We run our website the way we wished the whole internet worked: we provide high quality original content with no ads. We are funded solely by your direct support. Please consider supporting this project.

What is the significance of 2 Peter 3:9–12?
Peter says that the Lord has delayed his coming because “he is patient with you, not wanting any to perish” (vs. 9). We are encouraged to be “looking for and hastening the coming of the day of God” [NIV: “speed its coming”] (vs. 12).
If the future is an eternally fixed reality, of course God would foreknow the exact day of his return. Hence it is deceiving to suggest that it could be delayed because of his patience or speeded up by the way we live (e.g. by evangelizing). If God is never deceptive, however, it seems we must accept that the day of Christ’s return is not fixed and thus that the classical understanding of the future which requires that it be fixed is incorrect.
Along these lines, we should perhaps note that when Jesus says “about that day or hour no one knows, neither the angels in heaven, nor the Son of man, but only the Father” (Mark 13:32), this can easily be taken as an idiomatic way of saying that it lies in the Father’s authority to determine this time. It need not entail that the Father has already set the exact date (see Acts 1:7).
This passage also proclaims the glorious truth that God doesn’t want “any to perish, but all to come to repentance” (3:9). On this note, one has to wonder why God would create people he knew from all eternity would end up in a hell in which they’ll consciously suffer forever. Even if one holds that hell is annihilation, as I’m inclined to do, one has to wonder why God would bother to create beings he foreknows with certainty will end up not existing anyway.
Now some may object that denying the classical understanding of the future does not solve the problem of hell. For even if God didn’t foreknow who would end up in hell he at least knows who is in hell once they’re there. Yet he allows them to go on suffering for eternity.
Category: Q&A
Tags: Open Theism, Q&A
Topics: Open Theism
Verse: 2 Peter 3
Related Reading

What happens to babies who die?
The Bible does not directly address the issue of what happens to babies who die before being able to make a decision for or against Christ. People have thus had to arrive at conclusions about this matter on the basis of other beliefs they hold to be true. The majority of evangelicals today assume that…

What is the significance of Revelation 3:5?
“If you conquer, you will be clothed like them in white robes, and I will not blot your name out of the book of life…” If God is only the God of certainties, it is not clear how he can honestly speak in conditional terms (“If you conquer…”) and it is not clear why he…

How do you respond to 2 Samuel 16:10?
David says of Shimei’s cursing him, “If he is cursing because the Lord said to him, ‘Curse David,’ who then shall say, ‘Why have you done so?’” Some compatibilists cite this text to suggest that David regarded evil deeds, including cursing, as taking place in accordance with the sovereign will of God. If we accept…

What is the Gospel?
Our friend Roger Olson raised this question in response to accusations by Calvinists that those who espouse Arminianism do not “preach the gospel.” The same argument has been made about Open Theists. Olson writes: The complete gospel is communicated in Ephesians 2:8-9: “For it is by grace that you have been saved through faith and that not…

Making Room for Doubt and Questions in Our Youth Curriculum
This article from a Christianity Today blog was sent to us from a reader (Thanks Laura!) reflecting on the need for making space for doubt and questions in our youth curriculum. From the article: In our Sticky Faith research, geared to help young people develop a Christian faith that lasts, a common narrative emerged: When young people asked…

Do you believe God is pure actuality?
The basis of the classical view of God as pure actuality (actus purus) is the Aristotelian notion that potentiality is always potential for change and that something changes only because is lacks something else. So, a perfect being who lacks nothing must be devoid of potentiality, which means it must be pure actuality. I think…