Understanding "the beginning" and "the end"

[sovereigngrace]

Yes, you did. Well done, and excellent point.

I don't have all the answers, but I can not refute what scripture clearly states.

Matthew 5:18
For verily I say unto you, till heaven and earth pass, one jot or one tittle shall in no wise pass from the law, till all be fulfilled.

This tells me that heaven and earth will indeed pass away when the law is passed away, as all was fulfilled when the old covenant was destroyed leaving only the kingdom of Christ, an everlasting kingdom. And since I believe the law has now passed away, I must logically also believe that the "heaven and earth" referenced here, have passed.

Obviously if this is the literal heaven and earth, then this makes no sense, therefore it must not mean the literal heaven and earth. Either that, or the law is still in full effect, and I can not accept that.

Furthermore, if Jesus literally meant that the earth would pass away then he would be contradicting Psalm 104:5 (He set the earth on its foundations, so that it should never be moved.) and Ecclesiastes 1:4 (A generation goes, and a generation comes, but the earth remains forever.) so that I also can not accept.

Now how does the concept of "heaven and earth" referring to the temple make sense? There are a number of examples. The following verse tells us that heaven and earth are reserved for fire on the day of judgment.

2 Peter 3:7
By the same word the present heavens and earth are reserved for fire, being kept for the day of judgment and destruction of the ungodly.

The day of judgment was 70 AD, and the temple was destroyed by fire. This is fulfilled prophecy.

Now look at Revelation 21:1.

Then I saw ‘a new heaven and a new earth,’ for the first heaven and the first earth had passed away, and there was no longer any sea.

At first glance this verse seems pretty clear, but have you ever wondered why it says "there was no longer any sea"? That never made any sense to me until now. Clearly this reference to the sea is symbolic, not literal for it wouldn't be a victory of any sort to have no more physical sea on a physical earth. Why would we want that? And why if this is no victory, would it even be mentioned? It's mentioned because it's symbolic.

The sea in this verse is a symbolic reference to the gentile nations. The reason there's no more "sea" is because there are no longer any gentile nations, that is those outside of the realm of salvation (Ephesians 2). We all now have access to salvation, since Jesus died for our sins, we are all now citizens of Israel and in this way there is now no more sea, and recognizing that this too is fulfilled prophecy we can be quite certain that the "new heaven and new earth" is a symbolic reference to the new temple, which is the body of Christ.

You build your theology upon a faulty premise that you have obviously been taught by your Preterist teachers.

There is a big difference between the ceremonial law that ended when Jesus gave up the ghost and the veil was rent in 2 and the moral law that still exists today - and points sinners to Jesus.

Some Christians are under the false impression that the law of God is bad or redundant. It is not! In fact, Romans 7:12 tells us: “the law is holy, and the commandment holy, and just, and good."

Romans 7: 14: “the law is spiritual.”

The fact is, there had to be a divine standard or measuring stick to expose the depravity of the natural man. Without it, man is deceived into thinking right is wrong and wrong is right. Also, he has no natural ability to know he is offending God.

Paul says in Romans 3:20, “for by the law is the knowledge of sin.”

Rom 7:7 What shall we say then? Is the law sin? God forbid. Nay, I had not known sin, but by the law: for I had not known lust, except the law had said, Thou shalt not covet.

· The law was given to expose the old man.
· Grace was given to liberate the new man.

The problem with the law of God was, and is: it couldn’t save anyone and it couldn’t remove one single sin. In fact, the only thing it could do was show man his wretched state!

Romans 7:13: Was then that which is good made death unto me? God forbid. But sin, that it might appear sin, working death in me by that which is good; that sin by the commandment might become exceeding sinful.”

The law was really just a mirror to look into to show us exactly who we are. It could not rescue us from our miserable state. But it did give us an accurate revelation of the type of person we actually are.

A mirror is good, it is beneficial, but we do not always appreciate what we see.

I am convinced, every so often when we think that we’ve got all our ducks in a row, when we get too big for our boots, when compromise starts to arise, where pride kicks in, or when an attitude manifests, or when rebellion comes to the fore, the Holy Spirit is apt to give us a little glimpse of the law of God.

This stops us getting proud or looking to ourselves for any hope!

Romans 7:7: “Is the law sin? God forbid. No, I would not have known sin, but by the law: for I would not have known lust, except the law had said, Thou shalt not covet.”

Those religious people that you meet outside that tell you “they deserve to get into heaven because they are a good person,” testify that they have not had a look into the law of God. They have no true revelation of who they really are, or they would not even think of presenting their own pitiful religious efforts as some type of meritorious means of getting into heaven. When they tell you they are a good person they are admitting that they are a child of the devil. They are admitting that they are blind, deceived and deluded.

After all, the Book says that there is none good but God!

David Wilkerson asks, in his classic sermon Perfect Righteousness: “is there anyone brazen enough to think he can stand before the throne of Jesus Christ and present something of his own doing -- good works, good behavior, all the dos and don'ts he observed -- and call it perfect righteousness? No -- never! Such a man will find himself on that day wearing filthy rags!”

Brother/sister, if you can be good enough, then the cross was a joke and God the father was a tyrant!

2 Corinthians 3 describes the law of God for what it is:

6 the letter killeth
7 the ministration of death, written and engraven in stones,
9 the ministration of condemnation
10 had no glory

We all know that God is holy and that He requires us to be holy. We equally know that we all fall short of His perfect law.

But, the law of God is simply there to show us the holiness of God and the sinfulness of man. It also reveals God’s righteous character. But no one can perfectly keep the law because it is perfect and we are imperfect.

I think one of the things that confuses Christians is: what purpose does the law play in the lives of Christians, apart from condemn them? Is it still alive? Does it exist? Does it have any relevance to a Christian? Is the law redundant now for a believer? Is it possible for us to keep it?

Galatians 3:21-29 confirms: “Is the law then against the promises of God? God forbid: for if there had been a law given which could have given life, verily righteousness should have been by the law. But the scripture hath concluded all under sin, that the promise by faith of Jesus Christ might be given to them that believe. But before faith came, we were kept under the law, shut up unto the faith which should afterwards be revealed. Wherefore the law was our schoolmaster to bring us unto Christ, that we might be justified by faith. But after that faith is come, we are no longer under a schoolmaster. For ye are all the children of God by faith in Christ Jesus.”

Now, you need to get this this eve: whilst the law is still holy, good and moral, its prime purpose for the believer is that it points them to Jesus Christ. It is a signpost!

When a Christian starts to stray, when a Christian starts to wander, when a Christian starts to rebel, they see the law of God pointing them back in the direction of Jesus Christ.

Heb 7:19

19 For the law made nothing perfect, but the bringing in of a better hope did; by the which we draw nigh unto God.

I have good news for you this eve: God has provided someone more solid and sure, trustworthy and dependable, than is you, in order for you to make heaven.

Do you know why?

Because He knew you would fall short. He knew you were weak. He knew you would fail. He knew it was impossible for us to keep the law perfectly.

After all,

· The old covenant was based on man’s obedience.
· The new covenant was based upon Christ’s obedience.

Which would you rather trust? Where would you rather place your hope?

Jesus said in Matthew 5:17-18: “Think not that I am come to destroy the law, or the prophets: I am not come to destroy, but to fulfil.”

Our salvation is built solely and wholly upon Christ's keeping the law. We cannot keep the law. The pole is too high.

If you have ever tried to keep it, then you will know that it is futile task! I would rather place my hope in Jesus Christ!

Our faith is therefore 100% in the law-keeper - Jesus Christ.

Romans 10:4 says: “For Christ is the end of the law for righteousness to every one that believeth.”

He lived the life we could never live. He died the death we could never die. We are justified by simple faith in the perfect law-fulfiller, not by keeping the works of the law - which no man could do.

1 Timothy 1:8: “But we know that the law is good, if a man use it lawfully; Knowing this, that the law is not made for a righteous man, but for the lawless and disobedient.”

Why? Because the true believer knows he cannot fulfil the law. He has resigned himself to that upon salvation. He has placed his trust in Christ – who alone was able to fulfil the law. The believer’s substitute has perfectly fulfilled the law thus securing his eternal salvation. That is why it is all of faith.

I love verse 20 of Romans 5. It says: where sin abounded, grace did much more abound:

What is grace?

· Grace is Jesus Christ.
· Grace is God’s unmerited favour.
· Grace is God doing for us what we could never do for ourselves, and what we will never deserve
· Grace is God’s riches at Christ’s expense.

Basically: the Creator took upon Himself what pertained to the creature, and the creature took upon Himself what pertained to the Creator.

The shedding of the blood satisfied the Father and reconciled the sinner to God, securing eternal redemption (1 John 1:7).

Galatians 3:13 Christ hath redeemed us from the curse of the law, being made a curse for us:

Galatians 4:4-5

4 when the fulness of the time was come, God sent forth his Son, made of a woman, made under the law,
5 To redeem them that were under the law, that we might receive the adoption of sons.

Christ experienced the wrath of God, so that we could experience the grace of God.

 

[Andrewn]

I don't have all the answers, but I can not refute what scripture clearly states.

Matthew 5:18
For verily I say unto you, till heaven and earth pass, one jot or one tittle shall in no wise pass from the law, till all be fulfilled.

This tells me that heaven and earth will indeed pass away when the law is passed away, as all was fulfilled when the old covenant was destroyed leaving only the kingdom of Christ, an everlasting kingdom. And since I believe the law has now passed away, I must logically also believe that the "heaven and earth" referenced here, have passed.

You say that the Law has passed away and heaven and earth have passed away. But the Pulpit Commentary explains that "nothing in the Law shall pass away" even "with a new heaven and earth, all the contents of the Law will be completely realized so that even then nothing in the Law shall pass away. On the contrary, every part of it, moral or ceremonial, shall then, by being fully understood and obeyed in its true meaning, enter on its full and complete existence (γένητα)."

I apologize for the long quotation, but I'd like to look at the whole passage, which shows how we are commanded to fulfill the law:

Mat 5:16 In the same way, let your light shine before men so they may see your good works and glorify your Father in heaven.”
17 “Do not think that I came to abolish the Law or the Prophets! I did not come to abolish, but to fulfill (πληρῶσαι).
18 Amen, I tell you, until heaven and earth pass away, not the smallest letter or serif shall ever pass away from the Law until all things have come to pass (γένηται).
19 Therefore, whoever breaks one of the least of these commandments, and teaches others the same, shall be called least in the kingdom of heaven. But whoever keeps and teaches them, this one shall be called great in the kingdom of heaven.
20 For I tell you that unless your righteousness exceeds that of the Pharisees and Law experts, you shall never enter the kingdom of heaven!
21 “You have heard it was said to those of old, ‘You shall not murder, and whoever commits murder shall be subject to judgment.’
22 But I tell you that everyone who is angry with his brother shall be subject to judgment. And whoever says to his brother, ‘Raca’ shall be subject to the council; and whoever says, ‘You fool!’ shall be subject to fiery Gehenna.
23 “Therefore if you are presenting your offering upon the altar, and there remember that your brother has something against you,
24 leave your offering there before the altar and go. First be reconciled to your brother, and then come and present your offering.

Observe that our Lord does not say that the Law will then pass away. Now consider the parallel passage in Luke:

Luk 16:15 He said to them, “You are the ones who justify yourselves before other people, but God knows your hearts. What is highly valued by people is deeply offensive to God.
16 Until John, there was only the Law and the Prophets. Since then, the good news of God’s kingdom is preached, and everyone is urged to enter it.
17 It’s easier for heaven and earth to pass away than for the smallest stroke of a pen in the Law to drop out.

Is the Law God's words? Then consider the eternity of Christ's words in the following verses:

Mat 24:35 Heaven and earth will pass away, but My words will never pass away.

Mar 13:31 Heaven and earth will pass away, but My words will never pass away.

Luk 21:33 Heaven and earth will pass away, but My words will never pass away.

1Pe 1:25 But the word of the Lord endures forever.” And this is the word that was proclaimed as Good News to you.

2Pe 3:12 looking for and hastening the coming of the day of God. In that day the heavens will be dissolved by fire, and the elements will melt in the intense heat.
13 But in keeping with His promise, we look for new heavens and a new earth, where righteousness dwells.

Even in the new heavens and earth, we'll still need righteousness of the Law.

 

[Freedm]

Some Christians are under the false impression that the law of God is bad or redundant. It is not! In fact, Romans 7:12 tells us: “the law is holy, and the commandment holy, and just, and good."

Not sure why you're talking about the law when the conversation was around heaven and earth.

 

[Christian Gedge]

Not sure why you're talking about the law when the conversation was around heaven and earth.

You said on post#240 that heaven and earth would pass away when the law passed away. Then you developed your logic, "I believe the law has now passed away, must logically (mean) that the "heaven and earth" referenced here, have passed." Then you gave a figurative interpretation of heaven and earth passing in AD70 !!!

Im sorry, but we have to confront that faulty logic. The old law did indeed "pass away" for all who believe. (Galatians 3:24) However, the laws moral requirement are still applicable to those who don't believe.

"We also know that the law is made not for the righteous but for lawbreakers and rebels, the ungodly and sinful, the unholy and irreligious, for those who kill their fathers or mothers, for murderers ... etc" (Timothy 1:9)​

 

[BABerean2]

You said on post#240 that heaven and earth would pass away when the law passed away. Then you developed your logic, "I believe the law has now passed away, must logically (mean) that the "heaven and earth" referenced here, have passed." Then you gave a figurative interpretation of heaven and earth passing in AD70 !!!

Im sorry, but we have to confront that faulty logic. The old law did indeed "pass away" for all who believe. (Galatians 3:24) However, the laws moral requirement are still applicable to those who don't believe.

"We also know that the law is made not for the righteous but for lawbreakers and rebels, the ungodly and sinful, the unholy and irreligious, for those who kill their fathers or mothers, for murderers ... etc" (Timothy 1:9)​

Based on the verse below and several others in the same passage, the standard is higher in the New Covenant.


Christ quotes the Old Covenant and then adds... "But I say..."

Mat 5:27 "You have heard that it was said to those of old, 'YOU SHALL NOT COMMIT ADULTERY.'
Mat 5:28 But I say to you that whoever looks at a woman to lust for her has already committed adultery with her in his heart.


.

 

[sovereigngrace]

Not sure why you're talking about the law when the conversation was around heaven and earth.

But I showed how the moral law still exists. So to does the old heavens and earth. Your whole thesis doesn't add up.

 

[Freedm]

But I showed how the moral law still exists. So to does the NHNE. Your whole thesis doesn't add up.

I see, though I still disagree. There are good arguments on both sides, but I feel like we're just shooting past the bow. Something doesn't quite add up, neither your thesis nor mine. I suspect we're both at least partially right.

 

[sovereigngrace]

I see, though I still disagree. There are good arguments on both sides, but I feel like we're just shooting past the bow. Something doesn't quite add up, neither your thesis nor mine. I suspect we're both at least partially right.

I do not agree.

When are you going to give your "good arguments"? I do not see anything of merit.

 

[Freedm]

I do not agree.

When are you going to give your "good arguments"? I do not see anything of merit.

You will never see anything of merit until you agree, and that's o.k.

 

[sovereigngrace]

You will never see anything of merit until you agree, and that's o.k.

You have definitely not proved any legitimacy for the temple in Jerusalem in AD70 being the heavens and earth. That is frankly ridiculous and fanciful. All you have proven is that you swallowed what your Preterist teachers taught you without testing it by the Word or common sense.

 

[Spiritual Jew]

You will never see anything of merit until you agree, and that's o.k.

You have done absolutely nothing to show that heaven and earth passing away figuratively represented the destruction of the temple and the old covenant in 70 AD. Nothing at all.

You have been shown time and time again that references to heaven and earth in scripture always refer to the literal heaven and to the literal earth that you live on today. You have done nothing to show otherwise.

 

[Freedm]

You have definitely not proved any legitimacy for the temple in Jerusalem in AD70 being the heavens and earth. That is frankly ridiculous and fanciful. All you have proven is that you swallowed what your Preterist teachers taught you without testing it by the Word or common sense.

Clearly I've not been very convincing, but perhaps Jonathan Welton, and the other authors he quotes, can be more so. This is from a book called Raptureless, and while I still doubt that even this you will accept or even consider, for the sake of completeness I'll just leave this here in case anybody wants to consider the evidence.

In Hebrew culture and Scripture, the phrase heaven and earth was a common idiom used to refer to a system of government and specifically to the system of the old covenant Law.

Theologian Gary DeMar uses Second Peter 3 to prove that the end of the age (in Matthew 24:3) was the end of the Mosaic covenant in AD 70. DeMar also quotes the famous commentators John Owen and John Lightfoot on this matter: John Owen (1616–1683) maintained that the “passing of heaven and earth” in 2 Peter 3:5–7 had reference, “not to the last and final judgment of the world, but to that utter desolation and destruction that was to be made of the Judaical church and state” in A.D. 70.

John Brown (1784–1858), commenting on Matthew 5:18, follows the same methodology. “Heaven and earth passing away,” understood literally, is the dissolution of the present system of the universe; and the period when that is to take place, is called the “end of the world.” But a person at all familiar with the phraseology of the Old Testament Scriptures knows that the dissolution of the Mosaic economy, and the establishment of the Christian, is often spoken of as the removing of the old earth and heavens, and the creation of a new earth and new heavens.”

After surveying how this language is used throughout the Bible and in Jewish literature, John Lightfoot applies the “passing away of heaven and earth” to the “destruction of Jerusalem and the whole Jewish state…as if the whole frame of this world were to be dissolved.”1

This is one of the major points of the New Testament, which sadly so many Christians have missed—the removal of the old covenant world and the establishment of the new covenant Kingdom.

Maimonides, the Jewish Philosopher from the 1100s, also confirmed this interpretation of heaven and earth: The Arabs likewise [as the Hebrew prophets] say of a person who has met with a serious accident, “His heavens, together with his earth, have been covered”; and when they speak of the approach of a nation’s prosperity, they say, “The light of the sun and moon has increased,” A new heaven and a new earth has been created,” or they use similar phrases.2

And Josephus records how the Temple (tabernacle) was viewed as a representation of the universe—the heavens and earth: …for if any one do but consider the fabric of the tabernacle, and take a view of the garments of the high priest, and of those vessels which we make use of in our sacred ministration, he will find that our legislator was a divine man, and that we are unjustly reproached by others; for if any one do without prejudice, and with judgment, look upon these things, he will find they were everyone made in way of imitation and representation of the universe. When Moses distinguished the tabernacle into three parts, and allowed two of them to the priests, as a place accessible and common, he denoted the land and the seas, these being of general access to all; but he set apart the third division for God, because heaven is inaccessible to men.3

Thus, when the Temple was destroyed, the Jews saw it as the destruction of the heaven and the earth. And the new covenant that came to replace it can aptly be called a new heaven and a new earth—a new system by which humanity can relate to God.

Hebrews 12 also uses this imagery of heaven and earth to describe the transition from the inferior old covenant to the unshakable and eternal new covenant: See to it that you do not refuse him who speaks. If they did not escape when they refused him who warned them on earth, how much less will we, if we turn away from him who warns us from heaven? At that time his voice shook the earth, but now he has promised, “Once more I will shake not only the earth but also the heavens.” The words “once more” indicate the removing of what can be shaken—that is, created things—so that what cannot be shaken may remain. Therefore, since we are receiving a kingdom that cannot be shaken, let us be thankful, and so worship God acceptably with reverence and awe (Hebrews 12:25–28).

The one last shaking here specifically refers to the removal of the physical, natural Temple age of the first century. The old covenant world was about to be shaken, and only the invisible Kingdom of God would remain once the shaking of AD 70 was finished. Disappointingly, many preachers reference Hebrews 12 when major catastrophes occur, such as earthquakes, economic downturns, wars, and terrorist attacks. They do this because they do not understand its context. The writer of Hebrews was referring to AD 70 and nothing else. This passage is about moving from physical worship (see Heb. 12:18–21) to a spiritual form of worship (see Heb. 12:22–24).

Concerning the Hebrews 12 shaking of the earth and the heavens, James Stuart Russell wrote: What, then, is the great catastrophe symbolically represented as the shaking of the earth and heavens? No doubt it is the over–throw and abolition of the Mosaic dispensation, or the old covenant; the destruction of the Jewish church and state, together with all the institutions and ordinances connected therewith. There were “heavenly things” belonging to that dispensation: the laws, and statutes, and ordinances, which were divine in their origin, and might be properly called the “spiritualia” of Judaism—these were the heavens, which were to be shaken and removed. There were also “earthly things”: the literal Jerusalem, the material temple, the land of Canaan—these were the earth, which was in like manner to be shaken and removed. The symbols are, in fact, equivalent to those employed by our Lord when predicting the doom of Israel. “Immediately after the tribulation of those days shall the sun be darkened, and the moon shall not give her light, and the powers of the heavens shall be shaken.” (Mt 24:29) Both passages refer to the same catastrophe and employ very similar figures; besides which we have the authority of our Lord for fixing the event and the period of which He speaks within the limits of the generation then in existence; that is to say, the references can only be to the judgment of the Jewish nation and the abrogation of the Mosaic economy at the Parousia.4

To this, C.H. Spurgeon adds this reflection on the transition from the old covenant world to the new covenant world: Did you ever regret the absence of the burnt–offering, or the red heifer, or any one of the sacrifices and rites of the Jews? Did you ever pine for the feast of tabernacles, or the dedication? No, because, though these were like the old heavens and earth to the Jewish believers, they have passed away, and we now live under new heavens and a new earth, so far as the dispensation of the divine teaching is concerned. The substance is come, and the shadow has gone: and we do not remember it.5

This is the true meaning of the new heavens and earth. Peter ended his discussion of the melting elements, the destruction of the old covenant world and system, by reminding his readers of the coming new heavens and earth. He then ended this section of his letter by saying: So then, dear friends, since you are looking forward to this, make every effort to be found spotless, blameless and at peace with him. Bear in mind that our Lord’s patience means salvation, just as our dear brother Paul also wrote you with the wisdom that God gave him. He writes the same way in all his letters, speaking in them of these matters. His letters contain some things that are hard to understand, which ignorant and unstable people distort, as they do the other Scriptures, to their own destruction (2 Peter 3:14–16).

Here Peter declared he was writing of the same things that Paul wrote about. As we have seen, when Paul wrote concerning the elements of the world, he was referring to the basic principles of the old covenant. Thus, it is clear Peter was speaking of the passing of the elements of Judaism, not the end of the world or the destruction of the physical earth. In fact, not only was Peter not prophesying the world would be destroyed by fire, but also the New Testament does not contain even a single reference to the destruction of planet earth (the kosmos). Instead, when the New Testament speaks of the destruction of the world, it uses the root word ge, which means “land,” not globe. Not one verse predicts the destruction of the globe!​

 

[Spiritual Jew]

Clearly I've not been very convincing, but perhaps Jonathan Welton, and the other authors he quotes, can be more so. This is from a book called Raptureless, and while I still doubt that even this you will accept or even consider, for the sake of completeness I'll just leave this here in case anybody wants to consider the evidence.

In Hebrew culture and Scripture, the phrase heaven and earth was a common idiom used to refer to a system of government and specifically to the system of the old covenant Law.

Theologian Gary DeMar uses Second Peter 3 to prove that the end of the age (in Matthew 24:3) was the end of the Mosaic covenant in AD 70. DeMar also quotes the famous commentators John Owen and John Lightfoot on this matter: John Owen (1616–1683) maintained that the “passing of heaven and earth” in 2 Peter 3:5–7 had reference, “not to the last and final judgment of the world, but to that utter desolation and destruction that was to be made of the Judaical church and state” in A.D. 70.

John Brown (1784–1858), commenting on Matthew 5:18, follows the same methodology. “Heaven and earth passing away,” understood literally, is the dissolution of the present system of the universe; and the period when that is to take place, is called the “end of the world.” But a person at all familiar with the phraseology of the Old Testament Scriptures knows that the dissolution of the Mosaic economy, and the establishment of the Christian, is often spoken of as the removing of the old earth and heavens, and the creation of a new earth and new heavens.”

After surveying how this language is used throughout the Bible and in Jewish literature, John Lightfoot applies the “passing away of heaven and earth” to the “destruction of Jerusalem and the whole Jewish state…as if the whole frame of this world were to be dissolved.”1

This is one of the major points of the New Testament, which sadly so many Christians have missed—the removal of the old covenant world and the establishment of the new covenant Kingdom.

Maimonides, the Jewish Philosopher from the 1100s, also confirmed this interpretation of heaven and earth: The Arabs likewise [as the Hebrew prophets] say of a person who has met with a serious accident, “His heavens, together with his earth, have been covered”; and when they speak of the approach of a nation’s prosperity, they say, “The light of the sun and moon has increased,” A new heaven and a new earth has been created,” or they use similar phrases.2

And Josephus records how the Temple (tabernacle) was viewed as a representation of the universe—the heavens and earth: …for if any one do but consider the fabric of the tabernacle, and take a view of the garments of the high priest, and of those vessels which we make use of in our sacred ministration, he will find that our legislator was a divine man, and that we are unjustly reproached by others; for if any one do without prejudice, and with judgment, look upon these things, he will find they were everyone made in way of imitation and representation of the universe. When Moses distinguished the tabernacle into three parts, and allowed two of them to the priests, as a place accessible and common, he denoted the land and the seas, these being of general access to all; but he set apart the third division for God, because heaven is inaccessible to men.3

Thus, when the Temple was destroyed, the Jews saw it as the destruction of the heaven and the earth. And the new covenant that came to replace it can aptly be called a new heaven and a new earth—a new system by which humanity can relate to God.

Hebrews 12 also uses this imagery of heaven and earth to describe the transition from the inferior old covenant to the unshakable and eternal new covenant: See to it that you do not refuse him who speaks. If they did not escape when they refused him who warned them on earth, how much less will we, if we turn away from him who warns us from heaven? At that time his voice shook the earth, but now he has promised, “Once more I will shake not only the earth but also the heavens.” The words “once more” indicate the removing of what can be shaken—that is, created things—so that what cannot be shaken may remain. Therefore, since we are receiving a kingdom that cannot be shaken, let us be thankful, and so worship God acceptably with reverence and awe (Hebrews 12:25–28).

The one last shaking here specifically refers to the removal of the physical, natural Temple age of the first century. The old covenant world was about to be shaken, and only the invisible Kingdom of God would remain once the shaking of AD 70 was finished. Disappointingly, many preachers reference Hebrews 12 when major catastrophes occur, such as earthquakes, economic downturns, wars, and terrorist attacks. They do this because they do not understand its context. The writer of Hebrews was referring to AD 70 and nothing else. This passage is about moving from physical worship (see Heb. 12:18–21) to a spiritual form of worship (see Heb. 12:22–24).

Concerning the Hebrews 12 shaking of the earth and the heavens, James Stuart Russell wrote: What, then, is the great catastrophe symbolically represented as the shaking of the earth and heavens? No doubt it is the over–throw and abolition of the Mosaic dispensation, or the old covenant; the destruction of the Jewish church and state, together with all the institutions and ordinances connected therewith. There were “heavenly things” belonging to that dispensation: the laws, and statutes, and ordinances, which were divine in their origin, and might be properly called the “spiritualia” of Judaism—these were the heavens, which were to be shaken and removed. There were also “earthly things”: the literal Jerusalem, the material temple, the land of Canaan—these were the earth, which was in like manner to be shaken and removed. The symbols are, in fact, equivalent to those employed by our Lord when predicting the doom of Israel. “Immediately after the tribulation of those days shall the sun be darkened, and the moon shall not give her light, and the powers of the heavens shall be shaken.” (Mt 24:29) Both passages refer to the same catastrophe and employ very similar figures; besides which we have the authority of our Lord for fixing the event and the period of which He speaks within the limits of the generation then in existence; that is to say, the references can only be to the judgment of the Jewish nation and the abrogation of the Mosaic economy at the Parousia.4

To this, C.H. Spurgeon adds this reflection on the transition from the old covenant world to the new covenant world: Did you ever regret the absence of the burnt–offering, or the red heifer, or any one of the sacrifices and rites of the Jews? Did you ever pine for the feast of tabernacles, or the dedication? No, because, though these were like the old heavens and earth to the Jewish believers, they have passed away, and we now live under new heavens and a new earth, so far as the dispensation of the divine teaching is concerned. The substance is come, and the shadow has gone: and we do not remember it.5

This is the true meaning of the new heavens and earth. Peter ended his discussion of the melting elements, the destruction of the old covenant world and system, by reminding his readers of the coming new heavens and earth. He then ended this section of his letter by saying: So then, dear friends, since you are looking forward to this, make every effort to be found spotless, blameless and at peace with him. Bear in mind that our Lord’s patience means salvation, just as our dear brother Paul also wrote you with the wisdom that God gave him. He writes the same way in all his letters, speaking in them of these matters. His letters contain some things that are hard to understand, which ignorant and unstable people distort, as they do the other Scriptures, to their own destruction (2 Peter 3:14–16).

Here Peter declared he was writing of the same things that Paul wrote about. As we have seen, when Paul wrote concerning the elements of the world, he was referring to the basic principles of the old covenant. Thus, it is clear Peter was speaking of the passing of the elements of Judaism, not the end of the world or the destruction of the physical earth. In fact, not only was Peter not prophesying the world would be destroyed by fire, but also the New Testament does not contain even a single reference to the destruction of planet earth (the kosmos). Instead, when the New Testament speaks of the destruction of the world, it uses the root word ge, which means “land,” not globe. Not one verse predicts the destruction of the globe!​

This article is a bunch of nonsense. The old covenant was made obsolete when Jesus nailed it to the cross and established the new covenant with His bood. To think that the "old covenant age" ended in 70 AD is false teaching.

Colossians 2:13 And you, being dead in your sins and the uncircumcision of your flesh, hath he quickened together with him, having forgiven you all trespasses; 14 Blotting out the handwriting of ordinances that was against us, which was contrary to us, and took it out of the way, nailing it to his cross;

To think that the destruction of the temple ended the old covenant instead of Christ's shed blood on the cross is blasphemy as far as I'm concerned.

Heaven and earth never refer to the temple and always refer to the literal heaven and earth. To suggest that 2nd Peter 3 is referring to the temple and end of the old covenant and not the literal heaven and earth makes no sense whatsoever. Peter directly compared the fiery destruction of the heavens and the earth to what happened with the flood in Noah's day.

Why would he compare the destruction of the temple and old covenant system directly to the flood? That would make no sense. It makes far more sense that he compared the destruction that happened on the earth in Noah's day to the destruction that will happen in the future when Christ comes again. The scope of destruction will be the same. It will be global. How else will the new heavens and new earth be ushered in except that the heavens and earth, as they are now, first need to be burned up and renewed?

 

[sovereigngrace]

Clearly I've not been very convincing, but perhaps Jonathan Welton, and the other authors he quotes, can be more so. This is from a book called Raptureless, and while I still doubt that even this you will accept or even consider, for the sake of completeness I'll just leave this here in case anybody wants to consider the evidence.

In Hebrew culture and Scripture, the phrase heaven and earth was a common idiom used to refer to a system of government and specifically to the system of the old covenant Law.

Theologian Gary DeMar uses Second Peter 3 to prove that the end of the age (in Matthew 24:3) was the end of the Mosaic covenant in AD 70. DeMar also quotes the famous commentators John Owen and John Lightfoot on this matter: John Owen (1616–1683) maintained that the “passing of heaven and earth” in 2 Peter 3:5–7 had reference, “not to the last and final judgment of the world, but to that utter desolation and destruction that was to be made of the Judaical church and state” in A.D. 70.

John Brown (1784–1858), commenting on Matthew 5:18, follows the same methodology. “Heaven and earth passing away,” understood literally, is the dissolution of the present system of the universe; and the period when that is to take place, is called the “end of the world.” But a person at all familiar with the phraseology of the Old Testament Scriptures knows that the dissolution of the Mosaic economy, and the establishment of the Christian, is often spoken of as the removing of the old earth and heavens, and the creation of a new earth and new heavens.”

After surveying how this language is used throughout the Bible and in Jewish literature, John Lightfoot applies the “passing away of heaven and earth” to the “destruction of Jerusalem and the whole Jewish state…as if the whole frame of this world were to be dissolved.”1

This is one of the major points of the New Testament, which sadly so many Christians have missed—the removal of the old covenant world and the establishment of the new covenant Kingdom.

Maimonides, the Jewish Philosopher from the 1100s, also confirmed this interpretation of heaven and earth: The Arabs likewise [as the Hebrew prophets] say of a person who has met with a serious accident, “His heavens, together with his earth, have been covered”; and when they speak of the approach of a nation’s prosperity, they say, “The light of the sun and moon has increased,” A new heaven and a new earth has been created,” or they use similar phrases.2

And Josephus records how the Temple (tabernacle) was viewed as a representation of the universe—the heavens and earth: …for if any one do but consider the fabric of the tabernacle, and take a view of the garments of the high priest, and of those vessels which we make use of in our sacred ministration, he will find that our legislator was a divine man, and that we are unjustly reproached by others; for if any one do without prejudice, and with judgment, look upon these things, he will find they were everyone made in way of imitation and representation of the universe. When Moses distinguished the tabernacle into three parts, and allowed two of them to the priests, as a place accessible and common, he denoted the land and the seas, these being of general access to all; but he set apart the third division for God, because heaven is inaccessible to men.3

Thus, when the Temple was destroyed, the Jews saw it as the destruction of the heaven and the earth. And the new covenant that came to replace it can aptly be called a new heaven and a new earth—a new system by which humanity can relate to God.

Hebrews 12 also uses this imagery of heaven and earth to describe the transition from the inferior old covenant to the unshakable and eternal new covenant: See to it that you do not refuse him who speaks. If they did not escape when they refused him who warned them on earth, how much less will we, if we turn away from him who warns us from heaven? At that time his voice shook the earth, but now he has promised, “Once more I will shake not only the earth but also the heavens.” The words “once more” indicate the removing of what can be shaken—that is, created things—so that what cannot be shaken may remain. Therefore, since we are receiving a kingdom that cannot be shaken, let us be thankful, and so worship God acceptably with reverence and awe (Hebrews 12:25–28).

The one last shaking here specifically refers to the removal of the physical, natural Temple age of the first century. The old covenant world was about to be shaken, and only the invisible Kingdom of God would remain once the shaking of AD 70 was finished. Disappointingly, many preachers reference Hebrews 12 when major catastrophes occur, such as earthquakes, economic downturns, wars, and terrorist attacks. They do this because they do not understand its context. The writer of Hebrews was referring to AD 70 and nothing else. This passage is about moving from physical worship (see Heb. 12:18–21) to a spiritual form of worship (see Heb. 12:22–24).

Concerning the Hebrews 12 shaking of the earth and the heavens, James Stuart Russell wrote: What, then, is the great catastrophe symbolically represented as the shaking of the earth and heavens? No doubt it is the over–throw and abolition of the Mosaic dispensation, or the old covenant; the destruction of the Jewish church and state, together with all the institutions and ordinances connected therewith. There were “heavenly things” belonging to that dispensation: the laws, and statutes, and ordinances, which were divine in their origin, and might be properly called the “spiritualia” of Judaism—these were the heavens, which were to be shaken and removed. There were also “earthly things”: the literal Jerusalem, the material temple, the land of Canaan—these were the earth, which was in like manner to be shaken and removed. The symbols are, in fact, equivalent to those employed by our Lord when predicting the doom of Israel. “Immediately after the tribulation of those days shall the sun be darkened, and the moon shall not give her light, and the powers of the heavens shall be shaken.” (Mt 24:29) Both passages refer to the same catastrophe and employ very similar figures; besides which we have the authority of our Lord for fixing the event and the period of which He speaks within the limits of the generation then in existence; that is to say, the references can only be to the judgment of the Jewish nation and the abrogation of the Mosaic economy at the Parousia.4

To this, C.H. Spurgeon adds this reflection on the transition from the old covenant world to the new covenant world: Did you ever regret the absence of the burnt–offering, or the red heifer, or any one of the sacrifices and rites of the Jews? Did you ever pine for the feast of tabernacles, or the dedication? No, because, though these were like the old heavens and earth to the Jewish believers, they have passed away, and we now live under new heavens and a new earth, so far as the dispensation of the divine teaching is concerned. The substance is come, and the shadow has gone: and we do not remember it.5

This is the true meaning of the new heavens and earth. Peter ended his discussion of the melting elements, the destruction of the old covenant world and system, by reminding his readers of the coming new heavens and earth. He then ended this section of his letter by saying: So then, dear friends, since you are looking forward to this, make every effort to be found spotless, blameless and at peace with him. Bear in mind that our Lord’s patience means salvation, just as our dear brother Paul also wrote you with the wisdom that God gave him. He writes the same way in all his letters, speaking in them of these matters. His letters contain some things that are hard to understand, which ignorant and unstable people distort, as they do the other Scriptures, to their own destruction (2 Peter 3:14–16).

Here Peter declared he was writing of the same things that Paul wrote about. As we have seen, when Paul wrote concerning the elements of the world, he was referring to the basic principles of the old covenant. Thus, it is clear Peter was speaking of the passing of the elements of Judaism, not the end of the world or the destruction of the physical earth. In fact, not only was Peter not prophesying the world would be destroyed by fire, but also the New Testament does not contain even a single reference to the destruction of planet earth (the kosmos). Instead, when the New Testament speaks of the destruction of the world, it uses the root word ge, which means “land,” not globe. Not one verse predicts the destruction of the globe!​

You are not presenting any biblical evidence to support your claims, just the opinion of men. That does not cut it. Can I remind you: this is a Bible Discussion Forum? That is my issue with your speculation. There is no biblical instruction to support your thesis. I suspect you realize that, because of the route you have now went down. The fact is: heavens and earth in Scripture always refers to heavens and earth. I have shown you that. I could list numerous theologians over the years that hold to my position. But that proves nothing. I always find, when posters resort to listing sympathetic commentators to support their thoughts, they have lost the debate. They are bereft of solid Scripture.

 

[Freedm]

Don't be so closed minded to think that important evidence to help us understand the scriptures can not exist outside of the scriptures. You're tying your own hands behind your back if you do that.

 

[Freedm]

This article is a bunch of nonsense. The old covenant was made obsolete when Jesus nailed it to the cross and established the new covenant with His bood. To think that the "old covenant age" ended in 70 AD is false teaching.

Don't be so quick to claim "false teaching" of positions with which you disagree. We should all remain humble enough to admit we may be wrong.

The old covenant being obsolete is not the same as the old covenant being destroyed. If it were not so, Paul would not have said that the obsolete would "soon disappear".

Hebrews 8:13
By calling this covenant “new,” he has made the first one obsolete; and what is obsolete and outdated will soon disappear.

This verse alone proves that the old covenant had not yet disappeared after it was made obsolete.

 

[sovereigngrace]

Don't be so closed minded to think that important evidence to help us understand the scriptures can not exist outside of the scriptures. You're tying your own hands behind your back if you do that.

There are more and more red flags flying by the day. This is the road that all the apostate beliefs go down and is very dangerous. Clearly your views are extra-biblical. Sad!

 

[sovereigngrace]

Don't be so quick to claim "false teaching" of positions with which you disagree. We should all remain humble enough to admit we may be wrong.

The old covenant being obsolete is not the same as the old covenant being destroyed. If it were not so, Paul would not have said that the obsolete would "soon disappear".

Hebrews 8:13
By calling this covenant “new,” he has made the first one obsolete; and what is obsolete and outdated will soon disappear.

This verse alone proves that the old covenant had not yet disappeared after it was made obsolete.

After Christ’s death and the ripping of the curtain in two, the Jewish temple in Jerusalem was rendered wholly redundant. Its usefulness was over. It was obsolete. It remaining standing up until AD70 did not mean it had any further earthly purpose, or that the old covenant remained in effect. It was just like a human corpse awaiting burial. It had no vitality, no relevance and no purpose. Once Christ died, the old covenant died. Degeneration immediately set in, just like the decay that kicks in when a human gives up the ghost.

2 Corinthians 3:11: “For if that which is done away (katargeo or rendered entirely idle, useless) was glorious, much more that which remaineth is glorious.”

Hebrews 8:13: “In that he saith, A new covenant, he hath made the first old (palaioō, worn out, decayed, declared obsolete). Now that which decayeth (palaioō, worn out, decayed, declared obsolete) and waxeth old (gerasko) is ready to vanish away.”

Even though a corpse may look asleep it is lifeless. All you have is rotting flesh. Decomposition has set in immediately. It is gradually decaying, and will ultimately vanish away. But that entity has no further earthly use. Its time is up.

There cannot be 2 covenants ongoing at the one time. That is absurd! One superseded the other. There cannot be 2 competing priesthoods. One replaced the other.

The book of Hebrews destroys any notion of the continuation of the old covenant priests. It is quite inconceivable that this defunct priesthood would be needed after the commencement of God's true eternal priesthood. Hebrews 7:19 tells us: “the law made nothing perfect, but the bringing in of a better hope did; by the which we draw nigh unto God.” Christ owns the only priestly office that God recognises for all eternity. Hebrews 7:22 confirms, “By so much was Jesus made a surety of a better testament.” For “he is the mediator of a better covenant, which was established upon better promises” (Hebrews 8:6).

Remember, Hebrews was written in-between the cross and AD70!

We have entered into a new divine arrangement that supersedes the shadow, type and figure. Man has one true heavenly high priest and requires none other. For you to argue for two competing priesthood underlines the dangers of your teaching.

 

[Spiritual Jew]

Don't be so quick to claim "false teaching" of positions with which you disagree. We should all remain humble enough to admit we may be wrong.

The old covenant being obsolete is not the same as the old covenant being destroyed. If it were not so, Paul would not have said that the obsolete would "soon disappear".

Hebrews 8:13
By calling this covenant “new,” he has made the first one obsolete; and what is obsolete and outdated will soon disappear.

This verse alone proves that the old covenant had not yet disappeared after it was made obsolete.

It has nothing to do with being humble. I know that, with His death and resurrection, Jesus ended the old covenant and put the new covenant into effect. I know that every bit as much as we both know that He died for our sins and rose again from the dead. I make no apologies for calling your view that the old covenant didn't end until 70 AD a false teaching.

It was only the remaining traces of the old covenant that were still visible (namely the temple buildings) but that does not mean the old covenant was still in effect at that point. Colossians 2:14 makes it very clear that Jesus took away the old covenant with its burdensome ordinances and nailed it to His cross.

Also, if the old covenant was still in effect after His death then you would need to explain why Paul ranted against the Galatians for following the old covenant works of the law.

Galatians 3:1 O foolish Galatians, who hath bewitched you, that ye should not obey the truth, before whose eyes Jesus Christ hath been evidently set forth, crucified among you? 2 This only would I learn of you, Received ye the Spirit by the works of the law, or by the hearing of faith? 3 Are ye so foolish? having begun in the Spirit, are ye now made perfect by the flesh?

Paul called the Galatians fools for still trying to live under the old covenant. They should have known that the new covenant was in effect and that faith in Christ and obeying Christ was what they should be doing.

 

[Freedm]

There are more and more red flags flying by the day. This is the road that all the apostate beliefs go down and is very dangerous. Clearly your views are extra-biblical. Sad!

[insert eye roll emoji here]