Heaven and Earth

<body topmargin=0 leftmargin=0 marginheight=0 marginwidth=0> <table cellpadding=0 cellspacing=0 border=0 height="100%"><tr> <td valign="top" width=200 BGCOLOR="#003399" TEXT="#080000" background="040c8c00erkjxk.jpg"> <div> <B><U>Greg Rasaka</U></B></div> <div> <B>is the editor of </B><I><B>Eschatology Review</B></I><B>.  </B><I><B>Eschatology Review</B></I><B> is a free publication available by contacting Greg at 32080 N.E. Corral Creek Road, Newberg, Oregon, 97132.  You can also reach him via e-mail at gjr@viclink.com.</B></div> <div> <B>This article is from the December 2002 issue of </B><I><B>Eschatology Review.</B></I></div> <bR> </td> <td valign="top" BGCOLOR="#FFFFFF" TEXT="#080000"> <div> <FONT SIZE="7" COLOR="#000066" FACE="Brush Script MT" ><B>Restoration Ministries</B></FONT><FONT SIZE="1" COLOR="#FFFF99" FACE="Arial" > </FONT>  |<FONT SIZE="1" COLOR="#00FFFF" FACE="Arial" >     <A HREF="index.htm" TARGET="_top" TITLE="Restoration Ministries"><U>home</U></A></FONT></div> <div>                                                   </div> <DIV ALIGN="LEFT"></DIV> <div> <IMG SRC="0e01c480.jpg" border=0 width="540" height="72" ALIGN="BOTTOM" HSPACE="0" VSPACE="0"></div> <div> <B>by Greg Rasaka</B></div> <div> <B>__________________________________________________</B></div> <bR> <div> <B><U>A Good Question</U></B></div> <bR> <div> In the process of determining the direction for this issue of <B>Eschatology Review</B>, I was asked two questions by one of the readers:</div> <bR> <div> “I am a partial preterist. I gather that you are a full (complete) preterist. In light of that, do you believe the world as we know it continues on forever, with people being born and dying, and going ‘on to their reward?’ I mean, how does it work out with regard to a ‘new heavens and new earth?’” [PB]</div> <bR> <div> These are good questions and they deserve good answers. The fact is, I thought that the answers to those questions would make a good topic for this issue. These next three articles are my answers. I will begin with the second question.</div> <bR> <bR> <DIV ALIGN="LEFT"></DIV> <div> <B><U>Heaven and Earth</U></B></div> <bR> <div> First of all, what does the phrase “new heaven and new earth” mean? Before we can hope to ascertain that meaning, we must first define the phrase “heaven and earth” as used in the context of an eschatological passage. Yes, heaven and earth are used literally in the bible, but is that the only sense applicable for this phrase? So often we need to explore these phrases as used in the “Old Testament.” Are there examples of heaven and earth used in a figurative, symbolic or covenantal sense in the Old Testament? Yes, I believe there are.</div> <bR> <div> The thing we must keep in mind when reading the bible is that it is covenantal history, not world history. God dealt with his people by means of a covenant, and this must be kept in mind constantly when reading the bible. It is very easy to forget this very important point. I will be dealing with the covenant in more detail in a near issue of <B>Eschatology Review</B>, because I feel it is so important, as well as largely neglected.</div> <bR> <div> In Deuteronomy 4:25-26, we find Moses telling the people that in generations to come, they will forsake the covenant, and that they would perish from the land and be destroyed. Notice the phrase, <B>“I call heaven and earth to witness against you today.”</B> They are called as witnesses to the covenant. Of course inanimate objects cannot literally bear witness, yet God calls them to witness. </div> <bR> <div> Chapter 28 states the conditions of the covenant. If they adhere to the covenant, the stated blessings will be granted (1-14). If they stray and reject the covenant, the stated curses would be placed upon them (15-68). Reading on, we see in 30:19, God calling heaven and earth as witnesses against the people, who were to choose life or death. That is what it amounted to. Keeping the covenant meant life, while breaking the covenant meant death. </div> <bR> <div> In chapter 31, we find the “song of Moses,” which was taught to the people as a witness to testify against them, (19, 21). In verse 26, the book of the law was also to be a witness against them. Then in 28 we find yet again, heaven and earth being called as witnesses. In 32:1 we read, <B>“Give ear, 0 heavens, and let me speak and let the earth hear the words of my mouth.”</B> Who is being addressed here, the literal heaven and earth, or Israel, God<FONT SIZE="3" COLOR="#000000" FACE="WP MultinationalA Roman" >*</FONT>s covenant people?</div> <bR> <div> Let<FONT SIZE="3" COLOR="#000000" FACE="WP MultinationalA Roman" >*</FONT>s move on to Isaiah 1:2 where God is addressing heavens and earth again. Who is being addressed? Verse 1 tells us it is Judah and Jerusalem. Now look at 51:16, <B>“I have put my words in your mouth and have covered you with the shadow of my hand, to establish the heavens, to found the earth, and to say to Zion, ‘You are my people.’”</B> This is not in reference to the creation of the physical heaven and earth, but is rather in reference to creating his covenant people.</div> <bR> <div> So what have we found in the Old Testament? We have found heaven and earth to be a reference to the covenant people themselves or the witnesses thereof. All of these passages are in a covenantal context.</div> <bR> <div> Now, if we carry this same train of thought into the “New Testament,” what will we find? Lets look at Matthew 5:17-18. <B>“Do not think that I came to abolish the law or the prophets; I did not come to abolish, but to fulfil! For truly I say to you, until heaven and earth pass away, not the smallest letter or stroke will pass from the law until all is accomplished.”</B> This is still covenantal language, for any time the law or the prophets are mentioned it has to do with the covenant. </div> <bR> <div> Notice that it says that Jesus came to fulfill the law, not to abolish it. The law was not going to pass away by means of abolishment, but rather by fulfillment. Not one bit of the law would pass until all was accomplished (fulfilled) and heaven and earth passed away. So I ask, what is meant here by heaven and earth? Is it the physical heaven and earth? If so, then the law has not passed and we are still in our sins. Was it in reference to the covenant people of God or its witnesses? I say it is. That is what passed away. The entire Jewish theocratic system, or world, passed away. We know that a dot of the law has passed. In fact the whole law is gone.</div> <bR> <div> The temple is gone. The sacrifices are gone. The priesthood and its daily rituals are gone. Even the genealogies for keeping the priestly line are long gone. Heaven and earth have passed away, and all was fulfilled by the time Jerusalem fell in AD 70.</div> <bR> <div> At that point the old covenant was completely fulfilled and removed, and the new covenant was fully put in place. The old heaven and earth were replaced by the new heaven and new earth. This new covenant is spiritual in nature.<B> “Then I saw a great white throne and him who sat upon it, from whose presence earth and heaven fled away, and no place was found for them”</B> (Revelation 20:11). <B>“Then I saw a new heaven and a new earth; for the first heaven and earth passed away, and there is no longer any sea”</B> (Revelation 21:1). </div> <div> From here on we find a figurative description of this new heaven and new earth, the holy city, the new Jerusalem, the bride of Christ. This all represents the spiritual people of God, his true covenant people, those who believe and have washed their robes. None of it is meant to be taken literally.</div> <bR> <div> In Matthew 21 and 22, the disciples heard Jesus relate that the kingdom of God would be taken from the Jews and given to a people who would bear fruit. In chapter 23, the disciples had listened to Jesus tell of the destruction of the temple and the Jewish system. In chapter 24, Jesus continues and in verse 3 the disciples ask,<B> “Tell us, when will these things happen, and what will be the sign of your parousia, and the end of the age?”</B> (Please compare Mark 13 and Luke 21). </div> <bR> <div> Jesus tells them what to expect, including wars and famines, tribulation, false prophets and false christs. He also includes the highly figurative language used by the prophets. These include the failing of the sun, moon and stars, the Son of Man coming on the clouds of heaven, and the gathering of the elect with a great trumpet.</div> <bR> <div> <B>“Now learn the parable from the fig tree: when its branch has already become tender and puts forth its leaves, you know that summer is near; so you too, when you see all these things, recognize that he is near, right at the door. Truly I say to you, this generation will not pass away until all these things take place. Heaven and earth will pass away, but my words will not pass away”</B> (32-35).</div> <bR> <div> Here we have Jesus stating that heaven and earth would pass away in conjunction with the destruction of Jerusalem and the Jewish age. Again, is this in reference to the physical heavens and earth, or the covenant people of God? The physical heaven and earth did not pass away with the passing of the temple and Jerusalem. However, the covenant people of God, along with that system, did pass away at that time. The new covenant was the continuation, with a new covenant people consisting of those who have faith in Christ.</div> <bR> <bR> <DIV ALIGN="LEFT"></DIV> <div> <B><U>Will the Earth Continue?</U></B></div> <bR> <div> Will the physical earth, and life, as we know it continue indefinitely? I find nothing in the bible to tell us that it won<FONT SIZE="3" COLOR="#000000" FACE="WP MultinationalA Roman" >*</FONT>t. In fact I find the opposite.<B> “A generation goes and a generation comes, but the earth remains forever”</B> (Ecclesiastes 1:4). There are similar verses in the Psalms (78:69, 93:1). </div> <bR> <div> However, I think there is more solid evidence in Genesis 8:21-22, <B>“I will never again curse the ground on account of man, for the intent of man</B><FONT SIZE="3" COLOR="#000000" FACE="WP MultinationalA Roman" ><B>*</B></FONT><B>s heart is evil from his youth; and I will never again destroy every living thing as I have done. While the earth remains, seedtime and harvest, cold and heat, summer and winter, day and night shall not cease.”</B> Does this last sentence reserve God the right to destroy the earth or does it reaffirm that the world will continue in the same manner? I must say the latter. </div> <div> Why would God say that he would never destroy every living thing and then reserve the right to destroy the earth? Such would be a contradiction. If the earth is to be burned up, as so many claim, wouldn<FONT SIZE="3" COLOR="#000000" FACE="WP MultinationalA Roman" >*</FONT>t that destroy every living thing on it? </div> <bR> <div> Let<FONT SIZE="3" COLOR="#000000" FACE="WP MultinationalA Roman" >*</FONT>s read 9:11. <B>“I establish my covenant with you; and all the flesh shall never be cut off by the water of the flood, neither shall there again be a flood to destroy the earth.”</B> </div> <bR> <div> Now 9:15-16, <B>“And I will remember my covenant, which is between me and you and every living creature of all flesh; and never again shall the water become a flood to destroy all flesh. When the bow is in the cloud, then I will look upon it, to remember the everlasting covenant between God and every living creature of all flesh that is on the earth.”</B></div> <bR> <div> Some are quick to say that this is only a promise not to destroy the earth with water, but reserves for God the right to destroy it with fire. Now is there any comfort in knowing that God will not destroy the earth with water, but will use fire? What difference does it make how he does it? The comfort comes from knowing that he won<FONT SIZE="3" COLOR="#000000" FACE="WP MultinationalA Roman" >*</FONT>t. Think about it.</div> <bR> <div> But doesn<FONT SIZE="3" COLOR="#000000" FACE="WP MultinationalA Roman" >*</FONT>t the bible say that the earth will be burned up? This idea comes from 2 Peter chapter 3. Again, we are quick to forget about covenantal language. We must constantly recall the language used by the prophets in the Old Testament and use this to cast light on the words of the New Testament. </div> <bR> <div> In verses 6-7, Peter speaks of the world that was destroyed by water and that the present heaven and earth were reserved for fire. Was the earth and heaven destroyed by the flood? The earth remained, but the order of that world was obliterated. Where is the basis for insisting that the “present heavens and earth” to be destroyed by fire is the literal heaven and earth, rather than the order of that world? Specifically, I am speaking of the Jewish theocratic system, the covenant people of God.</div> <bR> <div> Paul said, <B>“For the form of this world is passing away”</B> (1 Corinthians 7:31). John said, <B>“The world is passing away and also its lusts; but the one who does the will of God lives forever”</B> (1 John 2:17). John goes on in the next verse, <B>“Children, it is the last hour; and just as you have heard that antichrist is coming, even now many antichrists have appeared; from this we know that it is the last hour.”</B> John was using the fact that antichrists had appeared as proof that they were in the last hour.</div> <bR> <bR> <DIV ALIGN="LEFT"></DIV> <div> <B><U>What Did Peter Say?</U></B></div> <bR> <div> Peter made it clear that the end was near.<B> “but they will give account to him who is ready to judge the living and the dead”</B> (1 Peter 4:5). <B>“The end of all things is near”</B> (4:7). <B>“For it is time for judgment to begin with the household of God”</B> (4:17). According to 1:20 they were living in the last times. This is in agreement with Paul (1 Corinthians 10:11) and the writer of Hebrews (1:2). Now Peter was writing a second time to stir them up and remind them what was spoke by the prophets of old, the Lord Jesus and the apostles (2 Peter 3:1-2).</div> <bR> <div> Peter said that in the last days, mockers would come mocking, saying,<B> “where is the promise of his parousia?”</B> These mockers knew full well that Jesus said he would come in that generation, and because that time frame had nearly expired, they were mocking the Lord concerning that promise. However, Peter refutes this kind of nonsense. He tells them that with the Lord one day is like a thousand years, and a thousand years like one day. </div> <bR> <div> Now this verse has been used by most to nullify the time statements concerning the parousia of the Lord. Is that what Peter is saying? Is he saying that God<FONT SIZE="3" COLOR="#000000" FACE="WP MultinationalA Roman" >*</FONT>s word when it comes to time is not trustworthy? That God uses a different measure of time than man? It is true that this means when God says something is near, that it may be far in the future? Does this give us the license we need to make the scriptures fit our preconceived paradigm? Is this why God is seemingly so slow to fulfill his promise?</div> <bR> <div> I think Peter is saying that the passing of time does not invalidate that which God has set forth. If God promises that something will occur in one day, it will happen in one day. Also, if God says it will happen in a thousand years, then it will happen in a thousand years. In this case he said it would happen in that generation. Though time had passed, that generation had not yet passed, however the time was near.</div> <bR> <div> Peter goes on to say that God is not slow about his promise, and states that the reason for waiting until the last minute is because God is patient, not wanting any to perish, but all to come to repentance.</div> <bR> <div> Two things can be said about this. First, if this is all yet in our future, God <B>is</B> slow about his promise by anyone<FONT SIZE="3" COLOR="#000000" FACE="WP MultinationalA Roman" >*</FONT>s standard. Second, it would make no sense to apply this statement to the present or the future, for there have been, and will be, many more lost than saved in the meantime. But if we apply it to the end of the Jewish age, it makes perfect sense.</div> <bR> <div> It is interesting to note that those who use verse 8 as a disclaimer for the time statements, use it as a one way street, and then only when it fits the bill. This is only done when it comes to eschatological passages. Why? Because it is necessary to support their preconceived paradigm. They can stretch a day into 1000 years, but they never squeeze 1000 years into 1 day. Why is it that only half of verse 8 works? Just think of the bizarre statements that could be wrung out of the bible by using this time twisting hermeneutic.</div> <bR> <div> When God speaks to man, he uses terms that man can comprehend. He has no double standard by which to tell us one thing and then do another. Much more could be said concerning God, time and man, but we will leave that for another time.</div> <div> When we move on to verses 10-13, we see more covenantal language that is commonly taken in a literal sense. Yes, to read this without any consideration of the covenant, without any consideration of the language used by the prophets, it seems like a literal burning and annihilation of the material universe. There again, we must recall the words of the prophets, and remember that the covenant is the foundation on which the bible is based.</div> <bR> <div> We can find many places in the prophets where highly figurative language is used when foretelling of the destruction of a nation or kingdom. Let<FONT SIZE="3" COLOR="#000000" FACE="WP MultinationalA Roman" >*</FONT>s look at a few.</div> <bR> <div> In Isaiah 13 we find a prophecy foretelling the destruction of Babylon by the Medes. <B>“For the stars of heaven and their constellations will not flash forth their light; the sun will be dark when it rises and the moon will not shed its light”</B> (v. 10). <B>“Therefore I will make the heavens tremble and the earth will be shaken from its place”</B> (v. 13).</div> <bR> <div> How about the language used in chapter 24? <B>“The earth is broken asunder, the earth is split through, the earth is shaken violently. The earth reels to and fro like a drunkard and it totters like a shack, for its transgression is heavy upon it, and it will fall never to rise again”</B> (verses 19-20).</div> <bR> <div> In chapter 34 we find a prophecy concerning the judgment against Edom. <B>“And all the host of heaven will wear away, and the sky will be roiled up like a scroll”</B> (v.4). <B>“Its streams will be turned to pitch, and its loose earth into brimstone, and its land will become burning pitch. It will not be quenched night or day; Its smoke will go up forever”</B> (9-10).</div> <bR> <div> We could go on and on, as most of the prophets contain many such passages. They are cataclysmic in terminology, yet all are figurative, or the earth would have been destroyed many times over.</div> <bR> <div> My question is why do people realize that these passages are figurative in the Old Testament, yet when the same type of language is used in the New Testament, they take it as literal? Do they not see the correlation between the two? Is it because we are so familiar with the New Testament, but are severely lacking when it comes to the Old Testament?  </div> <bR> <div> The Old Testament is the key to the New Testament. The two support one another and need to be treated as a whole. If we familiarize ourselves with the terminology of the Old Testament, it will aid greatly in understanding the New Testament in the light in which it was intended.  Without the Old Testament, the New Testament would make little sense.</div> <bR> </td> </tr></table></body>