I see your point, however, why isn’t Peter’s prophecy figurative? I see this one verse used to “disprove” old testament prophecy as figurative, but no one ever questions if Peter was figurative and not literal..
Ezekiel 37 says the new temple will be in Jerusalem forever. I guess God will work out how Peter’s vision of the future aligns with the mountains of prophecy about Jerusalem
Ezekiel 37:26-28
26 I will make a covenant of peace with them; it will be an everlasting covenant. I will establish them and increase their numbers, and I will put my sanctuary among them forever. 27 My dwelling place will be with them; I will be their God, and they will be my people. 28 Then the nations will know that I the Lord make Israel holy, when my sanctuary is among them forever.’”
Peter’s prophetic description could be figurative, but it cannot be false. Iow, he may be using intense heat, fire and burning figuratively. However, the result must be the same: the present heavens and earth utterly destroyed. Otherwise you invalidate the prophesy—inspired by the Holy Spirit—completely.
Ezekiel’s prophetic words are so beautiful. Did you notice how closely they track with John’s Revelation? Undoubtedly the language, being so amazingly similar, speaks of the same vision: New Jerusalem.