Page 3 of 16 FirstFirst 1234567891011121314 ... LastLast
Results 31 to 45 of 228

Thread: New Heaven New Earth

  1. #31
    Join Date
    Nov 2014
    Posts
    9,149
    Blog Entries
    1

    Re: New Heaven New Earth

    Quote Originally Posted by Aristarkos View Post
    You should take the Hebrew into account, for example in Psa. 104:5 it says « olam va ed » which never means never, but the olam (aion) and further. In the O.T. the purpose of the aions (Eph. 3:11) wasn't explained yet, so they couldn't and didn't need to see the full picture. So this verse does not state the earth remains eternally.
    Here is very faulty logic.
    Your basic premise is that those in the OT didn't need to see the full picture so they were given an incorrect one.
    This is wrong, as the words are NOT the words of a Man, but God-breathed.
    Now if you were aiming at the idea that the words may be limited, that may be a fair claim, but they are NEVER in contradiction with each other.

    Is there anything which endures forever?
    Well this depends on whether you are taking a scientific view, or a relationship view.
    My great-grandfather may have had a sword, and over time the blade may be pitted and need renewing, the haft might work lose and need replacing etc. So is it the SAME sword when over time every part of it has been replaced.
    Taking another example, if I have a liver transplant and a heart transplant, then parts of me were not mine at birth, but do I remain me?
    A transformation means it remains and yet it also changes.
    When we live eternally, we also die and we are changed.
    So we can argue that the person I was is no more. This is true.
    We can also say I am me, that the person who was born remains.
    Paul used the picture of a seed, yet the seed ONLY gives life to its own, and not some other.

    You also seem to share God among the ancients who didn't know much about the heavens? The ancients knew a lot more about the heavens than we nowadays think. They knew of the air heaven where the fowls of the air fly in (Psa. 104:12). They knew of the star heaven where the son and moon are in (Gen. 15:5), and they knew about the heaven of heavens, the one that cannot contain God (1 Kings 8:27).
    Indeed the word most often used speaks of Heavens in the plural, noting that there is a mutiplicity. The Greeks also did the same.

    You are correct that there will not come a new planet earth as there didn't came a new one when the aion of Noah closed. They will be new compared to the old, the same about the heavens. The NHNE of Isaiah are BTW not the same as those mentioned in Rev. 21, I've already posted the differences once — which were denied of course — but will do it again:
    And they will be shown in error again.
    The NHNE is ONLY one.
    God is NOT making a NHNE AFTER Jesus returns, ONLY to do the same thing again after the Millennium. It is a nonsense to think He would, and further why would He need to.
    Remember that from the time of Jesus' return then the world is being transformed, with the River of life flowing out from Jerusalem.

    Isa. 65 speaks of Jerusalem, which is now, the old, that will be restored by Israel, v. 18. In Rev. 21 is the New Jerusalem.
    Incorrect - Isaiah doesn't speak simply of the old being restored, but of it being NEW - EXACTLY like that in Rev 21.
    Isa 65:17* “For behold, I create new heavens and a new earth, and the former things shall not be remembered or come into mind.*
    Isa 65:18* But be glad and rejoice forever in that which I create; for behold, I create Jerusalem to be a joy, and her people to be a gladness.*

    Pay attention to what Isaiah is told to say:
    Isa 65:19* I will rejoice in Jerusalem and be glad in my people; no more shall be heard in it the sound of weeping and the cry of distress.*

    Now what is John told:
    Rev 21:4* He will wipe away every tear from their eyes, and death shall be no more, neither shall there be mourning, nor crying, nor pain anymore, for the former things have passed away.”

    According to Isa. 65 the location is on a high mountain: My holy mountain, v. 25. According to Rev. 21, it comes from God from heaven, v. 2.
    Where is the contradiction?
    The NJ comes DOWN OUT of heaven to the earth. Where is it placed? In a valley? Nope, on Mount Zion:
    Rev 14:1* Then I looked, and behold, on Mount Zion stood the Lamb, and with him 144,000 who had his name and his Father's name written on their foreheads.*
    Rev 14:2* And I heard a voice from heaven like the roar of many waters and like the sound of loud thunder. The voice I heard was like the sound of harpists playing on their harps,*
    Rev 14:3* and they were singing a new song before the throne and before the four living creatures and before the elders. No one could learn that song except the 144,000 who had been redeemed from the earth.

    Notice they are BEFORE the throne, which is ON Mount Zion.

    According to Isaiah there are still sinners in Jerusalem, v. 20. According to Rev. 21 in the New Jerusalem comes nothing that defiles, v. 27.
    Again incorrect. Isaiah 65 does NOT say there are sinners IN Jerusalem.
    It simply states that at that time there will be sinners who may live a hundred years.
    Are there sinners at the time of the NHNE in Revelation?
    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.*

    Yes there are sinners. So your claim is again incorrect.

    According to Isa. 65 Jerusalem must be built, (see also 61:4; 62:4). According to Rev. 21 it is built by God, v. 12 — 15. See also Heb. 11:10.
    Isa 61:4* They shall build up the ancient ruins; they shall raise up the former devastations; they shall repair the ruined cities, the devastations of many generations.

    Is this verse speaking of Jerusalem? Nope, it is speaking of the restoration of the world DURING the Millennium.

    Now I don't know why you referenced Isa 62:4 but we read this:
    Isa 62:7* and give him no rest until he establishes Jerusalem and makes it a praise in the earth.
    This is clearly what God does.

    Your rejection seems based on this:
    Isa 65:21* They shall build houses and inhabit them; they shall plant vineyards and eat their fruit.

    Does this say Jerusalem? Does this not show that actually we will be involved in what God has done!
    When God made Eden He had Adam work in it, and Adam was to do all the work of growing and building etc. IOW God ACTUALLY grows everything, but Man is involved.

    According to Isa. 66:19 is sent to the Gentiles. According to Rev. 21 the Gentiles come , v. 24.
    Where is the contradiction?
    Yes I agree they are sent, but the very next verse has them coming. IOW they come because someone was sent.

    In Isaiah's Jerusalem there is a temple from which the stream comes, Eze. 40 — 47. In John's prophecy there is no temple and the stream comes from the throne of God and the Lamb, 21:1.
    Here you seem NOT to understand what God's throne is.
    You are correct about the stream coming from the temple in Jerusalem.
    The FACT though is, what is the Temple?
    It IS the throne of God.
    Revelation ALONE makes this clear, never mind abundant other passages in OT and NT:
    Rev 7:15* “Therefore they are before the throne of God, and serve him day and night in his temple; and he who sits on the throne will shelter them with his presence.*

    The throne of God is IN His temple.

    Rev 11:19* Then God's temple in heaven was opened, and the ark of his covenant was seen within his temple. There were flashes of lightning, rumblings, peals of thunder, an earthquake, and heavy hail.

    Notice we have the temple that was made by Man, and we have the Temple in Heaven.
    There is NO temple made by Man in the NJ. Instead there is the God's temple in the NJ, which IS the place of His throne.

    King David got it correct when he spoke with Nathan the Prophet in 2 Samuel 7. he had a house of cedar and God a tent.

    According to Isaiah, there is curse and judgment, 65:20; 66:15, 16, 24. According to Rev. 22:3 there's not.
    Again incorrect.
    In Rev 22:3 it is ONLY speaking of IN the NJ.
    Rev 22:15* Outside are the dogs and sorcerers and the sexually immoral and murderers and idolaters, and everyone who loves and practices falsehood.

    In Isaiah the sea is still there, for it is sent to the distant islands, 66:19, in Revelation there is no sea anymore 21:1.
    The same error as you make about the temple.
    What does Revelation say about the sea:
    Rev 12:17* Then the dragon became furious with the woman and went off to make war on the rest of her offspring, on those who keep the commandments of God and hold to the testimony of Jesus. And he stood on the sand of the sea.

    Are you saying that the dragon goes to the beach?
    Rev 13:1* And I saw a beast rising out of the sea, with ten horns and seven heads, with ten diadems on its horns and blasphemous names on its heads.

    Is this literally the sea?

    In Isaiah there is day and night, 66:23, in The Revelation there is no night anymore, 22:5.
    Again incorrect. There is NO night in the NJ.
    Rev 22:2* through the middle of the street of the city; also, on either side of the river, the tree of life with its twelve kinds of fruit, yielding its fruit each month. The leaves of the tree were for the healing of the nations.*

    Here we have months being mentioned.

    Rev 22:5* And night will be no more. They will need no light of lamp or sun, for the Lord God will be their light, and they will reign forever and ever.
    Here it says it isn't needed for light, not that it no longer exists.

    Rev 21:23* And the city has no need of sun or moon to shine on it, for the glory of God gives it light, and its lamp is the Lamb.*
    Rev 21:24* By its light will the nations walk, and the kings of the earth will bring their glory into it,*
    Rev 21:25* and its gates will never be shut by day—and there will be no night there.*

    You see there is NOTHING in Isaiah 65 and 66 which is contradicted by anything in Rev 21 & 22.
    Further we FIND the two visions using similar language and speaking of the same things.
    There is a River of life with the Tree of Life bringing healing for the nations in BOTH.
    In Jerusalem there will be no more weeping in BOTH.
    John uses the language of Isaiah, which points to them being the SAME.

    Are you really suggesting that the Jerusalem which is where Jesus rules, and which is attacked by Satan is then destroyed by God, even though the throne of God is there, the river of life is there and the tree of life is there, and when Satan loses in this final battle.
    The picture we are shown in Rev 21 & 22 is a reversal of what happened in Genesis.

    There is ONLY one NHNE.
    If it is AFTER the Millenium, then the PostMils/Amils are correct. If it is at the START of the Millennium then the PreMils are correct.

  2. #32
    Join Date
    Nov 2014
    Posts
    9,149
    Blog Entries
    1

    Re: New Heaven New Earth

    Quote Originally Posted by DurbanDude View Post
    All true, well put. We agree on a literal river. Where we differ is that I believe the millenial Israel will be filled with mortal Jews, many verses speak of this mortality during the Messianic era (Isaiah 65, Ezekiel, Zechariah 13). Also the Ezekiel Jerusalem differs from the New Jerusalem, the river flows from the temple..

    The saints rule over these mortal nations as described in Rev 20:4 , and Rev 2:26 , and Daniel 7:27. where will we rule from? Rev 20 refers to the "camp of the saints" in Jerusalem. And they went up on the breadth of the earth, and compassed the camp of the saints about, and the beloved city

    The New Jerusalem of Rev 21/22 is a different place, the river flows from the throne, there is no temple. The saints are no longer in any "camp" but live in the New Jerusalem.
    Just to deal with this objection.
    Rev 20 does NOT speak of the saints RULING from a camp.
    The camp is created when Satan has his last attack and deception.
    Those who are not deceived will flee to the City of God - Jerusalem, and camp about it.
    Notice the city is mentioned separate to the camp.

    Further there is 100% without any doubt a temple in the NHNE in Rev 22.
    The problem so many seem to have is that they don't GET what a temple is!
    The Temple on earth is a shadow of the Temple in Heaven.
    The Temple in Heaven is where the Throne of God is!

    The throne of God is moved from Heaven to Earth WHEN Jesus returns.
    So the statement the water flows from the throne room IS speaking about GOD's temple.

    The statement about "no temple" means there is no shadow anymore, for the reality has come. This speaks of NO Man made temple being in Jerusalem.
    Now just as God is the one who builds Jerusalem, yet we are involved in our own dwellings, so too this Temple of God. He has built it, but He involves us in it.

  3. #33
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    Durban ,South Africa
    Posts
    7,421

    Re: New Heaven New Earth

    Quote Originally Posted by ForHisglory View Post
    Just to deal with this objection.
    Rev 20 does NOT speak of the saints RULING from a camp.
    The camp is created when Satan has his last attack and deception.
    Those who are not deceived will flee to the City of God - Jerusalem, and camp about it.
    Notice the city is mentioned separate to the camp.
    FHG The text does not say that the camp is only created when Satan attacks. That is your mere assumption. Admit it

    urther there is 100% without any doubt a temple in the NHNE in Rev 22.
    The problem so many seem to have is that they don't GET what a temple is!
    The Temple on earth is a shadow of the Temple in Heaven.
    The Temple in Heaven is where the Throne of God is!
    Maybe you did not realise I was referring to a building. Let me clarify, I was referring to a temple building that does not exist as per Rev 21:
    22 I did not see a temple in the city, because the Lord God Almighty and the Lamb are its temple.

    This is different to the Ezekiel where there IS a temple building.

    The throne of God is moved from Heaven to Earth WHEN Jesus returns.
    So the statement the water flows from the throne room IS speaking about GOD's temple.
    Two different temples, the one river is coming from a building with precise measurements as per Ezekiel 40-48. the other river is flowing from the throne of God where there is no building. These are the facts, you can't use semantics to get around it, that will just make you look like you trying to get around those facts.

    The statement about "no temple" means there is no shadow anymore, for the reality has come. This speaks of NO Man made temple being in Jerusalem.
    Now just as God is the one who builds Jerusalem, yet we are involved in our own dwellings, so too this Temple of God. He has built it, but He involves us in it.
    Who knows who builds the Ezekiel temple, but it is a building with exact measurements. Unlike the New Jerusalem which has no actual temple because God is the temple as per v22 I did not see a temple in the city, because the Lord God Almighty and the Lamb are its temple.

  4. #34
    Join Date
    Nov 2014
    Posts
    9,149
    Blog Entries
    1

    Re: New Heaven New Earth

    Quote Originally Posted by Aristarkos View Post
    When we look at the Heavenly Jerusalem watch the dimensions: ±1491 miles in length, width and height. Most people consider this way to large but forget God is its Builder and Architect and His thoughts are higher then our thoughts. As you can see from the size it will be higher then any mountain. From this alone we have to conclude the old Jerusalem is meant in Ezekiel, not the New Jerusalem.
    Sorry but your idea as to the dimensions is incorrect.
    I know many people state this but actually reading Ezekiel may help you:
    Eze 48:30* “These shall be the exits of the city: On the north side, which is to be 4,500 cubits by measure,*
    Eze 48:31* three gates, the gate of Reuben, the gate of Judah, and the gate of Levi, the gates of the city being named after the tribes of Israel.*
    Eze 48:32* On the east side, which is to be 4,500 cubits, three gates, the gate of Joseph, the gate of Benjamin, and the gate of Dan.*
    Eze 48:33* On the south side, which is to be 4,500 cubits by measure, three gates, the gate of Simeon, the gate of Issachar, and the gate of Zebulun.*
    Eze 48:34* On the west side, which is to be 4,500 cubits, three gates, the gate of Gad, the gate of Asher, and the gate of Naphtali.*
    Eze 48:35* The circumference of the city shall be 18,000 cubits. And the name of the city from that time on shall be, The LORD Is There.”

    How long is a cubit? well the problem is that the word used is this:
    H4060
    מִדָּה
    middâh
    mid-daw'
    Feminine of H4055; properly extension, that is, height or breadth; also a measure (including its standard); hence a portion (as measured) or a vestment; specifically tribute (as measured): - garment, measure (-ing, meteyard, piece, size, (great) stature, tribute, wide.

    IOW it does actually say cubits, but a measure.
    Now Exodus 26 uses the same word, but here it simply means that each curtain will be of the SAME measure, yet in verse 2 there are curtains which are 28 cubits long, and in verse 8 it is 30 cubits long. So there isn't a set measure.
    Now in Ezekiel 40 we have a measuring reed, which is used to measure, and is itself 6 cubits long.
    A cubit it often considered to be about 18 inches, so 6 cubits would be 108 inches, or 9 feet or around 275 cm.
    So possibly Ezekiel is being told the city is 4500 x 6 cubits, which is 27,000 cubits or 13,500 yards or around 7.67 miles, which is about 12.375 kilometres.
    This seems too small, though large for a city of Ezekiel's time.
    Nineveh was probably around that size, and Babylon was bigger. (see page 4 of this link)

    This makes me think that it is a possible usage of the measure which Ezekiel states, but it is also probable that rather another measure is in view.

    Now your dimension is based from this:
    Rev 21:16* The city lies foursquare, its length the same as its width. And he measured the city with his rod, 12,000 stadia. Its length and width and height are equal.*
    Rev 21:17* He also measured its wall, 144 cubits by human measurement, which is also an angel's measurement.

    Now 144 cubits is 72 yards. Babylon had walls which were 50 cubits high or around 1/3 this height.

    The first real issue is in the word "height" in verse 16. Is the second statement of the verse meaning that the total measurement of each is that amount or is it actually saying the measure being used was the same?
    The next is that it states a TOTAL figure of 12,000 stadia (stadion). Many claim this as a figure for each side, yet it can as easily be read as a TOTAL for ALL four side, which would be the same as Ezekiel 48:35.
    12,000 / 4 (as it has equal sides) is 3,000 stadia.

    You see cities have length and breadth, but height is measured with the wall.
    You notice that at the start of the verse he states that the length and breadth are the same.
    Now verse 17 states the walls height, so we either have a contradiction, or the wall is immensely dwarfed by the buildings behind, or in fact the city is NOT almost 1,500 miles in height.
    I am of the view that the walls are very high at 72 yards, and that the height of the buildings aren't actually being mentioned.

    Now a stadia (see link here) is usually considered to mean 660 feet.
    So 3,000 stadia is 375 miles.
    So a city 375 miles long by 375 miles wide is huge.
    However stadion itself as a measurement is done using a rod, which is EXACTLY what we are told he does in verse 16.
    So the question is whether John is saying that 100 feet was being used for each stadia and was it a 6 foot rod?
    If not then what we are really being told is that there are 3,000 rods of length for each side.
    If the angel is using a rod which is 1.5 times larger than the one used by Ezekiel then we actually get a city of the SAME dimension.

    We do NOT know for certain what size the measure used in Ezekiel is - we can only speculate.
    We do NOT know for certain what size the measure used in Revelation is - we can only speculate.

    What we can see however is that the length seen in Revelation is 2/3 that in Ezekiel IF using the SAME measure. Conversely the angels measure may be half as much again as that used by Ezekiel, which then points to the same size city.

  5. #35
    Join Date
    Nov 2014
    Posts
    9,149
    Blog Entries
    1

    Re: New Heaven New Earth

    Quote Originally Posted by DurbanDude View Post
    FHG The text does not say that the camp is only created when Satan attacks. That is your mere assumption. Admit it
    It isn't simply an assumption - though I agree it is mine.
    We are told a few things in the passage:
    1) Satan goes and deceives.
    2) The nations come from the four corners to surround Jerusalem.
    3) The city of Jerusalem is stated separately from the camp.
    4) The word "camp" speaks of a temporary fortification.

    Maybe you did not realise I was referring to a building. Let me clarify, I was referring to a temple building that does not exist as per Rev 21:
    22 I did not see a temple in the city, because the Lord God Almighty and the Lamb are its temple.
    This is different to the Ezekiel where there IS a temple building.
    My point is that there IS a Temple BUILDING in Rev 22.
    It is simply called the Throne Room of God.

    Two different temples, the one river is coming from a building with precise measurements as per Ezekiel 40-48. the other river is flowing from the throne of God where there is no building. These are the facts, you can't use semantics to get around it, that will just make you look like you trying to get around those facts.
    Not two different temples.
    The FACT that one has precise measurements and the other doesn't is irrelevant.
    Are you assuming that the Throne of God is NOT INSIDE God's Temple?
    I quoted Revelation for Aristarkos. I'll give you the same verses:
    Rev 7:14* I said to him, “Sir, you know.” And he said to me, “These are the ones coming out of the great tribulation. They have washed their robes and made them white in the blood of the Lamb.*
    Rev 7:15* “Therefore they are before the throne of God, and serve him day and night in his temple; and he who sits on the throne will shelter them with his presence.*

    Is there a temple? Is His throne in that Temple? Is this therefore speaking of the SAME time as Revelation 22?
    There is 100% a building. It simply is NOT THE building which was the temple, nor any other temple which is of Man, for it is God's temple which comes down out of Heaven.
    It is His throne ROOM.

    Who knows who builds the Ezekiel temple, but it is a building with exact measurements. Unlike the New Jerusalem which has no actual temple because God is the temple as per v22 I did not see a temple in the city, because the Lord God Almighty and the Lamb are its temple.
    See point above. There is a Temple, just NOT the temple which is seen in Rev 11.

  6. #36
    Join Date
    Dec 2013
    Location
    London, England
    Posts
    6,620
    Blog Entries
    13

    Re: New Heaven New Earth

    Quote Originally Posted by DurbanDude View Post
    Ok on further analysis of Hebrew 12:26 , it is a reference to Haggai 2. That shaking is related to the second temple being greater than Solomon's. Which never occurred even under the rebuilding of Herod, until the Romans destroyed it. So one can only assume the shaking is symbolic of Jesus' association with the second temple and his effect on the nations. Jesus is building a kingdom that cannot be shaken, the church.
    I'm glad you pointed out that context is the key.

    Heb 12:27 And this word, Yet once more, signifieth the removing of those things that are shaken, as of things that are made, that those things which cannot be shaken may remain.
    Heb:28 Wherefore we receiving a kingdom which cannot be moved, let us have grace, whereby we may serve God acceptably with reverence and godly fear:


    V-28 says we are receiving a kingdom that cannot be moved. We are the church, how then can we receive what we are?

  7. #37
    Join Date
    Dec 2013
    Location
    London, England
    Posts
    6,620
    Blog Entries
    13

    Re: New Heaven New Earth

    Quote Originally Posted by DurbanDude View Post
    Do you also see a partial transformation at the beginning of the 7th day, when the landscape is transformed as per descriptions of the great earthquake, every building collapses, every mountain and island removed, mount Zion raised higher than the rest, and a transforming river of life flowing out from Jerusalem? Thus we begin the millenium with a new land and new sky. I would associate the NHNE mentioned in Isaiah 66 and 2 Peter 3 with the day of the Lord, beginning of the 7th "day".
    As appealing as it is to associate the NHNE with the onset of the millennial age scripture, however, disagrees. It is plain that the NHNE is ushered in after the GWTJ, ie at the end of the 1000 years.

    1. When Jesus returns and defeats the Beats army, he sets up his Throne in new Jerusalem which comes down from heaven at that point.
    2. There is no evidence that God the Father will be on earth during the millennial age.
    3. But things kick up a gear after the 1000 years is over.
    4. At the GWTJ, the sea gives up the dead in it.
    5. And the last enemy, death and hell too are judged and cast into the lake of fire.

    Now, with all manner of evil and wickedness removed, the NHNE is finally ushered in. How do we know?

    a. In the NHNE, the sea is no more (Rev 21:1). Notice that the sea is still present during the GWTJ Rev 20:13?
    b. God himself and his Tabernacle finally comes to earth (Rev 21:3).
    c. In the NHNE death is no more Rev 21:4 And God shall wipe away all tears from their eyes; and there shall be no more death, neither sorrow, nor crying, neither shall there be any more pain: for the former things are passed away.
    d. In contrast, in as much as longevity will prevail in the millennial age [Isaiah 65:20] death will still occur.
    f. In Rev 20:9 we see God sending fire from heaven down to earth to devour Satan and his army.

    It is easy to get confused because of how John placed the coming of the New Jerusalem, but there are many clues as enumerated above that makes it impossible for the NHNE to commence at the same time as the millennium, instead it comes at the end of it.

  8. #38
    Join Date
    Nov 2014
    Posts
    9,149
    Blog Entries
    1

    Re: New Heaven New Earth

    Quote Originally Posted by Trivalee View Post
    I'm glad you pointed out that context is the key.

    Heb 12:27 And this word, Yet once more, signifieth the removing of those things that are shaken, as of things that are made, that those things which cannot be shaken may remain.
    Heb:28 Wherefore we receiving a kingdom which cannot be moved, let us have grace, whereby we may serve God acceptably with reverence and godly fear:


    V-28 says we are receiving a kingdom that cannot be moved. We are the church, how then can we receive what we are?
    Yes, CONTEXT is always key.
    The kingdoms of this world will be gone, but we will receive His kingdom, of which we are citizens, but not yet living in it.

  9. #39
    Join Date
    Nov 2014
    Posts
    9,149
    Blog Entries
    1

    Re: New Heaven New Earth

    Quote Originally Posted by Trivalee View Post
    As appealing as it is to associate the NHNE with the onset of the millennial age scripture, however, disagrees. It is plain that the NHNE is ushered in after the GWTJ, ie at the end of the 1000 years.

    1. When Jesus returns and defeats the Beats army, he sets up his Throne in new Jerusalem which comes down from heaven at that point.
    This is the START of the NHNE.
    You seem to be arguing against yourself.
    The NJ is part of the NHNE.

    2. There is no evidence that God the Father will be on earth during the millennial age.
    Actually there is:
    Isa 66:23* From new moon to new moon, and from Sabbath to Sabbath, all flesh shall come to worship before me, declares the LORD.
    Do you think this refers solely to Jesus?

    3. But things kick up a gear after the 1000 years is over.
    4. At the GWTJ, the sea gives up the dead in it.
    5. And the last enemy, death and hell too are judged and cast into the lake of fire.

    Now, with all manner of evil and wickedness removed, the NHNE is finally ushered in. How do we know?

    a. In the NHNE, the sea is no more (Rev 21:1). Notice that the sea is still present during the GWTJ Rev 20:13?
    Indeed, but what is the usage of sea referencing?

    b. God himself and his Tabernacle finally comes to earth (Rev 21:3).
    And, no contradiction.

    c. In the NHNE death is no more Rev 21:4 And God shall wipe away all tears from their eyes; and there shall be no more death, neither sorrow, nor crying, neither shall there be any more pain: for the former things are passed away.
    Incorrect, you attribute what is stated for the New Jerusalem, to the whole world.
    Yet when we read these SAME words in Isaiah 65 we see death continues.

    d. In contrast, in as much as longevity will prevail in the millennial age [Isaiah 65:20] death will still occur.
    Indeed. It is ONLY AFTER the GWTJ that death itself is done away with. This is NOT the moment when the NHNE happens.

    f. In Rev 20:9 we see God sending fire from heaven down to earth to devour Satan and his army.
    This does NOT require God to be IN Heaven. Also note that God is omnipresent, so in a sense He is in Heaven, even when on earth.
    Elijah prayed and fire came down from heaven. Elijah was on earth.

    It is easy to get confused because of how John placed the coming of the New Jerusalem, but there are many clues as enumerated above that makes it impossible for the NHNE to commence at the same time as the millennium, instead it comes at the end of it.
    Nope, there is NOTHING that makes it impossible for the NHNE to commence at the START of the MK.
    However the clue about the NJ makes it clear that it does happen at the same time.
    Rev 21:1* Then I saw a new heaven and a new earth, for the first heaven and the first earth had passed away, and the sea was no more.*
    Rev 21:2* And I saw the holy city, new Jerusalem, coming down out of heaven from God, prepared as a bride adorned for her husband.

    You cannot divorce verse 2 from verse 1 - CONTEXT makes things very clear.

  10. #40
    Join Date
    Dec 2013
    Location
    London, England
    Posts
    6,620
    Blog Entries
    13

    Re: New Heaven New Earth

    Quote Originally Posted by ForHisglory View Post
    Yes, CONTEXT is always key.
    The kingdoms of this world will be gone, but we will receive His kingdom, of which we are citizens, but not yet living in it.
    His Kingdom is the new Jerusalem, isn't it?

  11. #41
    Join Date
    Nov 2014
    Posts
    9,149
    Blog Entries
    1

    Re: New Heaven New Earth

    Quote Originally Posted by Trivalee View Post
    His Kingdom is the new Jerusalem, isn't it?
    His Kingdom is the whole world, which starts in Jerusalem, as so much does.

  12. #42
    Join Date
    Dec 2013
    Location
    London, England
    Posts
    6,620
    Blog Entries
    13

    Re: New Heaven New Earth

    Quote Originally Posted by ForHisglory View Post
    This is the START of the NHNE.
    You seem to be arguing against yourself.
    The NJ is part of the NHNE.
    Part of the NHNE? Is NJ divided into bits? Please elaborate?

    Actually there is:
    Isa 66:23* From new moon to new moon, and from Sabbath to Sabbath, all flesh shall come to worship before me, declares the LORD.
    Do you think this refers solely to Jesus?
    Isa 66:23 corroborates Zech 14:17. Both have Jesus in place, not the Godhead.

    Indeed, but what is the usage of sea referencing?
    The sea mentioned in Rev 20:13.

    Incorrect, you attribute what is stated for the New Jerusalem, to the whole world.
    Yet when we read these SAME words in Isaiah 65 we see death continues.
    The above is the common error made by those who haven't thought this through. The question you must answer is whether the NHNE will cover only the NJ or traverse the whole earth and heaven as we know it? While the NJ is limited to Jerusalem, there's nothing in scripture that says the NHNE will also be limited to that little space in the Mid-East. I challenge you to rebut this with scripture.

    This does NOT require God to be IN Heaven. Also note that God is omnipresent, so in a sense He is in Heaven, even when on earth.
    Elijah prayed and fire came down from heaven. Elijah was on earth.
    God indeed is omnipresent. However, if he is on earth when Satan's army surrounds the NJ, he could have sent fire from earth also. Yet the text (Rev 20:9) said: "fire came down from heaven". So with this and other info, I am satisfied that God is in heaven during the millennium. Elijah was a man calling upon God who is in heaven - this comparison is rather weak, don't you think?

    Nope, there is NOTHING that makes it impossible for the NHNE to commence at the START of the MK.
    However the clue about the NJ makes it clear that it does happen at the same time.
    Rev 21:1* Then I saw a new heaven and a new earth, for the first heaven and the first earth had passed away, and the sea was no more.*
    Rev 21:2* And I saw the holy city, new Jerusalem, coming down out of heaven from God, prepared as a bride adorned for her husband.

    You cannot divorce verse 2 from verse 1 - CONTEXT makes things very clear.
    1. Please explain why the sea is present in Rev 20:13 GWTJ - end of the 1000 years and not in Rev 21:1? There is no mistake that the sea here is literal and not figurative of something else because the text says it released the DEAD in it!

    2. How do you explain its absent here Rev 12:1? If the NHNE starts at the onset of the millennium with the sea present, why did it suddenly disappear? Either the Bible lied or you are WRONG.

    John said he saw the NJ several times, it is a general statement. The key is to follow the sequence of events according to scripture to ascertain where each event fits in. Failing to do this obviously is an own goal and you'll never get the proper understanding of things.

  13. #43
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Location
    ADELAIDE / South Australia
    Posts
    3,551

    Re: New Heaven New Earth

    Quote Originally Posted by DurbanDude View Post
    So folks, don't think of a new planet and new universe. Just a transformed landscape.
    Whatever God does , it is going to be good. Like when he first created the heaven and earth when everything all together was declared very good.

    I am of the belief that when God does create a NHNE, everything in it will be declared very Good. This is the restoration of all things back to the time when all was very good, and God in his fullness tabernacle with Man.
    And those castles made of sand....fall into the sea......eventually

  14. #44
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Location
    ADELAIDE / South Australia
    Posts
    3,551

    Re: New Heaven New Earth

    Quote Originally Posted by DurbanDude View Post
    So folks, don't think of a new planet and new universe. Just a transformed landscape.
    Whatever God does , it is going to be good. Like when he first created the heaven and earth when everything all together was declared very good.

    I am of the belief that when God does create a NHNE, everything in it will be declared very Good. This is the restoration of all things back to the time when all was very good, and God in his fullness tabernacle with Man.
    And those castles made of sand....fall into the sea......eventually

  15. #45
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    Durban ,South Africa
    Posts
    7,421

    Re: New Heaven New Earth

    Quote Originally Posted by jeffweeder View Post
    Whatever God does , it is going to be good. Like when he first created the heaven and earth when everything all together was declared very good.

    I am of the belief that when God does create a NHNE, everything in it will be declared very Good. This is the restoration of all things back to the time when all was very good, and God in his fullness tabernacle with Man.
    Yes definitely. But it can happen more than once because we are only talking about a surface transformation. If it was an actual New Earth, a new planet, we would have more of a tendency to want to coincide all verses about a NHNE at the end of the millenium as per the NHNE of Rev 20. But knowing that it's just a land transformation, it's more feasible/credible that context determines when that particular land transformation occurs.

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Similar Threads

  1. In Heaven or on Earth?
    By Soldier_of_Faith in forum End Times Chat
    Replies: 24
    Last Post: Apr 12th 2015, 12:36 AM
  2. Discussion New Heaven and New Earth ...
    By vja4Him in forum End Times Chat
    Replies: 13
    Last Post: Sep 21st 2009, 03:09 PM
  3. A New Heaven And A New Earth.
    By napsnsnacks in forum End Times Chat
    Replies: 32
    Last Post: Jun 23rd 2009, 07:19 AM
  4. Heaven and Earth the same???????
    By Firstfruits in forum Bible Chat
    Replies: 34
    Last Post: Mar 16th 2009, 07:40 PM

Tags for this Thread

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •