What is the river of life in Revelations

[Guest]

And he showed me a pure river of water of life, clear as crystal, proceeding from the throne of God and of the Lamb.

I will give of the fountain of the water of life freely to him who thirsts

And the Spirit and the bride say, Come. And let him that heareth say, Come. And let him that is athirst come. And whosoever will, let him take the water of life freely.

I have my opinion but I am looking for other opinions so could anyone give me thier 2 cents worth

God Bless,

Jim

[Guest]

The Tree of Life bears its crop twelve times a year. God's people will eat the fruit so the water is there to wash it all down. OK, maybe not.

I actually see the Tree of Life and the Water of Life as both representing eternal life. I believe this is just symbolic language that carries that meaning.

What's your take?

[Guest]

It could be the same river referred to by Ezekiel:

1 Then he brought me back to the door of the temple; and there was water, flowing from under the threshold of the temple toward the east, for the front of the temple faced east; the water was flowing from under the right side of the temple, south of the altar... 7 When I returned, there, along the bank of the river, were very many trees on one side and the other.... 12 Along the bank of the river, on this side and that, will grow all kinds of trees used for food; their leaves will not wither, and their fruit will not fail. They will bear fruit every month, because their water flows from the sanctuary. Their fruit will be for food, and their leaves for medicine.”
Ezekiel 47

Futurist alert, futurist alert!!!!!

[Guest]

Revelation 22:1-6 is definitely a reference to Ezekiel 47. The River of Life is symbolic of the life that flows out from Jesus, since the incarnation to the present and into the future.

... but whoever drinks the water I give him will never thirst. Indeed, the water I give him will become in him a spring of water welling up to eternal life. (John 4:14)

[Guest]

JC,

I see the river of life as salvation coming from Jesus, who gives us life and it is spiritual and not a literal river. Yet I wonder if there is a deeper meaning.

Ely,

Rev 21:22 And I saw no temple therein: for the Lord God Almighty and the Lamb are the temple of it.

In the New Jerusalem there will be no temple as stated in Rev 21:22 so the only place this river appears to come from is the Lord. To be honest if there was to be a new Temple for Isreal then to me that would make the entire NT a lie. As far as I can see in the NT the Church is the Body of Christ and the Temple. Anyone who hasn't accepted Christ as savior is not part of the Temple which means gentiles who reject Him are not grafted to the vine and jews who reject Him are cut of forever. It is the Church in the New Covenant, which include Christian jews, who will get Abrahams promise. Also rebuilding the temple is a gross act of rebellion against God.

Jim

[Guest]

Rev 21:22 And I saw no temple therein: for the Lord God Almighty and the Lamb are the temple of it.

In the New Jerusalem there will be no temple as stated in Rev 21:22 so the only place this river appears to come from is the Lord.

There two Greek words which are translated "temple". One of them "hieron" refers to the Temple building in general. The other, "naos" does not refer to the Temple building as a whole but to the "the Holy place and the Holy of Holies." Revelation 21 uses the word naos. Thus, this passage does not preclude the building of a "hieron." Rather, theological/eschatological presuppositions brought to the text are what make it preclude the building of a "hieron."

To be honest if there was to be a new Temple for Isreal then to me that would make the entire NT a lie.

Okedokee. I can't wait to see your face in the Ressurection if indeed God does build a Temple for Israel!

Ely

[Guest]

The other, "naos" does not refer to the Temple building as a whole but to the "the Holy place and the Holy of Holies." Revelation 21 uses the word naos. Thus, this passage does not preclude the building of a "hieron." Rather, theological/eschatological presuppositions brought to the text are what make it preclude the building of a "hieron."

So are you agreeing that God and the Lamb are the holy of holies but additionally saying that there will also be a physical temple (missing its holy-of-holies, I presume) because the scripture doesn't explicitly say there won't be one?

In that case, and based on the same logic, I think there's going to be a Starbuck's and a bowling alley!

I can't wait to see your face in the Ressurection if indeed God does build a Temple for Israel!

Seriously though, why would God reinstitute the type and shadow which pointed to Christ, the real thing? Or to take Paul slightly out of context, why go back to the imperfect now that the perfect has come?

Therefore, when Christ came into the world, he said:

"Sacrifice and offering you did not desire,
but a body you prepared for me;
with burnt offerings and sin offerings
you were not pleased.
Then I said, 'Here I am - it is written about me in the scroll -
I have come to do your will, O God"

First he said, "Sacrifices and offerings, burnt offerings and sin offerings you did not desire, nor were you please with them" (although the law required them to be made). The he said, "Here I am, I have come to do your will." He sets aside the first to establish the second. And by that will, we have been made holy through the sacrifice of the body of Jesus Christ once for all."

Hebrews 10:5-10

[Guest]

So are you agreeing that God and the Lamb are the holy of holies but additionally saying that there will also be a physical temple (missing its holy-of-holies, I presume) because the scripture doesn't explicitly say there won't be one?

Actually, the Scriptures explicitly say there will be a Temple. It says so in several places in the Tanakh. But you view these references as symbolically referring to the church age. Concerning the holy of holies, I think Jeremiah has something interesting to say concerning this:

16 “Then it shall come to pass, when you are multiplied and increased in the land in those days,” says the LORD, “that they will say no more, ‘The ark of the covenant of the LORD.’ It shall not come to mind, nor shall they remember it, nor shall they visit it, nor shall it be made anymore.
17 “At that time Jerusalem shall be called The Throne of the LORD, and all the nations shall be gathered to it, to the name of the LORD, to Jerusalem. No more shall they follow the dictates of their evil hearts.
18 “In those days the house of Judah shall walk with the house of Israel, and they shall come together out of the land of the north to the land that I have given as an inheritance to your fathers. Jeremiah 3

This matches up with what John tells us in Revelation 21. Again, I assume you find some historical event where this was fulfilled, or else you view it as being symbolically fulfilled in the church age.

In that case, and based on the same logic, I think there's going to be a Starbuck's and a bowling alley!

Whatever makes you happy bro! (Actually, is there any reason why there won't be Starbucks and bowling alleys in the New Earth? I mean, we'll still need to eat and drink and I think we'll still want to enjopy ourselves. Anyway, that's an aside.)

Seriously though, why would God reinstitute the type and shadow which pointed to Christ, the real thing? Or to take Paul slightly out of context, why go back to the imperfect now that the perfect has come?

I don't say that there'll be a return to the Old Covenant in the New Earth. Christ indeed did away with the Old Covenant. But taking all the scirptural evidence into consideration, it seems to me that the next age will feature some things which bear resemblance to the Old Covenant, for example, a temple in the city of Jerusalem. This is what I get from my reading of the scriptures..... Sorry!

Ely

[Guest]

Actually, the Scriptures explicitly say there will be a Temple. It says so in several places in the Tanakh.

Were these scriptures you refer to written before or after the Second Temple?

16 “Then it shall come to pass, when you are multiplied and increased in the land in those days,” says the LORD, “that they will say no more, ‘The ark of the covenant of the LORD.’ It shall not come to mind, nor shall they remember it, nor shall they visit it, nor shall it be made anymore.
17 “At that time Jerusalem shall be called The Throne of the LORD, and all the nations shall be gathered to it, to the name of the LORD, to Jerusalem. No more shall they follow the dictates of their evil hearts.
18 “In those days the house of Judah shall walk with the house of Israel, and they shall come together out of the land of the north to the land that I have given as an inheritance to your fathers. Jeremiah 3

“Again, I assume you find some historical event where this was fulfilled…”

It’s not hard to find. The land of the North is Assyria/Babylon. Jeremiah was writing after Israel had been conquered by Assyria and at the beginning of Judah’s fall to Babylon. The Babylonians destroyed the temple and carried off the contents as booty. The Ark of the Covenant is not heard from again and it is generally assumed that the Babylonians took it. Jeremiah is saying that when the captives return from exile in Babylon and rebuild the temple, the Ark will be missing and will not be replaced. “No big deal,” Jeremiah seems to be saying, “it will be forgotten.”

Revelation 21 isn’t referring to another man-made temple in the same old Jerusalem. It is a new Jerusalem, which is also referred to as “the bride” (Rev. 21:9-11).

[Guest]

Were these scriptures you refer to written before or after the Second Temple?

Before and during.

It’s not hard to find. The land of the North is Assyria/Babylon. Jeremiah was writing after Israel had been conquered by Assyria and at the beginning of Judah’s fall to Babylon. The Babylonians destroyed the temple and carried off the contents as booty. The Ark of the Covenant is not heard from again and it is generally assumed that the Babylonians took it. Jeremiah is saying that when the captives return from exile in Babylon and rebuild the temple, the Ark will be missing and will not be replaced. “No big deal,” Jeremiah seems to be saying, “it will be forgotten.”

Was this also when "Jerusalem [was] called The Throne of the LORD, and all the nations [were] gathered to it, to the name of the LORD, to Jerusalem" and didn't "follow the dictates of their evil hearts."?

Revelation 21 isn’t referring to another man-made temple in the same old Jerusalem. It is a new Jerusalem, which is also referred to as “the bride” (Rev. 21:9-11).

Yes, a new temple made by God in the New Jerusalem made by God on the New Earth made by God!