New Creation Millennialism

[jwmealy]

So are you an annhilationist then? or do you believe those in the lake of fire suffer eternal conscious punishment?

Your previous statement that only the saved will exist on the new earth, when coupled with the one you just made above, indicating you believe the damned will exist there too, seem to be contradictory.

Parousia70, my view (that the new creation and the millennium are both inaugurated by the glorious coming of Jesus at the end of this age) is compatible both with ECT and with annihilationism. That's a red herring as far as the matter of what Rev. 22:14 means. For one thing, there is not even any verb in that verse, in the Greek. There is no temporal statement being made, but only a spatial one: these people [are, will always be, and/or will always belong] outside. The point is that unrepentant sinners will never set foot in the New Jerusalem. The verse does not at all affirm positively that all the people described will exist in mortal form on the earth outside the New Jerusalem. For that matter, Revelation--and every other NT source--is clear that when Jesus comes as Judge, he will judge the living and the dead, and will forbid all such people from taking part in the age to come. If they are alive, they will be slain at his coming; if they are dead, they will be refused resurrection at that time. People who are in Hades are most definitely outside the New Jerusalem.

On the other hand, the final fate of the unrepentant is repeatedly pictured as fiery destruction outside the walls of the Jerusalem of the age to come (cf. Isa. 26:10-11; 26:20-27:5; 66:14-16, 23-34; [all Jesus' references to Gehenna]; Heb. 10:26-27; Rev. 20:7-10). My view is that all of these prophetic references are to the resurrection and judgment of the unrepentant, which happens after the thousand years. Rev. 20:7-10 and 13-15 picture the same judgment and final punishment--the one in final battle imagery, and the other in final trial imagery. So the unrepentant are outside for the thousand years because they are consigned to the prison of Hades, and they are outside when they are resurrected and judged. No unrepentant person survives, as a mortal, to live on the earth during the age to come.

What about tears of Joy? Will we not be able to experience those anymore either?

I don't know. For the purposes of my quotation of Rev. 7 it doesn't matter.

Plus, as I understand the scriptures, the Water of Life is a present reality in Christ. That anyone who thirsts can come to him today and drink, and one drink from those waters and we shall never thirst again. Who are the "thirsty ones" on the new earth inside the city if it's only the already saved there who no longer thirst?

What is different in the new creation is that the redeemed, who now thirst, will be able to drink from the water of life "freely," i.e., they will have unlimited resurrection life. This is not a hill to die on for a conventional premillennialist.

 

[jwmealy]

I should add that it is poor biblical logic to compose this equation:

Jesus said those who believe in him will never thirst
I believe in Jesus
Therefore I never thirst.

A much better syllogism would be:

Jesus said those who believe in him will never thirst
I find myself thirsty for God's life
Therefore I need believe more deeply in Jesus.

 

[Daniel Martinovich]

Daniel, One simple question. In your understanding, are we now living in the new creation? Webb

Absolutely.
Instead of you thinking , What kind of out in left field heretic is this guy. Allow me to define it rather than yours or anyone else's vivid imagination defining what I am saying.. We are living in the oft prophesied age that was to come after the fall of the Roman empire which happened in 1453 AD. There are over one hundred chapters of Bible prophecy that prophesy exactly what the world has been experiencing now for five hundred years and will continue to as a trend. New is defined by those 100+ chapters and not by the imaginations of 21st century believers.

These prophecies were not comparing the 21st century to the 1950's, (which weren't that great anyway.) They are not comparing the 20th century to the Victorian age. I say this because people are so myopic. The prophecies are comparing the x rated, unimaginably oppressive madness of the ancient world where outside of ancient Israel no one had any control of their own destinies or their nations to this world where now 1\4 of the population does. No westerner comprehends living under total subjugation, mind, body and spirit to a king or emperor who used actual idolatry to subjugate the population and keep them separated from their creator in perpetuity. Yet outside of ancient Israel that is the history of the entirety of the ancient world. Stalin and Hitler were the norm and they ruled in perpetuity. We, the peoples who have the Gospel and Bibles defeated them in short order. Up till the Roman empire fell the bad guys always won.
What changed that God knew beforehand would alter the dynamics and give the good guys a fighting chance? The Bible (illegally) getting into the hands of common men in their own languages . Then the discovery of the new world really helped it along. Why didn't that happen before? After all Bibles existed for 2000 years prior to 1453 AD? The first printing press went into operation in 1452-1454 AD. First book printed a Bible. Within ten years books and magazines went from thousands per year hand made in production to the millions per year. The powers that be couldn't keep up with it and this is what gave men power to over throw the system that reigned over them for 7000 years. Every where the Gospel has now been for centuries is, in comparison to the ancient world, like night verses day and finally.....All the earthly promises of God, made to the saints in times past. Promises that never came to pass in their generations are now coming to pass in nations that meet the conditions.
Just like this New Testament prophecy predicted the Messiah would bring about.: Luke 1:67 And his father Zacharias was filled with the Holy Ghost, and prophesied, saying,68 Blessed be the Lord God of Israel; for he hath visited and redeemed his people,69 And hath raised up an horn of salvation for us in the house of his servant David;70 As he spake by the mouth of his holy prophets, which have been since the world began:71 That we should be saved from our enemies, and from the hand of all that hate us;72 To perform the mercy promised to our fathers, and to remember his holy covenant;73 The oath which he sware to our father Abraham,74 That he would grant unto us, that we being delivered out of the hand of our enemies might serve him without fear,75 In holiness and righteousness before him, all the days of our life. * Note, this is talking about the believer, Jew and Gentile, and... it could not come to pass unless geographical area's of believers and unbelievers are significantly influenced by the Word of God and systems of limited government based in Biblical principle were established.

One word if you are pooh poohing this. Pop culture end times teachings are prophesying not only the exact opposite of what the Bible has said of this age. They are also prophesying in direct opposition to what God has done in the earth for the last 500 years and will continue to do. Dangerous very dangerous.
I could give you a link to my End Time Prophecy article on this but it is long and hard to read. I already linked a series of small easy to read articles on Jesus' parables that teach exactly what I am saying. In case you missed it and are interested here it is again. They are really quite amazing when you see them for what they are really saying. The Parables About the Government of God

 

[jwmealy]

Thanks, Daniel.

Our hermeneutical approaches are so divergent that I don't think it would be worth the time to attempt a dialogue. Thanks for sketching your view for me, though.

Webb

 

[Bible2]

jwmealy said in post 18:

Zechariah 14 is a problem passage for my view. On the other hand, so are the last nine chapters of Ezekiel.

Note that Ezekiel chapters 40 to 48 aren't necessarily a prophecy of future events which must happen, like those in Revelation must happen (Revelation 1:1), but could have been a conditional vision which Israel had to fulfill while it was still in Old Testament/Old Covenant times (Ezekiel 43:11). For the vision refers to animal sacrifices for sin (e.g. Ezekiel 43:21-22), which were abolished by Jesus on the Cross, along with all the rest of the letter of the Old Covenant Mosaic law (Ephesians 2:15-16, Colossians 2:14-17, Hebrews 7:18-19, Romans 7:6; 2 Corinthians 3:6-18). Jesus' New Covenant sacrifice for sin (Matthew 26:28) completely and forever replaced all the Old Covenant animal sacrifices for sin (Hebrews 10:1-23).

Nonetheless, when Jesus returns and begins his millennial reign on the earth (Revelation 20:4-6, Zechariah 14:3-21), he will still build a New Covenant, 4th temple building in Jerusalem; and New Covenant animal sacrifices will be offered in front of that temple (Zechariah 14:20-21, Zechariah 6:12-13). Instead of these sacrifices being for sin, they could be for thanksgiving (cf. Leviticus 22:29). Jesus could build that temple, and it could be operated according to the description in Ezekiel chapters 40 to 48, but leaving out the parts about animal sacrifices for sin. Another possibility is that New Covenant animal sacrifices for sin will be made, but only as a remembrance of Jesus' New Covenant sacrifice on the Cross for our sins (Matthew 26:28), like how communion is currently partaken of in remembrance of Jesus' sacrifice (Luke 22:19). The current practice of communion could cease at Jesus' return (1 Corinthians 11:26).

Also, after the millennium and subsequent events (Revelation 20:7-15), when the literal city of New Jerusalem will land on the new earth (Revelation 21:1-3), there will no longer be any temple building (Revelation 21:22).

jwmealy said in post 18:

Is it your position that sometime shortly before Jesus returns in glory, the UK, Manhattan, Crete, Sardinia, Hawaii, the entirety of Japan, the entirety of New Zealand, Indonesia, Taiwan, the Philippines, Hong Kong, Sri Lanka, Cuba, Iceland, along with all the world's other islands, will disappear? Similarly, will there no longer be any Sierras, Rockies, Himalayas, Alps, and so on? I ask because I would have thought that a consistent literal reading of Revelation combined with a consistent chronological reading leads to these conclusions (Rev. 16:20).

Note that in Revelation 16:20, the original Greek word (pheugo, G5343) translated as "fled away" can refer to a movement of only a few feet (Acts 27:30), which can happen to islands in a great earthquake (Revelation 16:18b).

Also, in Revelation 16:20, the original Greek word (heurisko, G2147) translated as "found" can be translated as "saw" (Matthew 2:11, Textus Receptus) or "perceived" (Acts 23:29), and so can refer to the peaks of every mountain range being so damaged by the future, unprecedented earthquake of Revelation 16:18b that the mountain ranges will no longer look like what they look like today.

jwmealy said in post 18:

I ask because I would have thought that a consistent literal reading of Revelation combined with a consistent chronological reading leads to these conclusions (Rev. 16:20).

Note that while even Revelation 16:20 can be read literally, it hasn't been said that Revelation is entirely literal.

Nonetheless, Revelation is almost entirely literal, for it is unsealed (Revelation 22:10), meaning that it shouldn't be difficult for saved people of any time to understand it if they simply read it as it is written: chronologically and almost-entirely literally. The few parts of it that are symbolic are almost always explained afterward (e.g. Revelation 1:20, Revelation 17:9-12). And Revelation's few symbols not explained afterward (e.g. Revelation 13:2) are usually explained elsewhere in the Bible (e.g. Daniel 7:4-7,17).

Just as Jesus' 2nd coming in Revelation 19:7 to 20:3 will be fulfilled almost entirely literally, so the events of the preceding tribulation in Revelation chapters 6 to 18 will be fulfilled almost entirely literally. Also, the millennium in Revelation 20 will be literal, and will begin after Jesus' 2nd coming (Revelation 19:7 to 20:6, Zechariah 14:3-21), when he will reign on the earth with the physically resurrected church for 1,000 years (Revelation 20:4-6, Revelation 5:10, Revelation 2:26-29, Psalms 66:3-4, Psalms 72:8-11). After that, the events of Revelation 20:7 to 22:5 will occur literally.

 

[jwmealy]

Bible2,

I have to give you points for industriousness. You've given the best answers that can be given, under your master assumptions, which seem to run close to dispensational premillennialism.

What really broke Ezek. 40-48 for me as a literal picture of the age to come was one verse--the one in which the king sacrifices for his own sins (Ezek. 45:22). The whole setup collapsed around that verse as a literal picture of the future. I prefer to read it, as in your first hypothetical, as a prophecy of what could have been after the exile, if the people of Israel fully turned to God.

As for Zech. 14, I have two or three options, none of which pleases me 100%.

The first is simply to appeal to the principle of progressive revelation. Looked at in this way, the prophecy imagines the age to come as an age in which Israel is completely holy, and has the first place among the nations, but much of the rest of the world goes on more or less as before, with sin expressing itself both individually and nationally. We know now, through the greater revelation given to us in the NT, that there will be a complete break between this age and the age to come, and only those who love God and belong to Jesus will be allowed to take part in it (e.g. those without clean and proper wedding garments will not be allowed to take part in the wedding feast of Christ at his return, Mt. 22:10-14; Rev. 3:5; 19:6-9; cf. also Lk. 20:35; 2 Thess. 1:5-10, etc.). In fact, even Isaiah, greatest of the OT prophets, prophesies in part (1 Cor. 13:9), because his vision of the new creation and the New Jerusalem includes mortality (Isa. 65:17-20). So, God revealed to Israel in a partially veiled way the reality of the radical and exclusively resurrection-based new creation, which Jesus calls the regeneration (Mt. 19:28).

My second approach, which I like better but I don't expect most people to accept, is to go with the LXX of Zech. 14, on the hypothesis that it reflects the original and earliest text, and to hypothesize that something has happened in the Masoretic Text tradition to goof the chapter up, expanding and overinterpreting the original, shorter, text in a way that conflicts with the intent of the original. In the LXX version, there is a narration of the battle of Har Magedon, and a prophecy that all the nations who survive that crisis will go up and worship the LORD every year. It then says, if any nation will not go up, "these will be put with those" (Zech. 14:17, LXX), meaning, nations that are unwilling to go and worship the LORD will suffer the same fate as those who attacked Jerusalem, namely, complete bodily destruction and removal from the earth. I'd have to write a scholarly article about it to make the whole case, but I suspect that the Targums, the Aramaic paraphrases of the Hebrew Bible, probably tried to figure out what the curt phrase "these will be added to those" meant (in the original Hebrew behind the LXX rendering), and just made something up about God withholding rain from the rebellious nations, and then at some point the Targumic rendering sneaked back into the Hebrew Bible tradition.

The third option would just be to say, you can't take any of this material literally. I don't prefer to simply loosen the settings of my hermeneutic when things get difficult.

 

[jwmealy]

I'll have more to say later today (God willing) about your specific proposal of how to read Rev. 16:20.

 

[jwmealy]

Bible2,

All I will say about your use of lexicographical tactics to minimize the impact of Rev. 16:20 is that it fails in the face of Rev. 20:11. That verse uses the same two verbs, and carries pretty much exactly the same sense that I claim 16:20 carries. John's usage is the best interpreter of his own meaning--not passages in Acts that have a completely foreign context.

Of course, you (and all conventional premillennialists) will not be happy associating these two verses, because you think the one describes something that happens before the coming of Jesus in glory, and the other describes something that happens a thousand years (or at any rate a full age) afterwards. This unwelcome doubling of the dissolution of the present creation disappears if you recognize that Rev. 20:11 does not narrate the fleeing of earth and heaven before the throne of God. On the contrary, it identifies the One whom John sees sitting on the throne as He from whose presence heaven and earth fled--back in 6:14 and 16:20. Most ancient versions of the NT get this nuance correct, but all but two contemporary translations into English misunderstand the force of the prepositional phrase, οὗ ἀπὸ τοῦ προσώπου ἔφυγεν ἡ γῆ καὶ ὁ οὐρανός καὶ τόπος οὐχ εὑρέθη αὐτοῖς. See, however, Richmond Lattimore's translation: "Sitting upon it was he from whose face the earth and sky fled...", and the Spoken English New Testament, similarly has "From the presence of that One, earth and heaven had fled away."

New Creation Millennialism is comfortable with these two verses talking about the same event, because both the dissolution and the re-creation of the cosmos take place at the glorious coming of Jesus, not later.

In other words, in Rev. 20:11 John does not narrate the dissolution of the present creation, but rather identifies God and/or Jesus as the One before whose presence he (John) had seen the present creation dissolving in connection with the Parousia of Jesus.

 

[Bible2]

jwmealy said in post 26:

In fact, even Isaiah, greatest of the OT prophets, prophesies in part (1 Cor. 13:9), because his vision of the new creation and the New Jerusalem includes mortality (Isa. 65:17-20).

Isaiah 65:20 could refer to a new race of humans who will be created along with the new earth (Isaiah 65:17), but who will fall into sin and mortality like Adam and Eve did. But even as mortals, they could live for about 900 years, like Adam and generations after him lived that long (Genesis 5:5-27), so that if one of them dies at 100, it will be like he died in his youth (Isaiah 65:20b).

If Isaiah 65:20 does refer to the new earth, then it can't refer to any humans born on our present earth. For by the time that the new earth is created (Revelation 21:1), all humans born on our present earth who got saved and remained obedient will have been resurrected (if dead) or changed (if alive) into immortal physical bodies (Revelation 21:4; 1 Corinthians 15:21-23,51-53, Romans 8:23-25). And all who didn't get saved or who remained disobedient will have been cast into the lake of fire and brimstone (Revelation 21:8, Revelation 20:10,15, Revelation 14:10-11, Isaiah 66:22,24, Matthew 25:41,46, Mark 9:45-46) or into the outer darkness (Matthew 25:30, Matthew 8:12, Jude 1:13b) of outer space.

The physically resurrected, immortal humans could minister to the new race of fallen, mortal humans (of Isaiah 65:20) in the same way that angels now minister to us (Hebrews 1:14). For resurrected, immortal humans will be equal to the angels (Luke 20:36).

jwmealy said in post 26:

We know now, through the greater revelation given to us in the NT, that there will be a complete break between this age and the age to come, and only those who love God and belong to Jesus will be allowed to take part in it (e.g. those without clean and proper wedding garments will not be allowed to take part in the wedding feast of Christ at his return, Mt. 22:10-14; Rev. 3:5; 19:6-9; cf. also Lk. 20:35; 2 Thess. 1:5-10, etc.).

Note that Luke 20:35, like the other references, isn't contradicting that there will be mortal, married, unresurrected, unsaved people in the current age's final stage, i.e. the future millennium (e.g. Zechariah 14:16-19).

Regarding 2 Thessalonians 1:5-10, note that while verses 7-10 indeed refer to Jesus' 2nd coming, this will occur before the millennium (Revelation 19:7 to 20:6, Zechariah 14:3-21). And 2 Thessalonians 1:7-10 doesn't say that "all" the unsaved will be killed at the 2nd coming, for some will be left alive (Matthew 24:39b-40), and they will enter the millennium (Zechariah 14:16-19). Also, the "vengeance" and "everlasting destruction" at the 2nd coming (2 Thessalonians 1:8-9) won't be the lake of fire for everyone killed, just as "the vengeance of eternal fire" which came on Sodom and Gomorrah (Jude 1:7) wasn't the lake of fire for those killed. For only the Antichrist (the individual-man aspect of Revelation's "beast") and his False Prophet will be cast into the lake of fire at the 2nd coming (Revelation 19:20). The rest of the unsaved won't be cast into the lake of fire until after they have been physically resurrected and judged at the great white throne judgment (Revelation 20:11-15). Between the 2nd coming (Revelation 19:7 to 20:3) and the great white throne judgment will occur the millennium (Revelation 20:4-6) and the subsequent Gog/Magog rebellion (Revelation 20:7-10, Ezekiel chapters 38-39).

jwmealy said in post 26:

What really broke Ezek. 40-48 for me as a literal picture of the age to come was one verse--the one in which the king sacrifices for his own sins (Ezek. 45:22).

Note that the prince in Ezekiel 45:22 could be a resurrected David (Ezekiel 34:24, Ezekiel 37:25b).

*******

jwmealy said in post 28:

All I will say about your use of lexicographical tactics to minimize the impact of Rev. 16:20 is that it fails in the face of Rev. 20:11.

Note that Revelation 16:20 is different than Revelation 20:11b because the latter adds the idea of "no place", which the former doesn't require. Also, between the time of Revelation 16:20 and the time of Revelation 20:11 will occur the 2nd coming, the subsequent millennium, and the subsequent God/Magog rebellion (Revelation 19:7 to 20:10).

jwmealy said in post 28:

On the contrary, it identifies the One whom John sees sitting on the throne as He from whose presence heaven and earth fled--back in 6:14 and 16:20.

The 6th seal (Revelation 6:12-14) could be fulfilled in our future by a huge volcanic eruption (possibly of the Yellowstone Caldera) which will occur during only the first stage of the future tribulation of Revelation chapters 6 to 18 and Matthew 24. This eruption could begin with a large earthquake (Revelation 6:12), signaling the sudden rising of magma within the volcano. When it erupts, it could shoot so much ash and smoke into the sky that the sun will appear darkened and the moon blood-red (Revelation 6:12b), like happens during large forest fires. The volcano could also shoot blobs of red-hot magma into the sky, which as they fall back down could appear like falling stars (Revelation 6:13). And it could shoot so much super-heated ash and smoke so high and so quickly into the sky that they could form a gigantic mushroom cloud which will make the sky (the 1st heaven) look like a scroll being rolled up (Revelation 6:14). Earthquakes connected with the eruption could be so large that they set off a chain reaction of other earthquakes in nearby faults and volcanoes, which could set off even more earthquakes further away, and so on, so that earthquakes will end up affecting every mountain and island, moving each of their positions at least a little bit (Revelation 6:14b).

--

There are 3 heavens (2 Corinthians 12:2b). The 1st heaven is the sky, the atmosphere, in which the birds fly (Genesis 1:20b). The 2nd heaven is outer space, where the sun, moon, and stars reside (Deuteronomy 4:19). Where God resides is the 3rd heaven (2 Corinthians 12:2b, Revelation 4:1-2), and so it is beyond outer space, in the sense of it being in a higher (i.e. a 4th) spatial dimension. And it is a physical place, for Jesus ascended there in his physical resurrection body (Acts 1:9-11, Luke 24:39). And Paul said that he could have visited there in his physical body (2 Corinthians 12:2). Also, Elijah and Enoch were taken up there in their physical bodies (2 Kings 2:11, Genesis 5:24, Hebrews 11:5). And the 2 witnesses will be taken up there in their physical bodies (Revelation 11:11-12).

In the 3rd heaven, there is currently a literal city 1,500 miles cubed (Revelation 21:16), which is called New Jerusalem (Revelation 21:2), the heavenly Jerusalem (Hebrews 12:22), the Jerusalem which is above (Galatians 4:26), and the Father's house (John 14:2, Revelation 21:2-3). In the future, God will create a new earth (a new surface of the earth) and a new heaven (a new 1st heaven, a new atmosphere for the earth) (Revelation 21:1). And then God will come down in New Jerusalem from the 3rd heaven to the new earth to live with people on the new earth (Revelation 21:2-3, Revelation 3:12b). It is New Jerusalem which has the literal pearly gates and streets of gold (Revelation 21:21) which people ascribe to heaven. So what people think of as heaven, in the sense of living in bliss with God, will eventually be on the new earth.

Currently, the 3rd heaven is where paradise is (2 Corinthians 12:2,4). And paradise is where believers go when they die (Luke 23:43,46). So believers go to the 3rd heaven when they die. Also, paradise is where the literal tree of life is (Revelation 2:7). And the tree of life is in New Jerusalem (Revelation 22:2). So when people go to paradise, they go to New Jerusalem.

The earth's 3rd heaven could be high above the north pole (cf. the connection between heaven and the north in Isaiah 14:13, KJV). Regarding what we today call "the northern lights", even though they can been explained by physics, they could still point to the location of the glory of the earth's 3rd heaven. And Psalm 48:2's reference to the north could refer to the location of New Jerusalem in heaven.

 

[jwmealy]

Bible2,

I have to go to work, but I have two things to mention right away.

1. If you insist that heaven is a physical place (even in a "higher dimension"), I'm worried that you miss the crucial point that God is not simply invisible because he's out of our line of sight---but rather, because God created light itself and everything that is--however many dimensions there may be. The picture of God on a throne cannot be taken literally, unless you want to be a Mormon. But in orthodox Christian theology, God is not physical at all, and cannot and never will be literally visible to human eyes. As Paul says somewhere, "...whom no human being has seen, or can see." Yes, we will see him, but in a poetic, symbolic sense. We will know him, deeply know his nature, and have intimate communion with him. If you go further than that, you take leave of Christian orthodoxy and put God in a little box that is the size of your created imagination.

2. The idea that God will create new mortal beings in the new creation illustrates how an interpretation fails. The more speculation you have to pull out of thin air in order to make your interpretation stay afloat, the weaker your interpretation is. And your comments on Isa. 65 show just how much made-to-order speculative material you have to generate. Secondly, immediately after John sees the new creation, he hears the word, "death will be no more (Rev. 21:4)." Your view requires a person to add, "...except in the case of those who die," hardly a satisfying way of reading the verse.

 

[jwmealy]

If Isaiah 65:20 does refer to the new earth, then it can't refer to any humans born on our present earth. For by the time that the new earth is created (Revelation 21:1), all humans born on our present earth who got saved and remained obedient will have been resurrected (if dead) or changed (if alive) into immortal physical bodies (Revelation 21:4; 1 Corinthians 15:21-23,51-53, Romans 8:23-25).

I agree. No unrepentant person survives the transition between this creation and the new creation. This creation is dissolved (Rom. 8:18-25; 2 Pet. 3; Rev. 6:12-17; 16:20-21), and then the new creation appears.

And all who didn't get saved or who remained disobedient will have been cast into the lake of fire and brimstone (Revelation 21:8, Revelation 20:10,15, Revelation 14:10-11, Isaiah 66:22,24, Matthew 25:41,46, Mark 9:45-46) or into the outer darkness (Matthew 25:30, Matthew 8:12, Jude 1:13b) of outer space.

Not on my view. Don't forget that we are discussing whether it works to understand the new creation event as happening at the glorious coming of Jesus. You've asserted that Revelation is to be read chronologically, as distinct, for example, from reading it as partially recapitulative (as I do), but you haven't argued in favor of your assertion yet. We might get to that at some point.

For resurrected, immortal humans will be equal to the angels (Luke 20:36). Note that Luke 20:35, like the other references, isn't contradicting that there will be mortal, married, unresurrected, unsaved people in the current age's final stage, i.e. the future millennium (e.g. Zechariah 14:16-19).

Lk. 20:34 And Jesus said to them, “The people of this age marry and get married. 35 But those who’ve been considered worthy to take part in that age, and in the resurrection from among the dead—they don’t marry, and they don’t get married. And they can’t die anymore. 36 Because they’re like angels, and they’re God’s sons, being sons of the resurrection."

A couple of things about this teaching.

1. Jesus says the resurrected ones will be equivalent to the angels--in the two respects he just mentioned, that angels do not die as mortal humans do, and angels do not have sex and reproduction, and therefore angels do not have marriage. Any attempt to say that we will be equal to/equivalent to angels beyond those two comparisons is speculation and not supported by the context. I'm not denying the theoretical possibility that we will have other commonalities with the angels in addition to the matter of not dying and not reproducing and marrying; I'm saying that Jesus is talking about those equivalences here, not any other equivalences, so you can't rely on this verse to justify your speculative ideas about other passages. After all, the idea that humans will minister to other created beings in the new creation is a given anyway. We were put on this planet to begin with to be the stewards and managers of all the living beings here (Gen. 1:26-28; 2:7, 15). Your speculation does not get any particular extra traction from Jesus' words about angels.

2. If you read Jesus' statement in Lk. 20:35 in the Greek, it is very clear that he is saying that only those considered worthy will live to see the age to come--that is, those who are found acceptable to God when they face Jesus and God at Jesus' coming in glory. There is no threefold division: believers, bad sinners, and mediocre sinners that can somehow squeak through into the kingdom. Those who have died who are found worthy at the judgment of the living and the dead at Christ's coming will be resurrected, leaving those who have died who are found worthy unresurrected for the age to come (later revealed as the thousand years, Rev. 20:1-10). Those who are alive and are found worthy will be gathered from the four winds to meet Jesus in the air along with the resurrected worthy ones, and they too (as Paul explains in 1 Thess. 4 and 1 Cor. 15) will be transformed to an immortal state exactly equivalent to resurrection. These latter people are the ones who are "taken" in Mt. 25, leaving everyone else--the unworthy--on the earth which is in the process of dissolving. It is a misreading of Lk. 20:35 to take it as meaning two different things when it speaks of being worthy to attain to that age, and being worthy to attain to the resurrection from among the dead. Jesus is making an equivalence, so he can be paraphrased, "those who are found worthy to attain to that age, which is to say, to the resurrection from among the dead."

Regarding 2 Thessalonians 1:5-10, note that while verses 7-10 indeed refer to Jesus' 2nd coming, this will occur before the millennium (Revelation 19:7 to 20:6, Zechariah 14:3-21). And 2 Thessalonians 1:7-10 doesn't say that "all" the unsaved will be killed at the 2nd coming, for some will be left alive (Matthew 24:39b-40), and they will enter the millennium (Zechariah 14:16-19).

You get yourself in trouble when you jump too quickly to other prooftexts, rather than facing up to the challenges of the passage under discussion. Paul says in 2 Thess. 1:8-9 that God will bring fiery vengeance on "those who do not know God and those who do not obey the gospel of our Lord Jesus Christ." It is special pleading to try to make room in this statement for people who are not going to be destroyed, but who are also not going to be treated as believers in Jesus. Paul makes clear in 2 Thess. 2:8-12 that the end of this age will see a temptation that will overtake all who are not truly believers in Jesus. No one who is swept into the lie of the man of lawlessness can be said to "know God" (1:8) or to "obey the gospel." Revelation has the same sharp dichotomy: under the beast's rule, everyone on earth will be forced to worship the beast or to be killed (Rev. 13). Those who are killed will be resurrected to reign with Jesus when he comes (Rev. 20:4, 6); those few who have stood firm but have not yet been executed by the beast will presumably be found worthy of taking part, as a recipient of eternal life, in the age to come. There is no room for a third group of folks that slip in the back door.

Also, the "vengeance" and "everlasting destruction" at the 2nd coming (2 Thessalonians 1:8-9) won't be the lake of fire for everyone killed, just as "the vengeance of eternal fire" which came on Sodom and Gomorrah (Jude 1:7) wasn't the lake of fire for those killed. For only the Antichrist (the individual-man aspect of Revelation's "beast") and his False Prophet will be cast into the lake of fire at the 2nd coming (Revelation 19:20). The rest of the unsaved won't be cast into the lake of fire until after they have been physically resurrected and judged at the great white throne judgment (Revelation 20:11-15).

I agree with this--that the coming of Jesus in glory at the end of this age will signal the judgment of the living and the dead. Those of the living who are judged worthy will be granted instant immortal life (aka "resurrection life"), and those of the dead who are judged worthy will be granted resurrection life. Those of the living who are judged unworthy will be cast into Hades, aka the abyss or the pit (Isa. 24:21-22), and those who are already in Hades will be sentenced to stay there "for many days" (Isa. 24:22), i.e. for the whole extent of the age to come, which John understands to be 1000 years.

Between the 2nd coming (Revelation 19:7 to 20:3) and the great white throne judgment will occur the millennium (Revelation 20:4-6) and the subsequent Gog/Magog rebellion (Revelation 20:7-10, Ezekiel chapters 38-39).

I agree with most of this, but no, the Gog/Magog rebellion is not a separate event from the Great White Throne Judgment. It is another viewpoint on the same judgment. Just as the Parousia is first revealed in Rev. 19:11-21 as a battle and conquest scene, then in 20:4-6 it is revealed as a courtroom scene, so the final judgment and sentencing of the unrepentant is first revealed as a battle (Rev. 20:7-10; cf. Isa. 26:10-11, 20-21; 27:1-5; Heb. 10:27, 31), then as a courtroom scene (Rev. 20:13-15). Things are very often revealed more than once and under more than one visionary image in Revelation--especially the coming of Jesus as judge of the living and the dead. This great event is so deep and full of meaning that it is not possible to reveal in one vision-scene.

Note that the prince in Ezekiel 45:22 could be a resurrected David (Ezekiel 34:24, Ezekiel 37:25b).

That doesn't make any sense at all. Jesus is the Messiah, the one and only King of Israel, of the nations, and of all creation in the age to come. David calls him Lord in the Spirit. David is done being king, and will bow the knee to Jesus, his creator and redeemer, along with everyone else (Phil. 2:10-11). There is no function for animal sacrifices in the age to come. The Lamb of God has been slain, and that has paid for all sins. Not to mention that there will be no more sin for those who take part in the resurrection. Once again, it is evidence that your interpretation has failed that you have to come up with unjustified and unjustifiable speculations like this. I appreciate that you are trying your best to work out a way of understanding all the scriptures together. Forgive me if it sounds like I am berating you; I'm not. I'm just observing that your best solutions are not working well at all, and I would hope that this spurs you to look more deeply at the alternative I am proposing.

Note that Revelation 16:20 is different than Revelation 20:11b because the latter adds the idea of "no place", which the former doesn't require.

John rarely says the same thing in precisely the same words. He does use a lot of the same terms and images when he wants us to understand that what he is seeing now is something that he (or another prophet before him) has already spoken about. He's giving you a strong clue as to the relationships between his visions, and by choosing to split hairs you are missing it.

Also, between the time of Revelation 16:20 and the time of Revelation 20:11 will occur the 2nd coming, the subsequent millennium, and the subsequent God/Magog rebellion (Revelation 19:7 to 20:10).

This is exactly what we are discussing. Simply reasserting your position is not going to advance the ball. To make progress, I propose that you answer me this: What would be lost if we considered it possible that Revelation is composed on a recapitulative scheme rather than a strict chronological scheme? I ask, because I believe Rev. 21:1-7 is intended to be taken as a recapitulation of Rev. 19:6-9, the announcement of the wedding of the Lamb and his Bride. This happens at Christ's coming in glory, not a thousand years later.

I'll sign off by admitting that your reading of Rev. 6:11-17 is not impossible; but I have many reasons for understanding that this is a picture of the coming of Christ and God as judge of the living and the dead, and of the dissolution of the cosmos that occurs at that time, ending the age of human mortality on this planet. All who welcome Christ will have immortal life in the age to come; all who do not welcome Christ will dissolve along with the physical world itself (see, pointedly, 2 Pet. 3:9-15).

 

[Bible2]

jwmealy said in post 30:

But in orthodox Christian theology, God is not physical at all, and cannot and never will be literally visible to human eyes.

Note that God the Son is physical (Luke 24:39).

1 John 4:12a and John 1:18a mean that no one has ever seen God the Father himself. But people saw a picture of God the Father when they saw Jesus at his first coming. For Jesus said "he that hath seen me hath seen the Father" (John 14:9). Jesus is the "image" of the invisible God the Father (Colossians 1:15).

jwmealy said in post 30:

Secondly, immediately after John sees the new creation, he hears the word, "death will be no more (Rev. 21:4)."

Revelation 21:4 means that there will be no more death for believers who overcame in this world (Revelation 21:7). It doesn't require that there will no more death for anyone at all in the next world, just as it isn't contradicting that the unsaved of this world will continue forever in the suffering of the 2nd death in the next world (Revelation 21:8, Revelation 20:10,15, Revelation 14:10-11, Matthew 25:41,46, Mark 9:45-46, Isaiah 66:24).

*******

jwmealy said in post 31:

If you read Jesus' statement in Lk. 20:35 in the Greek, it is very clear that he is saying that only those considered worthy will live to see the age to come . . .

That's right.

But the age (or world) to come won't begin until after the future millennium. For while the apostles asked Jesus about the end of the age (Matthew 24:3), he didn't tell them that the end of the age would occur at his 2nd coming (Matthew 24:29-31), or when the end of the age would occur, just as Jesus didn't tell the apostles many other things during his ministry (John 16:12). It wouldn't be until much later that Jesus would show the apostle John, through the vision in the book of Revelation (given about 95 AD: Irenaeus, Against Heresies 5:30:3c), that the end of the age, when all the unsaved will be cast into the lake of fire (Matthew 13:40, Matthew 25:41, Revelation 20:15), won't occur until over 1,000 years after Jesus' (never fulfilled) 2nd coming (Revelation 19:7 to 20:15).

Compare also the fact that the "last days" began in the 1st century AD with Jesus' first coming (Hebrews 1:2) and the Holy Spirit's pouring out at the Pentecost in Acts 2 (Acts 2:16-17). The last days can be the last 3, roughly 1,000-year "days" (2 Peter 3:8) of the 7, roughly 1,000-year "days" from the creation of Adam in roughly 4,000 BC to the future end of the present earth and the creation of the new earth (Revelation 21:1) in roughly 3,000 AD. So the last "days" can be the roughly 3,000 years from Jesus' first coming to sometime after the future millennium (Revelation 20:4-6), which will be part of the last, roughly 1,000-year "day" (2 Peter 3:8), which could begin at Jesus' 2nd coming (1 Corinthians 1:7-8).

jwmealy said in post 31:

Those who are alive and are found worthy will be gathered from the four winds to meet Jesus in the air along with the resurrected worthy ones, and they too (as Paul explains in 1 Thess. 4 and 1 Cor. 15) will be transformed to an immortal state exactly equivalent to resurrection. These latter people are the ones who are "taken" in Mt. 25, leaving everyone else--the unworthy--on the earth which is in the process of dissolving.

Do you mean those "taken" in Matthew 24:40, and Luke 17:34? If so, note that those "taken" at the 2nd coming (Luke 17:34-36, Matthew 24:40-41) will be unsaved people who will be taken to where they will be killed and birds will eat their dead bodies (Luke 17:36-37; Matthew 24:28, cf. Job 39:30b; Revelation 19:21). The Greek word "paralambano" ("taken": Luke 17:34-36, Matthew 24:40-41) can be used to refer to being taken to another place to be killed (John 19:16-18).

Those "left" where they are at the 2nd coming (Luke 17:34-36, Matthew 24:40-41) will include unsaved people who will be forced to come up annually to worship the returned Jesus in Jerusalem during the millennium (Zechariah 14:16-19). These unsaved people will have to be ruled with a rod of iron by Jesus and the physically resurrected church during the millennium (Revelation 2:26-29, Revelation 5:10, Revelation 20:4-6, Psalms 2, Psalms 66:3, Psalms 72:8-11). And their descendants will be deceived by Satan after the millennium into committing the Gog/Magog rebellion (Revelation 20:7-10, Ezekiel chapters 38-39).

Before the millennium, at Jesus' 2nd coming, those in the church will neither be "taken" and killed, nor "left" where they are, but will be "gathered together" (raptured) (Matthew 24:31; 2 Thessalonians 2:1) into the sky to hold a meeting in the air with the returned Jesus (1 Thessalonians 4:17). The purpose of this rapture meeting will be so that those in the church can be judged by Jesus (Psalms 50:3-5, cf. Mark 13:27) and married to Jesus (Revelation 19:7) in the sky, before Jesus descends from the sky (the 1st heaven) with the obedient part of the church to bring the 2nd-coming wrath of God on the unsaved world (Revelation 19:14 to 20:3).

Luke 17:27,29 and Matthew 24:39 don't mean that all unsaved people will be killed at Jesus' 2nd coming. For Luke 17:34-36 and Matthew 24:40-41 go on to show that some unsaved people will be left alive at that time (Zechariah 14:16-19). So in Luke 17:26-30 and Matthew 24:37-39, the point of the comparison isn't that all unsaved people will be killed at the 2nd coming, but that none of them will be expecting to be killed, but will be eating and drinking without worry right up to the day of the 2nd coming.

The 2nd coming will be like "the days of Noah" (Matthew 24:37) and "the days of Lot" (Luke 17:28,30) in that just as Noah went into the ark before the temporal (i.e. not the eternal) judgment of the Flood, and Lot went out from Sodom before its temporal (not its eternal) judgment (cf. Ezekiel 16:53-56), so the church will be raptured into the sky at the 2nd coming (Matthew 24:30-31; 2 Thessalonians 2:1-8; 1 Thessalonians 4:15-17, Revelation 19:7) before Jesus begins the 2nd-coming, temporal (not the eternal) judgment of the unsaved world alive at that time (Revelation 19:11 to 20:3, Luke 17:26-30, Matthew 24:37-39).

Regarding the final judgment of the unsaved, when Jesus returns, only the church will be physically resurrected and finally-judged (1 Corinthians 15:21-23, Revelation 20:5; Psalms 50:3-5, cf. Mark 13:27; Matthew 25:19-30; 2 Corinthians 5:10, Luke 12:45-48). The obedient part of the physically resurrected church, including those in the church who had been beheaded by the Antichrist, will then reign on the earth with the returned Jesus for 1,000 years (Revelation 20:4-6, Revelation 5:10, Revelation 2:26-29, Psalms 66:3-4, Psalms 72:8-11, Zechariah 14:3-21). Only sometime after the 1,000 years and the subsequent Gog/Magog rebellion (Revelation 20:7-10, Ezekiel chapters 38-39) will the rest of the dead (of all times) be physically resurrected (Revelation 20:5) and finally-judged at the great white throne judgment (Revelation 20:11-15).

jwmealy said in post 31:

All who welcome Christ will have immortal life in the age to come; all who do not welcome Christ will dissolve along with the physical world itself (see, pointedly, 2 Pet. 3:9-15).

Regarding 2 Peter 3:10-13, in the day of the Lord will occur the destruction of heaven (the 1st heaven: the sky/atmosphere) and the earth (its surface) at the great white throne judgment (Revelation 20:11, Revelation 21:1). And this will be followed by the creation of a new atmosphere and surface for the earth (2 Peter 3:13, Revelation 21:1) onto which New Jerusalem, God the Father's house (John 14:2, Revelation 21:2-3), will descend from the 3rd heaven (Revelation 21:2-3).

But the day of the Lord won't immediately bring the destruction of earth's atmosphere and surface. For the day of the Lord will begin at Jesus' 2nd coming (1 Corinthians 1:7-8) as a thief (2 Peter 3:10a, Revelation 16:15). And after his 2nd coming, he will establish his kingdom physically on the earth with the physically resurrected church for 1,000 years (Revelation 19:7 to 20:6, Revelation 5:10, Revelation 2:26-29, Psalms 66:3-4, Psalms 72:8-11, Zechariah 14:3-21).

And after the 1,000 years, the Gog/Magog rebellion will occur (Revelation 20:7-10, Ezekiel chapters 38-39). And after its defeat, at least 7 more years will occur (Ezekiel 39:9b), before the earth's atmosphere and surface are destroyed at the great white throne judgment (Revelation 20:11). All of these events, from Jesus' 2nd coming to the great white throne judgment, will be part of the day of the Lord. For it is not a 24-hour day, but to God is like a 1,000-year "day" (2 Peter 3:8).

 

[Interplanner]

JM,
B2 is sort of his own little expert on these things. Like about the surface. Don't bother asking why or how he got that, he just has another autopost of literalism for you.

 

[jwmealy]

JM,
B2 is sort of his own little expert on these things. Like about the surface. Don't bother asking why or how he got that, he just has another autopost of literalism for you.

That comment is unworthy of a Christian discussion.

 

[Interplanner]

Have you read 100 of his posts like I have? He does get one thing right, about the promises to Israel being recieved by both parties and how that makes them one entity. I'm referring to his immature literalism and his non-discussion and his treatment of the Rev as though it was the place to start everything and read as plain as a small town newspaper. Non-discussion means, if you ask him a 'why' question, you get bludgeoned with auto-quotes from everwhere else in the Bible except what was being asked.

 

[jwmealy]

Interplanner,

What's inappropriate is dipping into a conversation for the sole purpose of poisoning someone else's reputation in the eyes of a newcomer (like me). This is called "gossip," and I ask you as one Christian to another to refrain from doing it on threads that I start. I've observed, within a very few posts, the shortcomings you point out, but I'm still interested in pursuing the conversation. I'm a big boy--I'll get tired of the conversation when I get tired of it. I've got my own goals in this dialogue. If you're not interested, and the conversation irritates you, the appropriate thing to do is stay out of it.

With goodwill,

Webb

 

[jwmealy]

Bible2,

You've said that most of what's in the Book of Revelation is literal. Let's work with that together for a while, if you're willing. First, a definition of "literal."

Literal, in the context of a visionary book, can have two senses.

1. A statement is to be taken literally if it is intended to be taken as non-metaphorical, which is to say, the words are intended to carry their ordinary, everyday sense, and are not a figure of speech. For example, if I say "That was a train-wreck," I am being literal if I just saw a train crash. I'm being non-literal if I'm talking about some event or interaction that went very, very wrong.

2. A description of something that has been seen is intended to be taken literally if it is intended to be taken as referring directly, and in an ordinary way, to the things and characteristics it describes. For example, John sees a vision of seven gold lampstands. If we take his description literally, that means we think he means to convey to us that he saw seven ordinary and physical lampstands, made of the familiar element gold (Au), which, if one walked up to them, one could touch in an ordinary, physical way--not exclusively in a dream experience, not exclusively in a visionary experience, but in every-day physical reality.

Is this a fair definition of literal versus non-literal?

 

[Bible2]

Yes, if the lampstands are understood as representing something else (Revelation 1:20b).

 

[jwmealy]

OK, Bible2, so we have a baseline of common understanding. We know that some things John sees in Revelation are not to be taken literally for the simple reason that John explains them to us as (visual) symbols for something else--e.g. the seven stars "are" (to be understood as symbolic of) the angels of the seven churches, and the seven lampstands "are" (to be understood as symbolic of) the seven churches (Rev. 1:20). Similarly, the bowls of incense that John sees sending up smoke before God (as in the Jewish Temple) "are" (to be understood as symbolic of) the prayers of the holy ones (Rev. 5:8). You will not go anywhere in the universe--or elsewhere--and find ordinary, tangible, physical golden lampstands and bowls which are the ones that that John saw. He understood himself to be seeing something symbolic, not real (see, similarly, Jer. 1:11-16). Now I'm going to ask you about the literalness of some specific things John sees.

 

[jwmealy]

Literalism in Revelation Question 1
On Rev. 1:1

Do you believe that John actually saw what he describes in his visions? (I do--many others, however, believe that the form of his apocalypse is a literary convention, and he is making it all up in order to communicate his message of resistance.)