation you are reading). Both of these words are commonly used in SIMILE.

Here are couple of definitions to "simile":



The verse say "that with the Lord one day is like a thousand years, and a thousand years are like one day.": it doesn't say - "that with the Lord one day is a thousand years, and a thousand years are one day."

If the verse left out "like" after "is" or "are", then I would agree it should be read literally. But it is not. The verse uses "is like" or "are like", therefore they should be treated like similes.

What do you think?

It is literal in Baha'I view. You can also find a similar verse in Jewish Scriptures, and traditionally both Jews and Christians took that literally. It is related to 6 days of Genesis, Creation of human civilization in 6000 years (6 x 1000). The 6000 years starts from Adam and ended about 150 years ago. Therefor the old earth and Heaven expired and now we live in a new human era which was prophesied as New Heaven and earth in Bible.



Jewish Tradition, the Talmud comments:

R. Katina said, “Six thousand years the world will exist and one [thousand, the seventh], it shall be desolate (haruv), as it is written, ‘And the Lord alone shall be exalted in that day’ (Isa. 2:11)...
Jewish eschatology - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia


Christian Tradition:

Saint Augustine taught that there are six ages of the world in his De catechizandis rudibus (On the Catechising of the Uninstructed). Augustine was not the first to conceive of the Six Ages, which had its roots in the Jewish tradition, but he was the first Christian to write about it, and as his ideas became central to the church so did his authority.
The theory originated from a passage in II Peter:

"But of this one thing be not ignorant, my beloved, that one day with the Lord is as a thousand years, and a thousand years as one day." (II Peter 3:8)

The interpretation was taken to mean that mankind would live through six 1,000 year periods (or "days"), with the seventh being eternity in heaven or according to the Nicene Creed, a World to Come.
Six Ages of the World - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

 

[gnostic]

It is literal in Baha'I view. You can also find a similar verse in Jewish Scriptures, and traditionally both Jews and Christians took that literally. It is related to 6 days of Genesis, Creation of human civilization in 6000 years (6 x 1000). The 6000 years starts from Adam and ended about 150 years ago. Therefor the old earth and Heaven expired and now we live in a new human era which was prophesied as New Heaven and earth in Bible.



Jewish Tradition, the Talmud comments:

R. Katina said, “Six thousand years the world will exist and one [thousand, the seventh], it shall be desolate (haruv), as it is written, ‘And the Lord alone shall be exalted in that day’ (Isa. 2:11)...
Jewish eschatology - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia


Christian Tradition:

Saint Augustine taught that there are six ages of the world in his De catechizandis rudibus (On the Catechising of the Uninstructed). Augustine was not the first to conceive of the Six Ages, which had its roots in the Jewish tradition, but he was the first Christian to write about it, and as his ideas became central to the church so did his authority.
The theory originated from a passage in II Peter:

"But of this one thing be not ignorant, my beloved, that one day with the Lord is as a thousand years, and a thousand years as one day." (II Peter 3:8)

The interpretation was taken to mean that mankind would live through six 1,000 year periods (or "days"), with the seventh being eternity in heaven or according to the Nicene Creed, a World to Come.

Quite frankly, I haven't read Augustine's work, and I really don't give a fig what the saint thought of Genesis 1 or that of 2 Peter 3:8.

In Peter's verse, it use the words like "as" (in KJV) or "like" (in NRSV & NIV), and both of these words don't mean "equal to". Therefore the verse shouldn't be taken as literal 1-day = 1000-year.

In the 6 verses - 1:5, 1:8, 1:13, 1:19, 1:23 & 1:31 - in Genesis 1, was quite specific and explicit, that each day comprised of "evening" and "morning", not "age" or "millennium". An evening and morning make up a literal day.

And evening and morning don't add up to "1000 years", no matter how one wish to twist Genesis 1.

I have tried to not get bog down with traditions, whether it be Christian, Jewish, Islamic, Baha'i or Hindu tradition, because traditions are not always right, and can sometimes exaggerate even more than the written scriptures.

I actually understand sleppy's, muffled's and sharinui117's interpretations that Peter's verse mean that god is not govern by time like us, because god is supposedly "eternal". The verse doesn't mean that 1000-year is equalled to 1-day.

And beside that, I doubt very much that god's would measure time in night-and-day, in days, weeks, months, years, centuries or millennia in the same way we do; because al these measures of time, are relevant here on earth.

Do heaven would even have night and day?
And how would you measure year without a sun, or months without a moon?
And if you live forever, do you even want to measure time?​

 

[psychoslice]

I feel that it means that in Oneness there is no time, time is just a human concept.

 

[InvestigateTruth]

Quite frankly, I haven't read Augustine's work, and I really don't give a fig what the saint thought of Genesis 1 or that of 2 Peter 3:8.

In Peter's verse, it use the words like "as" (in KJV) or "like" (in NRSV & NIV), and both of these words don't mean "equal to". Therefore the verse shouldn't be taken as literal 1-day = 1000-year.

In the 6 verses - 1:5, 1:8, 1:13, 1:19, 1:23 & 1:31 - in Genesis 1, was quite specific and explicit, that each day comprised of "evening" and "morning", not "age" or "millennium". An evening and morning make up a literal day.

And evening and morning don't add up to "1000 years", no matter how one wish to twist Genesis 1.

I have tried to not get bog down with traditions, whether it be Christian, Jewish, Islamic, Baha'i or Hindu tradition, because traditions are not always right, and can sometimes exaggerate even more than the written scriptures.

I actually understand sleppy's, muffled's and sharinui117's interpretations that Peter's verse mean that god is not govern by time like us, because god is supposedly "eternal". The verse doesn't mean that 1000-year is equalled to 1-day.

And beside that, I doubt very much that god's would measure time in night-and-day, in days, weeks, months, years, centuries or millennia in the same way we do; because al these measures of time, are relevant here on earth.

The word 'as' or 'like' can also mean 'equivalent to'. A day of God is equivallent to 1000 years. But let's not get stuck at this.

I don't think you understood what I said regarding figurative interpretation of Genesis, because it is quite different from what you would generally hear about genesis. What I said, is totally different from how today Christians or Muslims understand the creation in 6 days.
In our view Genesis 1 is Prophetic and Figurative. When we say Figurative, we believe that there were hidden mysteries in it, and it was veiled using symbolism.


There was a human era that started with Adam and ended about 150 years ago, which lasted 6000 years. Then after that a new human era started which we are now living.
Most people agree that since mid, 19th century we are living in a new era, when human civilization is totally different from previous civilizations in terms of science, technology, ways of life, social and economic system,...etc.
This was prophesied in Bible to come after 6 days of Creation by sending successive revelations from days of Adam. Now, scriptures uses the word 'creation' not just as a physical creation , but also creation of human civilzations. So for example, when Jesus came He created Christians.
So gpoing back to Genesis, Jesus came beginning of 5th Day and after the end of 6th Day the old era ended and Christ was to be returned. This is how Augustine interpreted it:


The First Age: "The first is from the beginning of the human race, that is, from Adam, who was the first man that was made, down to Noah, who constructed the ark at the time of the flood," i.e the Antediluvian period.
The Second Age: "..extends from that period on to Abraham, who was called the father indeed of all nations.."
The Third Age: "For the third age extends from Abraham on to David the king."
The Fourth Age: "The fourth from David on to that captivity whereby the people of God passed over into Babylonia."
The Fifth Age: "The fifth from that transmigration down to the advent of our Lord Jesus Christ."
The Sixth Age: "With His [Jesus Christ's] coming the sixth age has entered on its process."

Six Ages of the World - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Do heaven would even have night and day?
And how would you measure year without a sun, or months without a moon?
And if you live forever, do you even want to measure time?​

I think you are reading genesis literally. I believe this is the correct interpretation of Genesis by Augustine:

"The light of Day One represents the enlightenment a soul receives which leads him to seek after God. The expanse, or “vault” (Augustine 1997, XIII.15.16) as he called it, of Day Two symbolizes the word of God in that just as the sky is stretched out to declare God’s truth to the world, so is God’s word stretched out on skins when a scroll is opened. The dry land of the third day represents those who hunger and thirst for God while the sea represents the masses of individuals who do not seek the Lord. The sun, moon, and stars of the fourth day are the various ways in which God communicates His message to mankind. The stars are likened to the gifts of the Spirit given to individuals, while the sun and moon shine brighter and represent the meatier teachings of God’s word which babes in the faith cannot handle. The swimming creatures of the fifth day symbolize God’s holy signs upon the earth while the flying creatures “represent the voice of [God’s] messengers” (Augustine 1997, XIII.20.26). The land animals of the sixth day are said to be true believers who no longer crawl or swim in the depths of the sea. These are living souls that have been regenerated and no longer need baptism as they once did while sunk beneath the waters"

An Examination of Augustine

So, what is interesting about Augustine's interpretation is that, He did not interpret it literally.

 

[gnostic]

The word 'as' or 'like' can also mean 'equivalent to'. A day of God is equivallent to 1000 years. But let's not get stuck at this.

I don't think you understood what I said regarding figurative interpretation of Genesis, because it is quite different from what you would generally hear about genesis. What I said, is totally different from how today Christians or Muslims understand the creation in 6 days.
In our view Genesis 1 is Prophetic and Figurative. When we say Figurative, we believe that there were hidden mysteries in it, and it was veiled using symbolism.


There was a human era that started with Adam and ended about 150 years ago, which lasted 6000 years. Then after that a new human era started which we are now living.
Most people agree that since mid, 19th century we are living in a new era, when human civilization is totally different from previous civilizations in terms of science, technology, ways of life, social and economic system,...etc.
This was prophesied in Bible to come after 6 days of Creation by sending successive revelations from days of Adam. Now, scriptures uses the word 'creation' not just as a physical creation , but also creation of human civilzations. So for example, when Jesus came He created Christians.
So gpoing back to Genesis, Jesus came beginning of 5th Day and after the end of 6th Day the old era ended and Christ was to be returned. This is how Augustine interpreted it:


The First Age: "The first is from the beginning of the human race, that is, from Adam, who was the first man that was made, down to Noah, who constructed the ark at the time of the flood," i.e the Antediluvian period.
The Second Age: "..extends from that period on to Abraham, who was called the father indeed of all nations.."
The Third Age: "For the third age extends from Abraham on to David the king."
The Fourth Age: "The fourth from David on to that captivity whereby the people of God passed over into Babylonia."
The Fifth Age: "The fifth from that transmigration down to the advent of our Lord Jesus Christ."
The Sixth Age: "With His [Jesus Christ's] coming the sixth age has entered on its process."

Six Ages of the World - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Like I have said, I haven't read Augustine, and judging by your quote from Wikipedia of the Six Ages, this has nothing to do with Genesis 1. Genesis 1 make no mention of any these events WILL take place.

I think you are reading genesis literally. I believe this is the correct interpretation of Genesis by Augustine:

"The light of Day One represents the enlightenment a soul receives which leads him to seek after God. The expanse, or “vault” (Augustine 1997, XIII.15.16) as he called it, of Day Two symbolizes the word of God in that just as the sky is stretched out to declare God’s truth to the world, so is God’s word stretched out on skins when a scroll is opened. The dry land of the third day represents those who hunger and thirst for God while the sea represents the masses of individuals who do not seek the Lord. The sun, moon, and stars of the fourth day are the various ways in which God communicates His message to mankind. The stars are likened to the gifts of the Spirit given to individuals, while the sun and moon shine brighter and represent the meatier teachings of God’s word which babes in the faith cannot handle. The swimming creatures of the fifth day symbolize God’s holy signs upon the earth while the flying creatures “represent the voice of [God’s] messengers” (Augustine 1997, XIII.20.26). The land animals of the sixth day are said to be true believers who no longer crawl or swim in the depths of the sea. These are living souls that have been regenerated and no longer need baptism as they once did while sunk beneath the waters"

An Examination of Augustine

So, what is interesting about Augustine's interpretation is that, He did not interpret it literally.

No, Augustine's interpretation to Genesis 1, is neither literal nor symbolic; it is either a complete fantasy or delusion. He must be either sipping too much home-grown wine or eaten too much of the wrong mushrooms, after fasting a whole fortnight.

It is not symbolic interpretation, because it is complete invention of his own making.

You can't distinguish a literary invention from symbols or metaphors?

 

[InvestigateTruth]

Like I have said, I haven't read Augustine, and judging by your quote from Wikipedia of the Six Ages, this has nothing to do with Genesis 1. Genesis 1 make no mention of any these events WILL take place.

No, Augustine's interpretation to Genesis 1, is neither literal nor symbolic; it is either a complete fantasy or delusion. He must be either sipping too much home-grown wine or eaten too much of the wrong mushrooms, after fasting a whole fortnight.

It is not symbolic interpretation, because it is complete invention of his own making.

You can't distinguish a literary invention from symbols or metaphors?

Well, I think you are a smart guy, but it seems to me you are coming from a prejudegment position. So, I like to suggest, it is fair to read and analyze the Bible from an unbiased and neutural point. By this I mean, let's neither try to reject, nor accept bible, neither allow our belief or disbelief effect the analysis of verses, but only let's examine it as a fair nuetural judge would do just to see what it really says and claims.
So, do you think when reading Bible and interpreting it, we should treate the Bible according to its own standards or, the standards that are current among people?

I suggest, it is fair to treat the Bible according to its own standards, because we want to see through its own eyes, what it says, and what it claims.
What do I mean according to its own standards?
To explain what I mean I have to, first give an example related to interpretations, by looking at case from Biblical narratives:
In Genesis 40, describes a dream and how it was interpreted:


"And the chief butler told his dream to Joseph, and said to him, In my dream, behold, a vine was before me; And in the vine were three branches: ........And Joseph said unto him, This is the interpretation of it: The three branches are three days" Genesis 40:10-13

Now, let's look here, how strange it is that it says "three branches symbolically represent three days"​

So, my intention from this is that the standard of interpretation of Bible is quite different from the standard current among people, for we can never see anywhere else that 'a branch be a symbol for a day'!​

So, how did Joseph know that 'Branches' are symbol for 'Days'?
He said: "Do not interpretations belong to God?" Genesis 40:8​

By this He claimed that, only God can know the interpretations correctly, and that He has taught them to Joseph.
Now, from a neutural and unbias view, let's not judge if Joseph was hounest, or a liar, or was drunk, because we don't know. We don't even know if Joseph existed really, but let's treat the Bible according to what it claimes, to see where it takes us.

So, before I continue with the topic of OP, I like to know your opinion, and if you agree or disagree with the point I am making regarding treating Bible with its own standards.​

 

[Shiranui117]

Like I have said, I haven't read Augustine, and judging by your quote from Wikipedia of the Six Ages, this has nothing to do with Genesis 1. Genesis 1 make no mention of any these events WILL take place.


No, Augustine's interpretation to Genesis 1, is neither literal nor symbolic; it is either a complete fantasy or delusion. He must be either sipping too much home-grown wine or eaten too much of the wrong mushrooms, after fasting a whole fortnight.

It is not symbolic interpretation, because it is complete invention of his own making.

You can't distinguish a literary invention from symbols or metaphors?

You're right, it's neither literal nor symbolic. It's allegorical, which doesn't negate the literal meaning of the text, but also adds in a "metaphorical" way of thinking of it. Even though Augustine's often off his theological rocker (mainly thanks to having had almost no theological training at any point in his life, and being a late convert), I see nothing exceedingly wrong about his commentary--though Sts. John Chrysostom and Basil the Great have far more insightful, educated and well-grounded commentaries.

 

[Pegg]

In another thread - How did Jesus break the Sabbath by healing? - Ken Brown and I were sidetracking the topic, so I thought I would start a new topic on the subject.*

As I understand it, some Christians take Peter's verse quite literally:

For the sake of comparison, I have included second translation below, from KJV:

Should the verse be taken "literally" as some Christians do?
Or is the verse meant to be taken as metaphor?​

To me, it is only meant to be symbolic or metaphoric because the verse uses the word "like" or "as" (depending on the translation you are reading). Both of these words are commonly used in SIMILE.

Here are couple of definitions to "simile":



The verse say "that with the Lord one day is like a thousand years, and a thousand years are like one day.": it doesn't say - "that with the Lord one day is a thousand years, and a thousand years are one day."

If the verse left out "like" after "is" or "are", then I would agree it should be read literally. But it is not. The verse uses "is like" or "are like", therefore they should be treated like similes.

What do you think?

do you know where the chrstians got that '1,000' years from?

It comes from the hebrew scriptures:

Psalm 90:4*For a thousand years are in your eyes but as yesterday when it is past, And as a watch during the night

But its not necessary to take it as 'absolute'.... the idea really is to show that Gods view of time is far different to our own perspective of time.
According to this way of figuring time, an 80-year-old person has lived only about two hours, and all of mankind’s history has lasted only about six days. Really, the scriptures are helping us to understand things from Gods perspective so twe don't become impatient on him.

It could be literal or metaphorical. For example, Adam was told that he would die 'in the day of eating from the tree' ... he died at the age of about 960yrs from memory, hence in this instance, 1 day is certainly close to 1,000 years.
But when you look at the 'Days' of genesis in the earths creation, 1 day likely spanned millions of years, we know this from the scientific evidence of the geology of the earth.

So it could be literal or it could be metaphorical.... but it is certainly a way to help us understand that God sees time in a far different way then we do.

 

[gnostic]

do you know where the chrstians got that '1,000' years from?

It comes from the hebrew scriptures:

Psalm 90:4*For a thousand years are in your eyes but as yesterday when it is past, And as a watch during the night

Thank you, pegg, for bringing up psalms 90:4, because I was going to bring this up, sooner or later.

But its not necessary to take it as 'absolute'.... the idea really is to show that Gods view of time is far different to our own perspective of time.
According to this way of figuring time, an 80-year-old person has lived only about two hours, and all of mankind’s history has lasted only about six days. Really, the scriptures are helping us to understand things from Gods perspective so twe don't become impatient on him.

It could be literal or metaphorical. For example, Adam was told that he would die 'in the day of eating from the tree' ... he died at the age of about 960yrs from memory, hence in this instance, 1 day is certainly close to 1,000 years.
But when you look at the 'Days' of genesis in the earths creation, 1 day likely spanned millions of years, we know this from the scientific evidence of the geology of the earth.

So it could be literal or it could be metaphorical.... but it is certainly a way to help us understand that God sees time in a far different way then we do.

No, you are overcomplicating the verse...reading more into the verse than what's really there.

The verse (psalms 90:4) is not saying that "yesterday" is "a thousand years" or "a thousand years" are "yesterday". I'd suggest that you re-read your quote properly, and notice that your translation uses the word - "as".

If look at my OP again, you can see that I have said that the words "as" and "like" are commonly used in similes and figurative writing; so the symbolic writing mean that it shouldn't be taken as "literal".

So the verse - is and should be taken as metaphorical or figuratively.

I don't know what translation you are using, but looking at other modern translations, like NIV, NRSV and NJPS, they all used the word "like", instead of "as", eg "are like":

4 For a thousand years in your sight
are like yesterday when it is past,
or like a watch in the night.

Do you see what I mean"?

To give you an example, in my life:
When I had graduated for my bachelor 14 years ago, I remember everything as if it happen yesterday.
Did you see that I had used the word "as" in my sentence?

This doesn't mean 14 years is equals to "yesterday". It also doesn't mean that I had graduate yesterday didn't happen. I am only speaking about my memory seemed to clear to me as yesterday, but that doesn't mean 14 years didn't pass for me.

My example is a parallel to what and similar to what psalm 90:4 is saying.

Do you understand what I am saying?

To give a example:

I could say that Pegg is brave as a lion.

So answer me this, Pegg: Am I saying that you are a "lion", literally?

BTW, Adam died at age 930, not 960.

 

[InvestigateTruth]

do you know where the chrstians got that '1,000' years from?

It comes from the hebrew scriptures:

Psalm 90:4*For a thousand years are in your eyes but as yesterday when it is past, And as a watch during the night

But its not necessary to take it as 'absolute'.... the idea really is to show that Gods view of time is far different to our own perspective of time.
According to this way of figuring time, an 80-year-old person has lived only about two hours, and all of mankind’s history has lasted only about six days. Really, the scriptures are helping us to understand things from Gods perspective so twe don't become impatient on him.

It could be literal or metaphorical. For example, Adam was told that he would die 'in the day of eating from the tree' ... he died at the age of about 960yrs from memory, hence in this instance, 1 day is certainly close to 1,000 years.
But when you look at the 'Days' of genesis in the earths creation, 1 day likely spanned millions of years, we know this from the scientific evidence of the geology of the earth.

So it could be literal or it could be metaphorical.... but it is certainly a way to help us understand that God sees time in a far different way then we do.

I think Psalm 90:4 must be read within its context:

"You turn people back to dust, saying, "Return to dust, you mortals."
A thousand years in your sight are like a day that has just gone by, or like a watch in the night.
You sweep them away as they sleep. In the morning they sprout like new grass." Psalm 90:3-5

You see this is talking about spiritual resurrection in every about a 1000 years.
verse 90:3 is saying God causes them to die spiritually as a punishment. The expression 'you turn people to dust' is a metaphor for causing them to become as dead. So the idea is, when a Revelation of God comes through a Manifestation, it is like light of guidance. When the Manifestation leaves, then it is like a Night with duration of a 1000 years, during which mankind falls into spiritual asleep and ignorance (see 90:4), untill again in the next Morning, the Sun of Truth returns to give Light to resurrect them spiritually again, in the morning of Revelation, just like new sprout (see 90:5)

 

[Ken Brown]

In another thread - How did Jesus break the Sabbath by healing? - Ken Brown and I were sidetracking the topic, so I thought I would start a new topic on the subject.*

As I understand it, some Christians take Peter's verse quite literally:

For the sake of comparison, I have included second translation below, from KJV:

Should the verse be taken "literally" as some Christians do?
Or is the verse meant to be taken as metaphor?​

To me, it is only meant to be symbolic or metaphoric because the verse uses the word "like" or "as" (depending on the translation you are reading). Both of these words are commonly used in SIMILE.

Here are couple of definitions to "simile":

The verse say "that with the Lord one day is like a thousand years, and a thousand years are like one day.": it doesn't say - "that with the Lord one day is a thousand years, and a thousand years are one day."

If the verse left out "like" after "is" or "are", then I would agree it should be read literally. But it is not. The verse uses "is like" or "are like", therefore they should be treated like similes.

What do you think?

Hi gnostic, you probably already know what i think, but let me clarify. Elohim took 6 days in sending forth His Spirit to work, and then rested on the 7th day in the renewing of this age/face of the earth - Psa 104:30. Those 6 days are as 6000 years and the 7th day is as a thousand years when you look at the "big" picture of how Elohim is renewing this OLD earth that was created in the very beginning (millions upon millions of years ago-many thousands of thousand year days).

Now, it is interesting that the sun, moon, and stars did not appear until the 4th day. The exodus took place sometime past the middle of the 3rd day, and the revealing of Elohim (to be seen across the expanse of the heavens) by the Israelites really did not start until the 4th day as they expanded their kingdom and glory upon the earth-David's and Solomon's kingdom.

If you start to look at the "big" picture, the day as or like a 1000 years becomes a lot clearer. KB

 

[InvestigateTruth]

You're right, it's neither literal nor symbolic. It's allegorical, which doesn't negate the literal meaning of the text, but also adds in a "metaphorical" way of thinking of it. Even though Augustine's often off his theological rocker (mainly thanks to having had almost no theological training at any point in his life, and being a late convert), I see nothing exceedingly wrong about his commentary--though Sts. John Chrysostom and Basil the Great have far more insightful, educated and well-grounded commentaries.

The understanding of the verses of the Scripture is not dependent on learning. It is dependent on purity of heart and sincerity.
When Jesus came, there were many learned jews who did not recognize Him, but peter who was a simple fisherman did.
Once a man becomes pure and sincere, the Holy spirit reveals the interpretations to him. This is a fundamental teaching of Bible, which I think many have forgot.
St Augustine became truely a pure an sincere man, and these things are revealed to Him. Many other scholars, may have studied the bible much more than st Augustine, but if they were not pure, the holy spirit did not reveal to them. Therefore their interpretations are from their own imagination, not from holy spirit.