II PETER 3:1-7

 

Q: Why would Peter write to his readers about some catastrophic event that would occur millennia in the future? It makes no sense to me!

I think that perhaps you have taken a valid hermeneutical principle a bit too far. One, but not the only, basic principle of interpretation is to try to figure out what the text would have meant to the original audience. But that does not imply that the meaning is to be restricted to their possible understanding at that time. This applies to the OT writings as well as NT ones, both narratives and prophecies. In God's wisdom, he filled the OT writings with words of hope, instruction and judgment, many not understood or fulfilled within the lifetimes of the original audience. Just a few examples:

a. On the surface, the puzzling story of Melchizedek in Genesis14 appears to have had little instructive value to offer the original Jewish audience. Rabbis pondered over it for millennia without coming up with much meaning. The first real revelation didn't come until the author of Hebrews (7:10).

b. The stories of the Israelites in the wilderness certainly had much to offer their Jewish audiences in terms of acceptable and unacceptable behavior before God, but Paul states to his mainly Gentile audience over 1,000 years later, “These things happened to them to serve as a example, and they were written down to instruct us, on whom the ends of the ages have come.” (I Cor. 10:11).

Getting a little closer to the subject of prophecy at hand:

a. Adam was told that he would die on the day he ate of the fruit, but he lived for another 900 years. It was a valuable warning to him even if he ignored it and even if it took almost a millennium to fully come to fruition, physically in addition to the spiritual sense.

b. Each of the patriarchs was told that his progeny would be as numerous as the sands in the ocean or the stars in the sky, but none came even close to seeing it come to pass. Nevertheless, it gave them a chance to trust God to keep his word eventually.

c. Jacob's family was told that they would return to the Promised Land, but several generations died off before that actually happened (Hebrews 11). And the author of Hebrews says that none of them ever really received the rest they were promised (ch. 4).

d. The Jews were promised a Messiah who would rescue them from captivity. A number of generations had to pass before that happened, and when it did happen it came in a different form from what they had expected. Their understanding of the prophecies was far inferior to ours today, but it still gave them hope.

e. Jeremiah's writings to the Jews in exile gave them hope that they would eventually return to the Promised Land, but that audience died off before it actually happened. Even Daniel agonized over the matter and asked God to give him more details concerning Jeremiah's writings since he didn't understand them (Daniel 9).

f. Isaiah's prophecies of a suffering servant who would die on their behalf were not understood by his original audience, and are still not accepted by Jews today.

g. Peter summarizes the situation by explaining that even the prophets who received the word from God regarding the future did not understand what it really meant (I Peter 1:10-12), much less their immediate audience.