2 Peter 3:9 King James Version (KJV)
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.
There's much debate about when and by whom this was written. Dates range from about 60 to 160 AD/CE.
My understanding of this verse is that the reason for God's delay in returning (or Christ's return) is that He doesn't want any to die unrepentant, or in other words He wants all of us to become Christians and go to heaven.
If my understanding is more or less correct there is a major problem with this verse. When it was written the world's population was around 200 - 300 million. Now it is over 7 billion (about 1.7 billion of which are Muslim and by Christian standards hellbound). Since it was written billions have been born and died. I couldn't find numbers for how many have died since the year 200 CE, let alone a break down by religion, but when you consider those that have died as members of non-Christian religions there must have been multiple billions the world over.
It seems to me that this means that God, by delaying his return, has increased the number of hell bound by many multiples of the entire world's population at the time of the writing of 2 Peter.
Am I missing something or is my assessment about right?
I ask because while I have read a good amount of writing against the bible, viewed more than a few religious debates, and read quite a bit of the religious apologetics out there I don't recall ever seeing this verse discussed. The preceding verse (...one day is with the Lord as a thousand years, and a thousand years as one day) shows up, but not 3:9 that I recall. I've tried searching (Google and here) but haven't been able to pull anything up (my search skills are weak though). I'm afraid I've missed something or am overlooking something obvious. I have found some discussions on this verse and it's implications to predestination but that isn't relevant to my question. It is of course more than possible that I've simply missed discussions on this verse and the implication I've mentioned. And I guess I should point out that I am an Atheist, so I don't believe much of the Bible (a bit of it's history, though I take that with more than a grain of salt). I'm considering using this as an argument against Christianity and just want to see if it is a reasonable argument.
I figure this is a good place to find out, so I invite both sides (Christians and non-Christians) to offer arguments/comments for/against/about my assessment.
Thanks!
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.
There's much debate about when and by whom this was written. Dates range from about 60 to 160 AD/CE.
My understanding of this verse is that the reason for God's delay in returning (or Christ's return) is that He doesn't want any to die unrepentant, or in other words He wants all of us to become Christians and go to heaven.
If my understanding is more or less correct there is a major problem with this verse. When it was written the world's population was around 200 - 300 million. Now it is over 7 billion (about 1.7 billion of which are Muslim and by Christian standards hellbound). Since it was written billions have been born and died. I couldn't find numbers for how many have died since the year 200 CE, let alone a break down by religion, but when you consider those that have died as members of non-Christian religions there must have been multiple billions the world over.
It seems to me that this means that God, by delaying his return, has increased the number of hell bound by many multiples of the entire world's population at the time of the writing of 2 Peter.
Am I missing something or is my assessment about right?
I ask because while I have read a good amount of writing against the bible, viewed more than a few religious debates, and read quite a bit of the religious apologetics out there I don't recall ever seeing this verse discussed. The preceding verse (...one day is with the Lord as a thousand years, and a thousand years as one day) shows up, but not 3:9 that I recall. I've tried searching (Google and here) but haven't been able to pull anything up (my search skills are weak though). I'm afraid I've missed something or am overlooking something obvious. I have found some discussions on this verse and it's implications to predestination but that isn't relevant to my question. It is of course more than possible that I've simply missed discussions on this verse and the implication I've mentioned. And I guess I should point out that I am an Atheist, so I don't believe much of the Bible (a bit of it's history, though I take that with more than a grain of salt). I'm considering using this as an argument against Christianity and just want to see if it is a reasonable argument.
I figure this is a good place to find out, so I invite both sides (Christians and non-Christians) to offer arguments/comments for/against/about my assessment.
Thanks!
via International Skeptics Forum http://ift.tt/2jUIhgd
Aucun commentaire:
Enregistrer un commentaire