LaSpino3 - I would agree with you that 2 Peter 3:8 is indeed speaking of a literal thousand, simply by the context wrapped around it. Peter wanted to make clear to his readers one very important point. If they missed everything else he was speaking about, he at least wanted them to be certain of this one detail: God was equating one day with a literal thousand years. It is similar to the day / year principle that we find elsewhere in scripture, except in this case, Peter is equating a day with a literal thousand years.
This is why I believe there are solid grounds to say that the literal 7 days (of 24 hours each) during creation week is meant to be a picture type of the literal 7,000 years of human history, based on Peter's very point here in 2 Peter 3:8. I am certainly not the inventor of this idea. Some on this site have posed this view before, as well as various preachers I have heard. Also, if I'm not mistaken, I believe it is also part of traditional Jewish teaching as well. Perhaps this can be confirmed or denied by our in-house experts on Judaism here on site.
To give a bit of a nod to 4WD's position, the word for thousand is not ALWAYS indicative of a literal period of a thousand; sometimes it CAN be symbolic, such as "the cattle on a thousand hills", "one day in thy courts is better than a thousand", etc. It truly does depend on the context to determine which way we are to understand it.
LaSpino3, you claim that you "cannot find any specific major events that would fulfill all three periods of 2,300, 1,290, and 1,335 if we use days to mean 24 hours". Well, I have found and confirmed for my own satisfaction these periods of 24-hour days fulfilled in history. Exactly, with no stretching or shrinking, and in the proper contexts. You will probably not agree, but I will offer this just the same.
#1) The 2,300 days span of time occurred during Maccabean times. If you check the text of Daniel 8:13-14 in the LXX, it specifically says that this 2,300 days is "EVENING AND MORNING there shall be two thousand and three hundred days, and then the sanctuary shall be cleansed." This is speaking of 24-hour days, with an evening and morning for each day, just as is described for the days of the creation week. 2,300 YEARS is NOT intended. This temple cleansing took place under Judas Maccabeus in 165 BC, after the “host” of Israel and its sanctuary were “trodden under foot” for that period of time by Antiochus Epiphanes’ forces. This period took place when the Greek empire under the Ptolemies and the Seleucids was in the “latter time of their kingdom” (Dan. 8:23), and was fulfilled before the 4th kingdom had arisen to full power.
#2) The 1,290 days occurs later down the road, in AD 66. Remember from my comment to your "No Man Knows" post, when I said that Ussher had correctly identified October 4th of AD 66 as the day the ARMIES of Cestius Gallus came against Jerusalem? The ARMIES SURROUNDING JERUSALEM were the equivalent term Christ gave in Luke 21:20 that compared with the "abomination of desolation" term in the parallel passages in Matthew 24:15 and Mark 13:14. Jesus does our homework for us by defining His own terms when we compare these duplicate accounts with each other.
From the day of October 4th in AD 66 when the armies of Rome first showed up at Jerusalem until the time when Titus showed up with HIS armies at the gates of Jerusalem was exactly 1,290 days. It was the week of Passover in AD 70, when the maximum number of Jewish people had arrived for the feast and were consequently trapped inside for the siege. Titus' military strategy took this Passover festival into account so that he could maximize the number of people that he could trap within the city at one time. Fortunately for Christians who had heeded Jesus' warning to flee for their lives when they first saw Cestius Gallus coming to the city back in AD 66, they escaped this AD 70 entrapment by obeying Jesus' warning to leave Jerusalem and Judea earlier.
#3) Forty-five days later after that 1,290 days, (as Daniel stipulates in Daniel 12:12), the day of Pentecost arrived: the 1,335th day. This is the day that Christ returned on the Mount of Olives with his holy ones for His second coming and the resurrection of all those who had lived in Old Covenant days. It was the day that Zechariah 14:7 says was "known to the Lord" when he would arrive at evening time, just in between day and night. (Remember, I have said before that we are now awaiting the 3rd resurrection of the New Covenant Age, which will occur at the time of year the Feast of Tabernacles used to be celebrated. But that is at the end of the 7,000 year of human history: a long way for us to go yet.)
I also have an interpretation for your text in Hosea 6:1-2, which you probably will also not agree with. "Come, and let us return unto the LORD: for He hath torn, and He will heal us;" (as God had just told Hosea in chapter 5:14 that He would tear Ephraim as a lion would do, and Judah also, which He would "tear and go away", leaving none to rescue him from being destroyed by the Babylonians) "He hath smitten, and he will bind us up." (As God would bind up the nation of Israel in a REVIVING during the post-exilic return - Ezra 9:9.) "After two days will he revive us: in the third day He will raise us up, and we shall live in His sight."
As Ezekiel 37 said, God would raise the dry bones of the whole house of Israel in the Valley - the Valley of Jezreel - where Hosea 1:5 said that God had "broken the bow of Israel". He would then raise them from that same Valley of Jezreel in the GREAT DAY OF JEZREEL in Hosea 1:11, when "the children of Judah and the children of Israel be gathered together and appoint themselves one head..." (one high priest, Joshua the son of Josedech). It is at that time that they would "come up out of the land" (the dry bones of Ezekiel 37 would arise out of the land in the Valley of Jezreel).
But how do we interpret the meaning behind the "TWO DAYS" and "IN THE THIRD DAY" part of the prophecy? I'm afraid this has nothing to do with a future fulfillment for us, but was fulfilled in the post-exilic return back under Ezra and Nehemiah's time. The way Hosea phrased his prophecy was meant to be a reflection of the Mosaic law of the Peace offering back in Leviticus 19:5-8. Bear with me for a minute and I will show the connection to the Hosea 6:1-2 prophecy.
You may already be familiar with this material, LaSpino3, but I'll go into a bit of detail for the other readers who may not be. The Peace Offering was unique among all the offerings given by those in Israel. The types of Peace Offerings were the only offerings of an animal in which the one offering was able to get back the flesh of the beast and eat most of it himself for dinner. If an Israelite wished to make a voluntary Peace Offering, after taking it to the temple or tabernacle and placing his hands upon the live beast to "transfer" his sins to the animal, the sacred part - the fat and the blood - was then offered first to God. Next, the priesthood received their portion, after which the remaining flesh of the animal was free to be eaten by the man who gave the offering. On one condition, though. He could have it for dinner the first day when it had been given back to him. And during the SECOND DAY also. But on THE THIRD DAY, if the man and his family had not consumed the Peace Offering completely before then, the flesh had to be burned, because it had become abominable. If they went ahead and ate of it that third day, they would be cut off from their own people for this serious offense.
The Peace Offering was unique also in that it went above and beyond what a burnt offering would do. Those burnt offerings were to deal with sin, but the Peace Offering went beyond this point, and illustrated that Peace existed between God and that man, and that full fellowship and comradeship had been restored (pictured by the man's shared eating of the sacrifice with God and the priesthood).
Now, switch over to the condition of the nation of Israel in their exiled condition under the Babylonians, which is the context of Hosea's prophecy. Because of her disobedience to God, Judah and her capitol, Jerusalem, would die completely under the Babylonian invasion and 3 deportations. God would SACRIFICE THE ENTIRE NATION for the sin of the majority. But there would be some "good figs" beside the "bad figs" within that nation (Daniel, his 3 friends, etc.) who would go to Babylon in the first deportation. These "good figs" had God's promise that after 70 years, they would return and be revived as a whole nation of a united Israel and Judah again (as shown by the two sticks of Ezekiel 37 becoming one in his hand).
Just as in the rules for the Peace Offering, God would not wait to revive the nation when it was too late, (that is, on the third day when these leftover remnants would have become abominable and would have to be totally burned). He made sure to revive them in a timely manner by raising those dry bones of the nation of Israel to life on the SECOND DAY. It's a symbolic "second day", not a literal second day, even though the law for the Peace Offering WAS a literal second and third day of 24 hours that was intended. Hosea's prophecy is playing on this symbolism to make his point that God did not regard the entire nation as abominable at that time - there were good elements within it that He intended to preserve and restore to their own land again after that 70 years.
Just as the Peace Offering was intended to look forward to a restored wholeness of peace and fellowship with God in the meal that the man shared with God and the priesthood, God would again be in fellowship with His restored nation of Israel in the post-exilic return, when scripture tells us that there was a real revival that took place among the spirit of the people as they were rebuilding.
As you have said, Daniel did indeed speak of the future, not the past. But it was a prophecy that was future to HIM, not what is future to us today. Hosea, too, spoke of the future, not the past. But again, it was future to HIM, not what is future to us today.