Will God literally destroy the earth again?

[RockSolid]

Except that the referent of Isaiah 34 is Edom, not Israel.

I'd compare Isaiah 34 with Isaiah 13 and 14, where we see similar language of cosmic disturbances (13:10) and then a clear identification of the image of a "star" with the king of Babylon (14:12).

Just making a comparison that it wasn't literal.

Peter would have a hard time convincing me to "look forward" and to "speed it's coming" the day when all of my unsaved friends and family, my dogs, cats, horses... whatever pets you have... all the animals, are heated to such an extreme temperature that they are melted down while we look on. What a great day!

[Raybob]

Just making a comparison that it wasn't literal.

Peter would have a hard time convincing me to "look forward" and to "speed it's coming" the day when all of my unsaved friends and family, my dogs, cats, horses... whatever pets you have... all the animals, are heated to such an extreme temperature that they are melted down while we look on. What a great day!

All the more reason to tell your unsaved friends and family about Jesus. Are you not looking forward to the new heavens and new earth wherin dwelleth righteousness with Satan cast into the lake of fire foreever?

[Matthehitmanhart]

Just thought I should note, we're now three pages into this thread and I haven't seen anyone advocating complete destruction give an answer for verses like Genesis 8:21 or Ecclesiastes 1:4. To these I would also add Psalm 78:69 ("He built his sanctuary like the heights, like the earth which he has established forever") and Psalm 104:5 ("You who laid the foundations of the earth so that it should not be moved forever"). If you think the earth will be completely destroyed, then what do you make of these passages?

[Raybob]

Just thought I should note, we're now three pages into this thread and I haven't seen anyone advocating complete destruction give an answer for verses like Genesis 8:21 or Ecclesiastes 1:4. To these I would also add Psalm 78:69 ("He built his sanctuary like the heights, like the earth which he has established forever") and Psalm 104:5 ("You who laid the foundations of the earth so that it should not be moved forever"). If you think the earth will be completely destroyed, then what do you make of these passages?

I believe the new testiment interprets the old.

Heaven and earth shall pass away: but my words shall not pass away.
(Luk 21:33)

[Matthehitmanhart]

I believe the new testiment interprets the old.

Heaven and earth shall pass away: but my words shall not pass away.
(Luk 21:33)

Sure, and if the Lord tarries you will also pass away. But then Jesus will raise you up with a renewed body, the same and yet different, which will not be subject to decay. And there is also a sense in which you have already passed away...

"Therefore, if anyone is in Christ, he is a new creation; old things have passed away; behold, all things have become new." - 2 Corinthians 5:17

Let me ask you this: are you the same physical person you were before you accepted Christ?

"Because the creation itself also will be delivered from the bondage of corruption into the glorious liberty of the children of God." - Romans 8:21

According to Paul, God's plan is to rescue his people from the power of death, not destroy them and start again from scratch. And in the same way, God's plan is to rescue creation from its bondage to decay, not destroy it and start again from scratch.

[Chris38]

In chapter 8:21 God says that he will never again smite all things living as he has done. Then again in chapter 9 he vows never to destroy mankind by way of a flood.

Genesis 8:21
And the Lord smelled a savor of rest, and the Lord said in his heart, I will henceforth curse the ground no more for mans cause: for the imagination of mans heart is evil, even from his youth: neither will I smite anymore all things living as I have done.

Then in the next chapter he says he will never destroy every living thing by flood.

Chapter 9:11
And my covenant will i establish with you, that from henceforth all flesh shall not be rooted out by the waters of the flood, neither shall there be a flood to destroy the earth anymore.

So are these 2 separate promises? or is the promise in chapter 8 making reference to the promise in chapter 9?

[Cyberseeker]

Here is that word 'dissolved' again:

"All the stars in the sky will be dissolved
and the heavens rolled up like a scroll;
all the starry host will fall
like withered leaves from the vine,
like shriveled figs from the fig tree."
(Isaiah 34:4

I'd say this is a prime example of non-literal language in prophecy, an evocative mixture of metaphor and hyperbole.

And yet both Jesus and Peter quote it literally and in context with literal events.

St. Peter: “Looking for and hasting unto the coming of the day of God, wherein the heavens being on fire shall be dissolved ” (2Pe 3:12-13)

Jesus: “In those days, following that distress, the sun will be darkened, and the moon will not give its light; the stars will fall from the sky, and the heavenly bodies will be shaken.” (Mark 13:24-25)

[Matthehitmanhart]

And yet both Jesus and Peter quote it literally and in context with literal events.

St. Peter: “Looking for and hasting unto the coming of the day of God, wherein the heavens being on fire shall be dissolved ” (2Pe 3:12-13)

Jesus: “In those days, following that distress, the sun will be darkened, and the moon will not give its light; the stars will fall from the sky, and the heavenly bodies will be shaken.” (Mark 13:24-25)

I've already given some comments on 2 Peter 3 in post #16 of this thread. As for Mark 13 and pars, what indication do you have from the text that Jesus is speaking literally? Granted that Isaiah 13 and 34 are both non-literal (not to mention other passages like Joel 2), I would say it's more likely, historically speaking, that Jesus' words should be understood in like manner, i.e. as cosmic metaphors for socio-political upheaval. That's not to say that Jesus couldn't transform an established metaphor into literal prose by letting the image become the referent, but that does seem less likely in light of (a) the metaphor's established history as a metaphor, and (b) the absence of any indication from the text that Jesus' meaning was different than the prophets before him.

[BroRog]

Where does it say in 1 Cor 15 or Rom 8 that there will be a change in the physical laws of the universe? I'm not seeing this in either text...

Beginning at 1Cor. 15:35, Paul begins to describe what the resurrection body will be like.

But someone will say, "How are the dead raised? And with what kind of body do they come?" You fool! That which you sow does not come to life unless it dies; and that which you sow, you do not sow the body which is to be, but a bare grain, perhaps of wheat or of something else. But God gives it a body just as He wished, and to each of the seeds a body of its own.

Here he draws an analogy between our current body and our resurrection body. Our current body is to our resurrection body as a seed is to a fully grown plant. Our current body is like some wrinkly, ugly, lifeless seed as compared to our resurrection body. Nevertheless, just as a seed has continuity with the plant that grows from it, our resurrection body will have come kind of continuity with our current body.

All flesh is not the same flesh, but there is one of men, and another flesh of beasts, and another flesh of birds, and another of fish. There are also heavenly bodies and earthly bodies, but the glory of the heavenly is one, and the glory of the earthly is another. There is one glory of the sun, and another glory of the moon, and another glory of the stars; for star differs from star in glory. So also is the resurrection of the dead.

Paul observes that the farther from the earth a creature exists, the more glory it has. Those who live on the earth have a certain kind of glory, but those who exist in heaven have another kind of glory. The resurrection body will have so much more glory than our current body since it will be more heaven like than earth like.

The most significant aspect of the heavens, the sun, moon, and stars, is the fact that it represents timeless eternity. By comparison to the earth, the heavens are timeless and never change. From age to age they remain the same, keeping their courses and never deviating from the path their creator gave them. As such, they represent "heaven" itself, which by comparison to this reality is permanent and not subject to going out of existence. This reality and especially the earth is transitory. We know from the second law of thermodynamics that God built entropy into this system. Left to itself, this creation would lose all of it's energy to heat that will eventually dissipate into space and the entire cosmos will eventually end up like a tepid tapioca pudding.

Jesus uses the concept of heaven to indicate a place where things do not rust or decay. He tells us, "Do not store up for yourselves treasures on earth, where moth and rust destroy, and where thieves break in and steal. But store up for yourselves treasures in heaven, where neither moth nor rust destroys, and where thieves do not break in or steal . . ." In other words, heaven is a place where the law of entropy does not apply. A treasure in heaven will not rust. It is not subject to decay or dissolution such that it will become useless to us. Paul will go on to use vocabulary that indicates the same concept -- words such as "imperishable."

[Our current body] is sown a perishable body, it is raised an imperishable body; it is sown in dishonor, it is raised in glory; it is sown in weakness, it is raised in power; it is sown a natural body, it is raised a spiritual body. If there is a natural body, there is also a spiritual body. So also it is written, "The first man, Adam, became a living soul." The last Adam became a life-giving spirit.

By "spiritual" I think he means "supernatural" or an existence that is not explainable according to the natural laws. Right now we have a "natural" body, which we explain in terms of natural laws of physics, chemistry, and biology. The resurrection body will not be a natural body, which exists according to the current laws of physics etc., it will be a supernatural body which exists according to an entirely new, more glorious physics, which is based on a life-giving spirit.

However, the spiritual is not first, but the natural; then the spiritual. The first man is from the earth, earthy; the second man is from heaven.

Paul denounces the teaching of some we started out as spiritual beings and were subsequently given bodies of flesh. He says, no, the natural body came first and then the spiritual body will come later.

As is the earthy, so also are those who are earthy; and as is the heavenly, so also are those who are heavenly. Just as we have borne the image of the earthy, we will also bear the image of the heavenly.

Paul employs the terms "earth" and "heaven" as relative terms with the focus on whether or not something is subject to going out of existence. Something is "earthly" if it is transitory, temporary, changing, rusting, breaking, wearing out, and etc. Something is "heavenly" if it is permanent, lasting, eternal, and not subject to decay, rust, breakage, etc. Right now we bear the image of the earthly in that our bodies grow old, weak, diseased, feeble, and etc. But when we bear the image of the heavenly, we will not grow old, wrinkled, aged, diseased, feeble, etc. We will be strong, invincible, ageless etc.

Now I say this, brethren, that flesh and blood cannot inherit the kingdom of God; nor does the perishable inherit the imperishable.

Here is the clearest indication that the future will present us with a totally different physics. The future kingdom will be imperishable; unlike the current system which has the property of entropy, the next system will have the property of being resistant to decay. This being the case, it would not be possible for the perishable to inherit such a kingdom. Flesh and blood is the kind of thing that doesn't last and would not be appropriate for such a kingdom. It makes no sense to think that a person who will eventually dissolve into dust will inherit a kingdom that will last forever. Rather it makes more sense to think that God will give us a body that will also last forever.

Notice that Paul's assertion here assumes a brand new physics, which is not subject to decay. It is an imperishable kingdom. His point is to say that it would not be appropriate to say that we who exist in flesh and blood bodies would inherit that kingdom. Rather, this is why we need to have imperishable bodies befitting of an imperishable kingdom.

Behold, I tell you a mystery; we will not all sleep, but we will all be changed, in a moment, in the twinkling of an eye, at the last trumpet; for the trumpet will sound, and the dead will be raised imperishable, and we will be changed. For this perishable must put on the imperishable, and this mortal must put on immortality. But when this perishable will have put on the imperishable, and this mortal will have put on immortality, then will come about the saying that is written, "Death is swallowed up in victory."

So we see that the hope of the believer is to inherit a kingdom that is not subject to rust, decay, dissolution, breakage, entropy or even death. As Solomon says, it is death that robs us of significance and robs life of meaning. "Futility, Futility, all is futile" says the preacher. We look forward to a world in which neither sin nor death can rob us of our significance. As sinless, morally good creatures that always obey the will of God, we will be significant. And death will not be able to rob us of that significance and render it meaningless.

Romans 8, makes a similar point.

For I consider that the sufferings of this present time are not worthy to be compared with the glory that is to be revealed to us.

Here we have the idea of glory again and this future glory is being compared to our current sufferings.

For the anxious longing of the creation waits eagerly for the revealing of the sons of God. For the creation was subjected to futility, not willingly, but because of Him who subjected it, in hope that the creation itself also will be set free from its slavery to corruption into the freedom of the glory of the children of God.

The elements of this futility are things like death, destruction, dissolution, corruption, rust, breakage, and entropy. Everything rusts, breaks down, decays, etc. and becomes not useful to us. This creation is futile because it won't last, and will eventually run down, the sun will go out, and the earth will end up being swallowed by a dieing sun and the whole cosmos will die a dark and cold death. But Paul says that the creation itself awaits to be glorified in the same way that the children of God will be glorified -- freed from its slavery to corruption. The creation and the children of God are changed together, at the same time, so that imperishable people will inherit an imperishable creation, both of which are freed from corruption, decay, rust, etc.

For we know that the whole creation groans and suffers the pains of childbirth together until now. And not only this, but also we ourselves, having the first fruits of the Spirit, even we ourselves groan within ourselves, waiting eagerly for [our] adoption as sons, the redemption of our body.

Not only do we suffer during our time of waiting but the creation itself suffers, waiting for the day when God will glorify his children along with their domain.

[InHisGlory]

Will God destroy the Earth again? Yeppers.
Will you care? Nope. Not even a little bit.
In a sense, He already has.
When the Bible talks about man or earth and uses terms like "forever" God simply means as long as earth is in time. Or, in some cases, as long as an era persists.
However, time is only a useful illusion created to give us humans a reference until the true reality of Heaven. Once time is no longer needed on Earth "forever" will be closed. Think of it more of a ballon than line. God blows it up and releases the air at His will. Our Forever is only the universe we occupy in our present realm. It's not the "true" forever.

[Matthehitmanhart]

Beginning at 1Cor. 15:35, Paul begins to describe what the resurrection body will be like...

Thanks for laying this out. Like you, I definitely think Paul emphasizes discontinuity as well as continuity in the relation of our current decaying bodies with our future imperishable bodies. But then I would also note that Jesus' own resurrected body is the prototype. Thus I'm also wary of saying that our future bodies won't be "natural", because I know this will regularly be taken in the dualistic, platonic sense of non-physicality. Instead of this, and instead of the word "supernatural", I would suggest the word trans-physical, because I think it hits the right balance of continuity and discontinuity without suggesting any anti-physical nonsense. When Paul contrasts the "natural" body of the present with the "spiritual" body of the future, he is not working within the dualistic categories of Plato. Rather, he is contrasting a physicality that is subject to death and animated by the present laws of decay with a physicality that is set free from death and animated by the life of the Spirit (hence, "Spiritual", or "Pneumatikos"). As long as we get that right, then I'm okay with exploring the aspects of discontinuity.

[RockSolid]

All the more reason to tell your unsaved friends and family about Jesus. Are you not looking forward to the new heavens and new earth wherin dwelleth righteousness with Satan cast into the lake of fire foreever?

All my unsaved family and friends already know about Jesus. I live in the United States, 99.9% of the population know about Jesus.

We're living in the new heavens and new earth now. The old has already passed away. The old heavens and earth... the old covenant, sacrifice, priests, temple, ect., are in the past... sealed with the destruction of the temple in 70AD. It was changed to the new heavens and earth.. new covenant, sacrifice (Jesus Christ), priests (us Christians), temple ( "for its temple is the Lord God the Almighty and the Lamb."), new Jerusalem .

Only Christians can be a part of it, that's why righteousness dwells there.
Rev 21:27 But nothing unclean will ever enter it, nor anyone who does what is detestable or false, but only those who are written in the Lamb's book of life.

Sinners still exist in the new heavens and earth but they are not part of it.... they are stuck outside.
Rev 22:14 Blessed are those who wash their robes, so that they may have the right to the tree of life and that they may enter the city by the gates.
Rev 22:15 Outside are the dogs and sorcerers and the sexually immoral and murderers and idolaters, and everyone who loves and practices falsehood.

It was built by Jesus Christ and the Apostles are the foundation.

Rev 21:14 And the wall of the city had twelve foundations, and on them were the twelve names of the twelve apostles of the Lamb.

We have no need of a human-built temple in the new covenant.
Rev 21:22 And I saw no temple in the city, for its temple is the Lord God the Almighty and the Lamb.

You can keep waiting for the new heavens and earth all you want, but you are already part of it.

[BroRog]

Thanks for laying this out. Like you, I definitely think Paul emphasizes discontinuity as well as continuity in the relation of our current decaying bodies with our future imperishable bodies. But then I would also note that Jesus' own resurrected body is the prototype. Thus I'm also wary of saying that our future bodies won't be "natural", because I know this will regularly be taken in the dualistic, platonic sense of non-physicality. Instead of this, and instead of the word "supernatural", I would suggest the word trans-physical, because I think it hits the right balance of continuity and discontinuity without suggesting any anti-physical nonsense. When Paul contrasts the "natural" body of the present with the "spiritual" body of the future, he is not working within the dualistic categories of Plato. Rather, he is contrasting a physicality that is subject to death and animated by the present laws of decay with a physicality that is set free from death and animated by the life of the Spirit (hence, "Spiritual", or "Pneumatikos"). As long as we get that right, then I'm okay with exploring the aspects of discontinuity.

I agree. Paul is not a platonist as far as I can tell.

[Raybob]

All my unsaved family and friends already know about Jesus. I live in the United States, 99.9% of the population know about Jesus.

Are you sure about that? For 27 years of my life, I thought I knew about Jesus. It wasn't until after much drinking, drugs, etc., that I really began to search, then later, was shown about the real Jesus that could save me. Before that, I "knew about Jesus" but didn't really have any idea about the true Jesus. I only knew what I heard from a few pulpits and from tv programs. I did NOT know about Jesus. This is totally off topic here but needs to be said.

[RockSolid]

In chapter 8:21 God says that he will never again smite all things living as he has done. Then again in chapter 9 he vows never to destroy mankind by way of a flood.

Genesis 8:21
And the Lord smelled a savor of rest, and the Lord said in his heart, I will henceforth curse the ground no more for mans cause: for the imagination of mans heart is evil, even from his youth: neither will I smite anymore all things living as I have done.

Then in the next chapter he says he will never destroy every living thing by flood.

Chapter 9:11
And my covenant will i establish with you, that from henceforth all flesh shall not be rooted out by the waters of the flood, neither shall there be a flood to destroy the earth anymore.

So are these 2 separate promises? or is the promise in chapter 8 making reference to the promise in chapter 9?

Would you rather drown or be nuked? One is just as bad as the other.
If He was going to destroy the earth with fire next time, why even promise not to use water. Why would it matter.

Gen 8:21 ... Neither will I ever again strike down every living creature as I have done.

I believe He is saying He will never strike down every living creature again.