Input greatly desired

[jaydam]

I have taken the last several days to immerse myself in Revelation 21, and its implications. The following are rough drafts of blog posts where I am attempting to explain what I have found simply based upon using cross-references and a lexicon.

This is so far removed from what I thought I believed, that I just want to know if it makes sense. Perhaps it really doesn't matter since I am convinced my understanding is pretty accurate, but I figured I'd throw it out for input. Also, I always admit that my understanding in my head is a far cry from coherently putting it into writing, so I apologize for places that might not be as clear as they could be.

Admittedly, this study has changed my view somewhat on Mt 24.

The copy and paste does not catch the formatting that helps break up thoughts, so I've tried to format the post a bit.

The Revelation 21 Revelation

Revelation 20 and 21
Let us jump right in with a quick and oversimplified look at the progression of Revelation 20:

1. An angel binds Satan & throws him into a pit
2. Reign of Christ for 1000 years
3. Satan released
4. Battle seemingly preempted between Satan and the beloved city
5. Devil thrown in lake of fire
6. White throne judgment
7. Unsaved people, death, and Hades thrown into the lake of fire

It has been my understanding, and I believe is the generally popular opinion, that Revelation 21 sequentially follows Revelation 20. After the final judgment, John witnesses the creation of a new heaven and a new earth with the heavenly Jerusalem coming down – Rev 21:1-2.

Hebrews 12:22-23 shows us that this heavenly Jerusalem is associated with Mount Zion, it is God’s city, and contains the general assembly, and the “church of the firstborn who are enrolled in heaven.”

An Initial Problem
However, the language of Revelation 21 does not allow for it to be placed after final judgment. Not only must Revelation 21 actually occur prejudgment, but it must occur before humanity ends at the end of the millennium. This is all supported by the following, and while some of the following could perhaps be dismissed individually, the weight of all the examples should be considered as a whole:

-Rev 21:3 – It seems from the rest of the NT that the tabernacle of God being among men should be a present reality, not a post-judgment one.

-21:5 – “Making” is in the present tense, indicating it is a process still underway at the time it is spoken. The Greek word Poieo indicates something that is currently in process at the speaking. If the final and complete new had really already been ushered in, it would seem “making” should really be past tense, “Behold, I have made all things new.”

-21:6 – “It is done” echoes the words Christ spoke on the cross, that his work was essentially completed. If Christ could declare such a thing on the cross prejudgment, then this phrase does not have to indicate the end of everything. The real issue here is the offering of the “water of life” as the NT seems to generally indicate we are now drinking of such water.

-21:7 – “He who overcomes will inherit…” appears to look at a future time where overcoming is complete. If this chapter was looking at a post-judgment reality, grammatically correct phrasing should read, “He who overcame has now inherited…”

-21:8 – Perhaps one of the most telling passages reads, “But for the… their part will be in the lake of fire… which is the second death.” We just read in Revelation 20 about these people being thrown into the lake of fire, yet this phrasing to looking forward to that time. A post-Revelation 20, post-judgment reading should be, “But for the… they found their part in the lake of fire… which was their second death.”

-21:24 – “The nations will walk… kings of the earth will bring…” if taken post-judgment, this verse would mean that in the post-judgment reality there still seems to be independent nations that need guided “by its [the city's] light,” and there are still earthly kings around. This would seem to pose somewhat of a problem for a post-judgment world, even more when one also considers v25-26…

-21:25 – “Its gates will never be closed” is actually a present reality that the church (heavenly Jerusalem) experiences now, open gates for people to enter. Open gates would be meaningless if there was nobody left to enter, which would be the case in a post-judgment era.

-21:26 – There are people – nations/kings – who actively entering the city, adding glory and honor to the heavenly Jerusalem. Again, if this is post-judgment, it would seem there should be no more who would enter, much less bring anything into the heavenly Jerusalem – All who entered are in, and all who did not enter are in the lake of fire.

-21:27 – The idea that “Nothing unclean… no (sinner)… shall ever come into it” is seen in contrast to those who are still entering the holy city. It insinuates that uncleanliness/sinners are still around, but are under prohibition of entry. If sinners had already been done away with into the lake of fire, then there would be no need for this point.

It should be fairly clear that the language of Revelation 21 places it before the final judgment, and even before the end of humanity at the end of the millennium.

More Evidence: The Hebrews 12 Dilemma
If we return to Hebrews 12, where we found the expanded description of the heavenly Jerusalem, it adds to the evidence that Revelation 21 cannot sequentially follow the final judgment of Revelation 20. In Hebrews 12, the heavenly Jerusalem is seen as already here and accessible to the earthly believer. This would seem to mean that somewhere between Revelation 21′s prophecy of the heavenly Jerusalem’s arrival and the writing of Hebrews, the heavenly Jerusalem has arrived.

Since Revelation 21 really cannot be split, but all centers around the arrival of the heavenly Jerusalem, it would also appear that the entirety of Revelation 21 must have occurred by the time Hebrews 12 was written.

Conclusion
I hope I have not lost you yet. This might go against everything you were taught, it certainly did for me, but I have to believe the inspired scripture more than I believe any tradition or college course. Many of you are now at the first point I arrived at, being forced to consider what the scriptures say, but not understanding how it will all work out relating to details held in Revelation 21. However, I encourage you to have faith as I did. Know that the scriptures will not contradict themselves, and if the scriptures show Revelation 21 happened before the final judgment of Revelation 20, and even before the writing of Hebrews, then the rest of scriptures will support this. It is the rest of scripture that we will begin to look at in our next post…

Notes
*While not explored here, if John’s vision was prophetic and showed an event that had not yet occurred, then this could greatly impact the understood date of authorship for the book of Revelation.

To spell it out in a different way: If Revelation 21 is supposed to be a future event at the time of its writing, and if Hebrews says the event has occurred, then Revelation must have been written before Hebrews, and Hebrews must have been written after the event.

Some consideration of the dating of the book of Revelation can be found within my post, here.

[jaydam]

This is the second post (My third is in progress):

Revelation 21: Fulfillment & Implications – Part 1
In the last post, we saw from John’s word tenses that the events of Revelation 21 cannot be placed after the final judgment of Revelation 20. Not only that, but Hebrews 12 indicates that the arrival of the heavenly Jerusalem occurred by the time of its authorship. Additionally, as Revelation 21 deals with events surrounding the holy city’s arrival, it would seem Revelation 21 in its entirety should be seen as having occurred before Hebrews was written.

With all this in mind, let us get to the review of my thoughts and my study of Revelation 21:

“Then I saw…”

This is clearly not the grammatical equivalent of, “What happened next…” To say that the next thing John saw is the next thing that will happen is to assume something that must first be supported. As the last post demonstrated, such an assumption is grammatically and scripturally incorrect.

“A new heaven and a new earth” and the first ones passed away.

This is the first major hurdle to my “realization” that Revelation 21 not only takes place prejudgment, but took place before Hebrews was written – how did heaven and earth already pass away?

Let me first pose a question – If most things in Revelation are symbolic, then aren’t the odds increased that heaven and earth in Revelation could be symbolic?

Consider this question as we first look at Matthew. In his gospel, Matthew records the anticipation of heaven and earth passing – Matthew 5 and 24.

-5:18 – Christ says that nothing will pass away from the Law until heaven and earth pass away.

The implication of the word “until” is that the time will come. It is anticipated by Christ that one day heaven and earth will pass away, and on that day the Law can be removed, but until that day the Law stands.

-24:35 – Christ assures his listeners that the day will come when heaven and earth will pass away.

This is the second passage where Christ looks to the day that heaven and earth will pass away. By his use of this dialogue to reference the day heaven and earth will pass away, it would seem Christ is tying the day heaven and earth pass away to the other events in the Matthew 24 dialogue. Only shortly after does Christ liken the day heaven and earth will pass away, to a thief – v42-44.

2 Peter 3:10 supports this, as it declares the heavens and earth will pass away upon the day of the Lord, which will come like a thief.

Now we address the hurdle:
If Christ looked to a day heaven and earth would pass away, and if Revelation 21 has already been fulfilled, to include the passing of heaven and earth to make way for the new ones which preempted the holy city’s arrival, then what heaven and earth passed away if heaven and earth are still here?

Additionally, what is the new heaven and earth if I am still standing on the old earth and looking up at the old heavens that have always been here?

The answer was surprisingly simple once I conducted a word search in the Bible for places where heaven and earth is used. A few instances are considered here:

-Leviticus 26:14-20 – the punishment for Israel’s disobedience is that their personal heaven/sky will become like iron, and their earth like bronze.

The fact that heaven and earth here is personalized by “your” seems to distinguish the understanding of this heaven and earth from the general heaven and earth. From this passage one can begin to consider that the idea of heaven and earth might be used in another way than the general manner in which science views them.

-Isaiah 51:16 – God says that he has given his words to Israel to establish the heavens and found the earth.

Unless heaven and earth can mean something different here, this passage does not make sense. Heaven and earth already existed before God gave his word to Israel. So heaven and earth here must again mean something different than the literal, general, physical heaven and earth.

So what is this heaven and earth that seems to be different from the physical one?

Lets consider: Have you ever heard of somebody who is said to exist in their own world? Or heard of somebody telling their lover that their lover is their world? It is in this sense that I believe we find heaven and earth as it relates to Israel. They existed in their own world, or had their own heaven and earth, which was founded upon the Law. This can be plain to see in the benefits that would accompany their obedience to the Law, they would be blessed, have bountiful crops, etc. Adherence to the Law permitted Israel to live under their own heaven and upon their own earth, untouched by external problems the gentile “world” would encounter. Obviously, we know from history that Israel did not follow the Law which governed their personal heaven and earth that God created for them, and they paid the price for it.

I am not saying that every reference to heaven and earth in the Bible is really related to the ones seen as unique to Israel, but I would contend that some instances must now be understood to mean something different than physical heaven and earth that we all exist under and upon.

To further support this understanding:

-Deuteronomy 30:19 – heaven and earth are called to witness against Israel.

Then Colossians 2:14 tells us it was the record of the Law that was against Israel. In these passages, it seems the roll of heaven and earth is equated to the Law.

-Deuteronomy 31:26 – Israel is told the Book of the Law will be the witness against them.

However, as we saw in Lev 26:14-20 heaven and earth do the same thing. Again, we see heaven and earth paralleled to the Law.

-Deuteronomy 31:28 – the heaven and earth are again seen as bearing witness against people of Israel.

Now returning to the Isaiah 51:16 passage, we can understand heaven and earth to in some instances be related to Israels personal situation with God and the Law.

A Further Look as Israel’s Heaven and Earth
Paul writes to the Galatians regarding elemental things – Gal 4:3, 9. The understanding of the Greek “stoicheion” can be of elements, elementary, elemental things, or elemental principles.

To the general reader, the elemental things which Paul relates to the world might be seen by a Christian to relate to the secular/sinful/flesh world. However, when one takes context into account, they will find the elemental things are discussed in parallel to the Law.

Moving on, 2 Peter 3:10, 12 looks to the burning up of the elements. Peter uses the same “stoicheion” that we just saw Paul use in conjunction with the Law. This would be understood as the same Law that established the idiosyncratic heaven and earth for Israel.

It is more interesting that 2 Peter 3:10 associates the heavens that will pass away with the elementary principles (things of the Law according to Paul), and associates the earth that will be burned up with the works. Thus, we have Peter painting a picture of the removal of the personalized heaven and earth Israel used to have with God, one that involved principles and works.

If heaven and earth is understood in the sense of the world of dynamics in which God’s people live in relationship with God, even while on this earth, then one can understand why the heaven and earth God had established with just the Jews, and based upon the Law had to be ended. A new heaven and earth had to be established to include the Gentiles, and it would be based upon Christ’s work.

Have you ever heard the phrase, his world came crashing down? This is the parallel idea to Israel’s heaven and earth passing away. This is why Paul worked so hard to reassure the Jews of what they had, and what now was.

This is a lot to process, I know it was for me, so we will stop here. In the next post, we will begin with the missing sea of Revelation 21.

Beyond this, the readers must consider further implications:

If Mt 24 events are related to the passing of heaven and earth, and if Heb 12 and Rev 21 show that the passing has happened, then Mt 24 has happened.

[dizerner]

[user account removed]

[jaydam]

One mistake you seem to be making is that Revelations is a strictly chronological book with every chapter following every other in strict chronological order.

There are many thing I could bring up, but I'll start with this. If Rev is strictly chronological, how do you account for the linguistic issues I provided that show the end if humanity and the final judgment of Rev 20 is only anticipated in Rev 21?

This is aside from other evidences I believe show that Rev moves forwards and backwards, repeats events, etc.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Singalphile]

Hi jaydam,

Thanks for sharing. I'll give my thoughts on the passage (Rev 21) and some of your thoughts, perhaps.

I think ...

The Revelation 21 Revelation ...
It has been my understanding, and I believe is the generally popular opinion, that Revelation 21 sequentially follows Revelation 20. After the final judgment, John witnesses the creation of a new heaven and a new earth with the heavenly Jerusalem coming down – Rev 21:1-2.

As I read it: The vision through chapter 20 flows chronologically through to Rev 21:5a. A closing statement/summary is given in Rev 21:5b-8. Then a new vision is opened in Rev 21:9.

Hebrews 12:22-23 shows us that this heavenly Jerusalem is associated with Mount Zion, it is God’s city, and contains the general assembly, and the “church of the firstborn who are enrolled in heaven.”

Yes, I think that the "holy city"/"heavenly Jerusalem" is an image of the Church, which is our state/citizenship in a spiritual or symbolic sense. In the imagery of Rev 21:2, the city is prepared as a bride for her husband and is seen coming down to the new heaven and earth. The fact that the "Jerusalem" is "new" in this vision is probably because this is when it will come down to the new heaven/earth where all things will be made new.

-Rev 21:3 – It seems from the rest of the NT that the tabernacle of God being among men should be a present reality, not a post-judgment one.

Yes, the Holy Spirit dwells with us (1 Cor 6:19, 2 Tim 1:14), and we are God's people now and we will be God's people in the future as well. However, that may be different than the "tabernacle of God being among men" rather than in heaven, after the resurrection. (Even if not different, it will still be true.)

Regarding Rev 21:4, I agree with dizerner. In the new heaven/earth, after the resurrection and judgment, there will be no more tears, death, or pain. This is the "holy city's" destination.

-21:5 – “Making” is in the present tense, indicating it is a process still underway at the time it is spoken. The Greek word Poieo indicates something that is currently in process at the speaking. If the final and complete new had really already been ushered in, it would seem “making” should really be past tense, “Behold, I have made all things new.”

In the vision, which is of his and our future, John sees God "making everything new" in the present tense. Possibly, in that future time, we will see that "process" unfold ourselves. I have noticed that Revelation does sometimes jump around in tenses, which is sometimes puzzling, but I don't see any issue here.

-21:6 – “It is done” echoes the words Christ spoke on the cross, that his work was essentially completed. If Christ could declare such a thing on the cross prejudgment, then this phrase does not have to indicate the end of everything. The real issue here is the offering of the “water of life” as the NT seems to generally indicate we are now drinking of such water.
-21:7 – “He who overcomes will inherit…” appears to look at a future time where overcoming is complete. If this chapter was looking at a post-judgment reality, grammatically correct phrasing should read, “He who overcame has now inherited…”
-21:8 – Perhaps one of the most telling passages reads, “But for the… their part will be in the lake of fire… which is the second death.” We just read in Revelation 20 about these people being thrown into the lake of fire, yet this phrasing to looking forward to that time. A post-Revelation 20, post-judgment reading should be, “But for the… they found their part in the lake of fire… which was their second death.”

Verses 5b through 21:8 are a closing statement or commentary about the preceding vision. It is introduced by a direct statement to John to "write this down". The speaker is essentially saying, "Let me tell you about what you just saw." He first confirms the certainty of its fulfillment, and He then tells us who will and will not inherit the things seen in the vision. Thus ends this glimpse (and possibly any glimpse) of our future resurrection, the judgment, and the new heaven/earth.

-21:24 – “The nations will walk… kings of the earth will bring…” if taken post-judgment, this verse would mean that in the post-judgment reality there still seems to be independent nations that need guided “by its [the city's] light,” and there are still earthly kings around. This would seem to pose somewhat of a problem for a post-judgment world, even more when one also considers v25-26…

-21:25 – “Its gates will never be closed” is actually a present reality that the church (heavenly Jerusalem) experiences now, open gates for people to enter. Open gates would be meaningless if there was nobody left to enter, which would be the case in a post-judgment era.

-21:26 – There are people – nations/kings – who actively entering the city, adding glory and honor to the heavenly Jerusalem. Again, if this is post-judgment, it would seem there should be no more who would enter, much less bring anything into the heavenly Jerusalem – All who entered are in, and all who did not enter are in the lake of fire.

-21:27 – The idea that “Nothing unclean… no (sinner)… shall ever come into it” is seen in contrast to those who are still entering the holy city. It insinuates that uncleanliness/sinners are still around, but are under prohibition of entry. If sinners had already been done away with into the lake of fire, then there would be no need for this point.

It should be fairly clear that the language of Revelation 21 places it before the final judgment, and even before the end of humanity at the end of the millennium.

I agree in a sense, but not exactly. As I see it, Rev 21:9 begins another vision or revelatory scene. Here, I think we're getting a description of one of the elements (or "characters") in the previous vision, namely, the "holy city". As mentioned, I agree that this "city" symbolizes the Church. So this is not a description of any particular time period here. Instead, we're getting a description of the nature and character of the Church, in largely symbolic imagery. The description is true now and will continue to be true.

(I have also heard that the "open gates" might also picture peace and security, btw.)

~ The End.

So that's roughly how I read Rev 21, which is good because I end up liking it very much because I think it gives insight into our present standing and responsibilities before God and of course it helps give hope and confidence about the future. I know that there are other ways that people understand it that also provide those benefits (or others), and that's okay with me. It's obviously not as clear as it could be if it was just meant to explain a precise time line of future events.

[jaydam]

Regarding Rev 21:4, I agree with dizerner. In the new heaven/earth, after the resurrection and judgment, there will be no more tears, death, or pain. This is the "holy city's" destination.

I might have agreed with you about this a few days ago, but I look at the new heaven and new earth prophecy in Is 65:17ff and it cannot be heaven although this passage holds much of Revelation 21 in it. It also hold ideas from Hebrews 12.

In the new heavens and new earth of Isaiah, which I would argue are the new heavens and new earth of Revelation 21, it says there is no more weeping or crying, but there is also still death and birth. Things which we do not believe will occur in ultimate heaven.

I believe the no more weeping and crying is related to the purpose of the heavenly Jerusalem's creation as stated in Is 65:18. Additionally, God rejoices in the city and is glad in the people. Within the church, there is (or should be) rejoicing and gladness. Since coming to God at age 31 I don't mourn like I used to, I don't mourn like the unsaved outside of the church. Really, after coming into the church, I feel fairly bulletproof emotionally, and the more I learn the more so I feel.

When I got saved, I experienced being pulled from the muck, I weep and cry now too, but it is only rarely because life gets to me. Most of the times I tear up is over God and his greatness as I worship him or speak of him, and what he has done to me. It is a joyful weeping experience.

It boggles my mind at the downcast Christians in the church who are in perpetual depression, and weep and cry at the events of life. They live on par with the low level of the unsaved, apart from some belief that eventually they will be pulled from the muck, and will later be made happy. I believe I have experienced that happiness now.

[robbyyoung]

Hi Jaydam,

I like your approach to solving the interpretation of John's apocalyptic genre of literature. I like it because, you are trying to remain faithful to the less unambiguous key to solving all of the prophecy's content:

"The Revelation of Jesus Christ, which God gave unto him, to shew unto his servants things which must shortly come to pass..."

"And he said unto me, These sayings are faithful and true: and the Lord God of the holy prophets sent his angel to shew unto his servants the things which must shortly be done."

"Behold, I come quickly: blessed is he that keepeth the sayings of the prophecy of this book."

"And he saith unto me, Seal not the sayings of the prophecy of this book: for the time is at hand."

"And, behold, I come quickly; and my reward is with me, to give every man according as his work shall be."

"He which testifieth these things saith, Surely I come quickly. Amen. Even so, come, Lord Jesus."

Yep. I believe you are heading in the right direction in applying answers to "The How" question as you pay strict attention to "The When" question outlined for "The Seven Churches".

Your second post is spot on concerning "The Heavens and Earth". Good job and I look forward to your 3rd post .

God Bless.

[jaydam]

Thanks Robby,

I value your guys' input, but I will admit to not listening too close since as you can see, my goal is to find the truest meaning of scripture, based on scripture, as unadulterated as possible with outside opinions.

In this way, I come to my own major conclusion, then I test it among other believers. While minor details have differed here and there, I have found most of my study to be holding up under opposition and find commendations from those in the same vein of thought.

I do have one friend who I have allowed to see my study notes as I progressed, and he has thanked me for completely undermining everything Bible college taught him was true. Lol.

Not to bash Bible college too much, I am going to one now, but I enjoy it as a chance to sharpen myself, not be spoon fed the answers.

Anyway, I'm primarily glad you find my second post accurate. It was a big jump for me, but I have to say it wasn't that hard when I asked myself that question:

If most things in Revelation are symbolic, then aren’t the odds increased that heaven and earth in Revelation could be symbolic?

As soon as I considered that and began to study it, I easily found that heaven and earth does not always mean heaven and earth, but can reference Israel's personal world.

[robbyyoung]

Thanks Robby,

I value your guys' input, but I will admit to not listening too close since as you can see, my goal is to find the truest meaning of scripture, based on scripture, as unadulterated as possible with outside opinions.

In this way, I come to my own major conclusion, then I test it among other believers. While minor details have differed here and there, I have found most of my study to be holding up under opposition and find commendations from those in the same vein of thought.

Hi jaydam,

I'm sure you know by now, historically, Preterism and it's components aren't new ideas at-all??? They've just been supressed in lieu of other popular dogmas. Nevertheless, my goal is the same. I tend to stay grounded by one of the simplest forms of communication God made available, writing a letter. Once I began to read these inspired letters, as letters, addressed to real people, given to real promises from relief of persecution, rewards, expectation, etc... in their lifetime, I realized, for the most part, that everyone "post" these promises were not and will not be party to these events, for they are not even hinted towards in the context of "The Letters". Personal pronouns, 1st, 2nd, & 3rd person verbage to the original audience is irrefutable and devasting to idiology that inserts itself as "The Original" audience. Is it reasonable to read another person's mail, and then deny what was historically said is theirs, to lay claim to it for yourself??? For me, This IS NOT reasonable to "The Context" or a reasonable position. What's reasonable for me is to read the letters and listen to what the inspired writers, through the Holy Spirit, was telling THEM. I no longer struggle with the timing of any eschatological event. I try to ascertain "The How" because I am confident the timing was in the 1st Century.

God Bless.

[dwilkins]

I'm going to suggest a few foundational keys to the way that the Bible presents history and then challenge you to keep your paradigm within those bounds.

1) The Bible talks about life on earth and life in heaven. Some of the passages apply to one and some apply to the other. Switching between them is not always clear without bringing in additional passages. However, when we keep in mind that promises such as that there will be no more tears etc., these are made to a certain group of people in a certain place (to the believers in the New Jerusalem in this case) and not necessarily to everyone at all times, or everyone after a certain time.

2) There is some sort of limit to the experience of humans in heaven before the eschaton. Before that date we see human souls in the sea of glass or some similar imagery, but it's clear that before the final judgment is applied they are not personally allowed into the Temple in Revelation's imagery. This parallels the pattern of thought around the function of Hades, Abraham's Bosom, the New Jerusalem in Hebrews, etc. However, at some point God will fully dwell with man. When and where he starts to finally do so in the fullest manner is a key piece to this.

3) There are all sorts of passages in the Old Testament that declare that there will be no end to the generations of man on earth. If we take those as seriously or literally as we take other passages I think it should make us pause for a moment to think about what scripture is actually proposing about human history.

4) There are a number of passages in scripture that clearly describe the earth lasting perpetually. Again, this is a major challenge to normal approaches to creation.

5) The kingdom promises of Israel (admittedly spiritualized under the New Covenant) clearly show how that the perpetual state will be one in which the kings and peoples of the earth perpetually bring honor and riches into the new Jerusalem. This flatly requires indefinite ongoing human history on earth.

These five points above speak to the primary mistake I think you are making right now. There is no such thing as the end of humanity at the end of the millennium. I'll try to tell you in detail how I think this works out when I get back from an appointment in a couple of hours.

Doug