New heaven and new earth on the ultimate day of the Lord
|
This was moved from the What would Jesus do to the planet? thread. Here is something else from my book (The Antichrist and the Second Coming). It continues the post that I put up earlier on the burning of the Land. As I see it, Revelation 21-22 is talking about the same thing as Isaiah 65-66: The destruction of the old covenant order at the full establishment of the new covenant order A NEW HEAVEN AND EARTH ON THE ULTIMATE DAY OF THE LORD Peter said that when the land of Israel was burned up on the ultimate day of the Lord there was to be new heaven and new earth (or new “land”): “Nevertheless we, according to His promise, look for new heavens and a new earth in which righteousness dwells” (2 Pet. 3:13). In the following pages I will go into some detail on passages related to the new heaven and new earth. In doing so I will be looking back to Isaiah 64-66 and then ahead to Revelation 21-22. Both of these sections of Scripture speak of the new heaven and earth that would be established on the day of the Lord. In considering the new heaven and new earth, first notice that Peter says that righteousness dwells in it (v. 13). It would seem that since there is still sin in the world today that we could not possibly be in this time of the new heaven and new earth. This reasoning seems logical but look at the description of the new heaven and earth in Revelation 21-22; there are still sinners in it (cf. Rev. 22:14-15). The new heaven and earth of Isaiah 65-66 likewise has sinners in it (cf. Isaiah 65:17-20). Neither is describing the eternal order. THE TIMING OF REVELATION 21-22 In examining the new heaven and new earth in Revelation, the first consideration is that of timing. Revelation 21 shows the New Jerusalem coming down out of heaven prepared as a bride for her husband to the new heaven and new earth (vv. 1-2). This is referring to AD 70, the time of God’s marriage to His people at the destruction of harlot Jerusalem (Rev. 19:1-9; cf. Matt. 22:1-10; Matt 8:10-12). Thus, the new heaven and new earth do not happen after the millennium, they are concurrent with it.14 That is, the new heaven and earth and the millennium are two images of the same time, the AD 70 full establishment of God’s kingdom (cf. Is. 65:17-25, where the new heaven and earth is described using language that is usually associated with the millennium). Consistent with this, notice how “the regeneration” (that would happen in the new heaven and earth, cf. Rev. 21:1-5) was to take place at the AD 70 “judging” of Israel (Matt. 19:28); it is synonymous with the full establishment of the “kingdom” (Luke 22:29-30). So Jesus said to them, ‘Assuredly I say to you, that in the regeneration, when the son of Man sits on the throne of His glory, you who have followed Me will also sit on twelve thrones judging the twelve tribes of Israel.’ Matthew 19:28 ‘But you are those who have continued with Me in My trials. And I bestow upon you a kingdom, just as My Father bestowed one upon Me, that you may eat and drink at My table in My kingdom, and sit on thrones judging the twelve tribes of Israel.’ Luke 22:28-30 The two sections are clearly talking about the same time period. Earlier in Matthew we were told that this time of the Son of Man coming “in the glory of His Father” would happen in the lifetime of some of Jesus’ first century hearers (Matthew 16:27-28). The kingdom of God would be fully established at the Second Advent (Luke 19:11-27); that would be the time of “the restoration of all things” (Acts 3:19-21). Again the AD 70 full establishment of the kingdom of God at the Second Coming would be the time of the spiritual renewal that constitutes the new heaven and new earth. IS THE NEW JERUSALEM A GIANT CUBE-SHAPED CITY THAT WE WILL LIVE IN? The New Jerusalem descended to the new heaven and earth at the destruction of harlot Israel on the ultimate day of the Lord. This was the time of the marriage of the bride (Rev. 19:1-9; cf. Rev. 21:1-2). Notice that inside the “city” are the redeemed (Rev. 21:24-27), while outside it are the unredeemed: Blessed are those who do His commandments, that they may have the right to the tree of life, and may enter through the gates into the city. But outside are dogs and sorcerers and sexually immoral and murderers and idolaters, and whoever loves and practices a lie (Rev 22:14-15). Revelation is not talking about a literal cube shaped 1,500 mile high city (Rev. 21:16 NASB) that drops out of the sky; rather, it is revealing the bride of Christ and who is part of her and who is not (Rev. 21:9-10; cf. Heb. 12:18-29). The images of Revelation do not suddenly become literal at chapter 21. Revelation 21-22 are giving us a symbolic portrayal of the post-AD 70 kingdom age. The New Jerusalem coming to earth in the new heaven and earth in (Rev. 21:1-2) is a symbol of the full establishment of the kingdom of God in the earthly realm at that time (cf. Rev. 11:15-18). And He said to me, ‘It is done! I am the Alpha and the Omega, the Beginning and the End. I will give of the fountain of the water of life freely to him who thirsts. He who overcomes shall inherit all things, and I will be his God and he shall be My son. But the cowardly, unbelieving, abominable, murders, sexually immoral, sorcerers, idolaters, and all liars shall have their part in the lake which burns with fire and brimstone, which is the second death. Revelation 21:6-8 I am the Alpha and the Omega, the Beginning and End, the First and the Last. Blessed are those who do His commandments, that they may have the right to the tree of life, and may enter through the gates into the city. But outside are dogs and sorcerers and sexually immoral and murder and idolaters, and whoever love and practices a lie. Revelation 22:13-15 Again, this is not a literal picture of the future of the earth with some people in a giant cube shaped city and some outside it; rather, it is a symbolic portrayal of the post-AD 70 kingdom order. The New Jerusalem is cube shaped just as the Holy of Holies of the Temple was cubed shaped (1 Kings 6:20). God dwells in the midst of His New Jerusalem wife today (Rev. 21:9-10); we are His Temple (cf. Rev. 21:22-27). God’s people being represented by a physical structure (i.e. the New Jerusalem) is not unique to Revelation. Elsewhere in the NT God’s people are likened to a house or Temple (Matt. 16:18; 1 Cor. 3:10-17; 1 Peter 2:4-8). Notice how the New Jerusalem is built on twelve foundations which have the names of the twelve apostles (Rev. 21:14). Compare this with what Paul wrote of believers in Ephesians: Now therefore, you are no longer stranger and foreigners, but fellow citizens with the saints and member of the household of God, having been built on the foundation of the apostles and prophets, Jesus Christ Himself being the chief cornerstone, in who the whole building, being fitted together, grows into a holy temple in the Lord, in whom you also are being built together for a dwelling place of God in the Spirit. Ephesians 2:19-22; cf. Rev. 21:1-3 The meaning is the same in both contexts. A physical structure is being used as a symbol to portray the totality of God’s people (notice, the foundations of the New Jerusalem have the names of the twelve apostles, the gates, the names of the twelve tribes, Rev. 21:12-14). The New Jerusalem is not a giant cube-shaped city that believers will live in some day; we are the “living stones” that make up this city (cf. 1 Peter 2:5). Believers are the New Jerusalem (cf. Is. 62:12; Rev. 3:12); we are the wife of the Lamb! Robert Gundry summarized this concept well in an article entitled: “The New Jerusalem: People as Place not Place for People” (Novum Testamentum XXIX, 3, 1987). Those who are part of the New Jerusalem wife today have eternal life; those who are not part of her do not have eternal life. It is important to notice, however, that the gates of the New Jerusalem are open, (Rev. 21:25-27). Those who are outside can come in and become part of the bride by coming to the Lord; indeed, they are entreated to do so (Rev. 22:17). Revelation shows the sea disappearing at AD 70 (again, this is symbolic, cf. Dan. 2:34-35, 44-45, the sea being a symbol of the abode of the serpent, cf. Is. 27:1 and the Gentiles, cf. Is. 60:5). This transformed the whole world into the Land at that time (i.e. the whole world became the Holy Land, Rev. 21:1-2) as the kingdom of God was fully established in the earthly realm. The kingdom authority of this planet that Adam lost to Satan (cf. Luke 4:4-8) was taken back by Jesus at the cross (Matt. 28:18; cf. Dan. 7:13-14). God then took this great authority and fully implemented His reign at the AD 70 destruction of those who were destroying the Land of Israel (Rev. 11:15-18; cf. Dan. 7:21-22). This was the time of the spiritual restoration of all things (Matt. 16:27-28; 19:28). |
Comments
Re: What would Jesus do to the planet?
Andrew, I was genuinely surprised to see you write this:
‘To be honest, I really don’t understand how people reach the conclusion that ‘Babylon the great’ is a symbol of Jerusalem rather than of the current pagan oppressor of the people of God.’
Do you really not understand how some come to that conclusion? Rev 11:7-8 refers to Jerusalem as Sodom and Egypt. (Cf. the great city of Rev. 17:18)So, there is clearly no problem with positing Israel as the enemy of God. I think we even see this in Mt. 24-25, where Jesus takes events associated with the enemy and shows how they applied to Israel at the time. There is an obvious irony there.
Incidentally, I think closer attention could be paid to the idea that in the first century it’s difficult to separate Israel and Rome. Perhaps there is a sense in which the beast or Rome-Israel eats itself.
Re: What would Jesus do to the planet?
Check these texts please. In Isaiah 9:1-7 “The people who sat in darkness saw a great light…. And of His Kingdom and Peace there will be no end.” In Math.3 John announces this kingdom and in Math.11:13 Jesus confirms his announcement so It seems to me we have pretty good evidence as to when this eternal kingdom started. I have a hard time correlating the arrival of the New Jerusalem to AD70 but agree that Math. 16:27 does present a challenge and the kingdom Jesus discusses with His desciples on the way down the mountain from the transfiguration in Math.17 is certainly that same kingdom. If Jesus meant to indicate visualizing the kingdom as in a realization that the kingdom had arrived then it would seem this was realized in Math.17:11-12. If He meant to actually envision the Kingdom then John certainly envisioned it on the isle of Patmos. Either way thr prophecy was fulfilled, some present saw the Son of Man coming in His Kingdom.
Re: What would Jesus do to the planet?
Graham, I pointed out in The Coming of the Son of Man that the accounts of the seven seals and the seven trumpets draw consistently on Old Testament passages that speak of judgment on Israel; the account of the seven bowls uses language and imagery from passages that speak of judgment on the enemies of Israel. You mention Revelation 17:18, but again I fail to see how John’s readers in the Roman world would not have identified the ‘great city that has dominion over the kings of the earth’ with Rome. Certainly Jerusalem is regarded as hostile to God and subject to judgment, but there is no reason to exclude Rome from the same fate. Babylon in the Old Testament is the instrument of divine judgment and then becomes subject to judgment. What objection is there to supposing that John saw things in much the same way: Rome is the contemporary Babylon which God will use to punish rebellious Israel, but which will then itself become subject to judgment because of its idolatry, wickedness and imperial arrogance?
Re: What would Jesus do to the planet?
When you mention the judgements of the 7 angels in context with old testament I assume you are refering to the judgements against Egypt which are similar but not identical. The 7 last plagues will be much more extensive. Also if we look at the book of Revelation as prophetic it rules out Israel, Rome and Egypt because this is a world power Revelation !8:3 “She made all the world to drink of the wine of the wrath of her fornication. All 3 of these cities are no longer world powers and have not been for some years. The world power today is the world bank which has controlled American policy for years and other countries as well through financial assistance that comes with a price. The war in Iraq was certainly not in the best interest of the US, IT WAS IN THE BEST INTEREST OF BIG MONEY AND THEIR INVESTMENT IN OIL.
Re: What would Jesus do to the planet?
I’m not in a position right now to back this up, but it can be shown quite easily that ‘world’ in the context of this sort of apocalyptic would have been understood as a reference to the ‘world’ that Rome purported to control. Caesar was commonly described as ‘ruler of the world’; and the word oikoumenē, which occurs in Revelation 3:10; 12:9 and 16:14, would naturally be taken to denote the sphere of Rome’s influence (cf. BDAG: ‘the world as administrative unit’). There is no reason, therefore, to suppose that the visions of Revelation encompass events in our own time.
Re: What would Jesus do to the planet?
I find it surprising that you contend that the last plagues Rev.15:1 etc. do not occor in the last days or end time prophecy. I am not saying that these prophecies are being fulfilled in the present time. They might be. They might be in the future. I was trying to introduce the idea of a world power that will exist as these prophecies unfold. I am not conceding that they are fulfilled and no one told us either. I apologize if I was’nt clear. Are you saying the occurences of Rev.3, Rev.12 and Rev. 16 all exist in the same period. time frame or are you speaking to the language of John? Of course John spoke in terminology current to his culture and period in time, it’s what he understood. But his prophecies were for a future time. Thats the difference between prophecy and history.
Re: What would Jesus do to the planet?
Andrew, my point with Rev. 17:18 was the mention of ‘the great city’ and its similarity to Rev. 11:8. The ‘great city’ in Rev.11 is clearly Jerusalem - also seen as Sodom and Egypt.
This isn’t about excluding Rome from the same fate as Israel. I simply wanted to respond to your statement that you didn’t ‘understand how people reach the conclusion that ‘Babylon the great’ is a symbol of Jerusalem.’ There are, I think, many good reasons why people come to this conclusion.
Sodom and Egypt are, of course, the great enemies of God. To refer to Jerusalem/Israel under such a description is a painful irony. Jesus takes a similar tack in Mt. 24, by using speaking of Israel in terminology usually reserved for her enemies. This makes the use of ‘Babylon’ a fitting reference to Israel, for the same rhetorical effect.
We told in 16:6; 17:1-6; and 18:20-24 that Babylon was ‘drunk with the blood of the prophets.’ This is most likely a reference to OT prophets and therefore speaks of Israel, not Rome. If we compare this to Mt. 23, the identity of Babylon is even clearer. Mt. 23:32 has Jesus saying that the Jews would fill their cup of sin by persecuting those sent to her. Babylon, in Rev. 17, is seen to fill her cup by persecuting the prophets and the followers of Jesus. Further, Jesus said that Jerusalem was guilty of all the blood shed on the earth (Mt. 23:35). This is the exact same thing said of Babylon in Rev. 18:24.
More than any of that, however, we are told that Babylon was an adulteress. In John’s usage, this is most likely a reference to Israel.
You may not find all of this compelling - and it may not fit with your wider understanding of Revelation’s message - but I trust it demonstrates why it is that some people reach the conclusion that ‘the great city’ of Babylon refers to Jerusalem.
Re: What would Jesus do to the planet?
Graham, I made the same case you are making a while back :) The case for Babylon being first century Jerusalem/Israel seems to be quite compelling.
Re: What would Jesus do to the planet?
This is unsubstantiated and depends on the assumption that Revelation 18-19 speaks of judgment on Jerusalem rather than Rome. That cannot be addressed in detail here, but I pointed out in The Coming of the Son of Man that the visions of seven bowls all draw on Old Testament texts that speak of judgment on the pagan enemy of the people of God. To be honest, I really don’t understand how people reach the conclusion that ‘Babylon the great’ is a symbol of Jerusalem rather than of the current pagan oppressor of the people of God. Why shouldn’t John have foreseen judgment on Rome as well as on Jerusalem, fully in keeping with the pattern of Old Testament prophecy?
That just defies the narrative logic of these chapters for no good reason. During the 1000 years evil and death are still present; satan has not been destroyed. In the new heavens and new earth, these destructive and corrupting forces have been finally eradicated.
The events associated with the coming of the Son of man (ie. the concrete historical vindication of the people of God through the destruction of Jerusalem and the victory over paganism) culminate in the awarding of a kingdom, first to Jesus, then to those who suffered with him. This is where we are in Revelation 19:16 - before the 1000 years. Nothing is said about kingdom in Revelation 20:11-21. The regeneration of the people of God following judgment requires a king because there are still enemies. In the new creation there are no enemies left, no more battles to fight, therefore no king is needed.
It seems to me that what has happened with the new creation theme in scripture is something like this:
1. It begins with Abraham, who is called to be God’s new creation (‘I will bless you; you will be fruitful; I will multiply you; and you will fill the land’).
2. The restoration of Israel is depicted in Isaiah 65:17 as a renewal of creation; the old world of judgment passes away, a new world of rejoicing is inaugurated.
3. This theme reaches a climax in the New Testament, as you point out: the ‘regeneration’ of Israel is again thought of as a renewal of heaven and earth.
4. However, at this point something new is introduced. The resurrection of Jesus takes us beyond metaphor to a real victory over death. It is this unexpected development that raises the possibility that eventually a creation that is subject to decay will be radically transformed - to the extent that corruption, sickness, evil and death have been eradicated.
5. This bigger vision is clearest in Romans 8, where creation sees in the glorification of the sons of God (ie. the suffering church) the potential for its own liberation from the bondage to decay; and in Revelation 20-21, where the victory of the suffering church over Rome is separated from the final judgment and renewal of creation by the 1000 years.
One final observation relevant to this discussion:
This is misleading. I think that at Revelation 22:6 we revert to a pre-parousia situation - John voices the hope that Jesus will come soon (22:7). This is not part of the new heavens and new earth image - notice that the wicked who are outside the city in 22:15 are thrown into the lake of fire following judgment in the new creation (21:8). What 22:14 describes is the entry of the martyrs into the city and the exclusion of the wicked from it. They are then kept in the city, where they reign with Christ, throughout the 1000 years until the city descends to be part of a pristine new creation.