New Earth or Renewed Earth?

By Rupert

15 Jun 2007

earthas17.jpgWe live in a disposable culture, where we often throw away something when we have finished with it. My parents had their first washing machine for nearly two decades; now we think we have done well if it lasts 8 years, before we discard that last one, to buy the latest version. So it is with computers, cars, MP3 players, and almost everything else we possess. So have we created God in our image? Have we made Him act in ways that we act?

For long time I have always envisioned God bringing his mighty hands to bear on our earth at the end of time, to wrap it up as one does with the empty paper from Fish n’ Chips (for UK readers) or a MacDonald’s Burger (for US readers) and toss it into the bin. And then, of course, there is the hope of brand new creations, a New Earth & New Heavens: this time with no sin, death, pain or suffering.

Recently, I have looked again at this theology of the New Heavens and the New Earth, and began to see that maybe God isn’t going to destroy this present earth and make a new one, but to RENEW the one we have currently. The vision of Revelation 21 is of an earth with no sin and no effects of sin: no pain, tears, suffering; no death or destruction; no evil. There is a discontinuity with our current world, something tremendous has happened to destroy evil. But has God started again? Or has He purified and cleansed what we have now, setting all things right?

It is interesting to note that the creation described in Genesis 1 is not so much about the creation of the world, but God forming the earth, the sun, the birds, fish, animals and humans, bringing life and order from the chaos and darkness. God was stamping His DNA on the earth, His fingerprint, and it was very good. Will He not do that once again, bringing His order, His DNA once again to this wonderful world we live in, that has been stained so badly with chaos and darkness?

So back to Rev 21, the word new is not ‘neos’ (meaning new in time or origin) but ‘kainos’ (new in nature of quality) which implies that this world is to restored or renew taking on a new nature or quality, rather than a brand and completely different earth.

Some would say that 2 Pet 3:10-12 seems to speak of the destruction of the world we live in, with fire coming to melt the earth. Michael Goheen, in a brilliant and easily accessible theological paper that can be found here, suggests the question to ask is “whether the fire of judgement will annihilate or purify the world. Fire can to both. In Scripture the fire of judgement destroys that which is evil but purifies what is good.”

Does it make any difference? Well I think it does. If I see God’s purpose is to restore the earth the way I live now has to be consistent with that … I can’t just treat it as one of those disposable items that will be thrown away when finished with. I have a responsibility to care and tend, and to participate in God’s mission of restoring the whole of creation, bringing it back to His original blueprint. As Goheen says:

“If redemption is the restoration of the whole of our creational life, then our mission is to embody the good news that every part of creational life, including the public life of our culture, is being restored. It will mean being good news in our care for the environment, international relations, economic justice, business, media, scholarship, family, and law.”

What do you think? Is this a possible way of seeing God’s mission? Or theological nit-picking? Does it make any difference?

If you are interested, I have blogged a bit about this and engaged in some discussion about this on a couple of posts on my blog: New Earth and Carbon Emissions and What is missional church? – Part 8

Rupert Ward

Tagged: ,

42 comments

Trackback


  1. Comment by Chaz

    9.46 am on 15 Jun 2007

    Rupert, I think it makes a huge difference, and for me has been a very important way of viewing God’s purposes and the mission we are called to live out.

    The first time I heard someone teach about a renewed heaven and earth, many years ago, it had a hugely profound impact on my thinking and my faith. It provides me with a beautiful and consistent picture of God’s purpose throughout all of time, where he is working to perfect a creation that he loves.

    Without this view, we can end up with an attitude that everything we see around us is disposable, and all problems are ultimately solved with a divine “magic wand” – and that has to affect our outlook and approach to mission. With it, we’re encouraged to see the reality of God’s kingdom coming on earth, day-by-day, and be part of advancing it in preparation for the day when it is complete.

    It makes sense to me :)

    1. Comment by Rupert Ward

      3.27 pm on 15 Jun 2007

      Thanks Chaz … you are ahead of the game! I totally agree.
      As I have been talking about this recently, I have come across some people who seem resistant to even considering an alternative to the traditional brand new earth theology! I wonder what they are so scared about?

  2. Comment by fernando

    10.14 am on 15 Jun 2007

    Yes, the difference between seeing the new earth as renewed, instead destroyed and built again, has tremendous difference. Tied into this is the impact of seeing the world as good but marred by the repairable effect of sin versus seeing the world as tainted beyond redemption.

    But, coming back to your initial metaphor about consumer goods. Without doubt a well-maintained washing machine will last a couple of decades, at least. But, my state of the art 1999 laptop computer, despite still functioning well, simply will not run a lot of the software I currently need and will not be able to run any of the software by the time next year’s updates are in.

    Some things will last, some will be renewed and yes, some will be cast aside. The essential theological task then becomes discerning those categories, does it not?

    1. Comment by Paul

      10.49 am on 15 Jun 2007

      thanks fernando, that is a really helpful point. There does seem to be an eternal dimension to this – the bible talks about some things that will never fade away -and maybe that is part of this, that within the story of the eternal son, our stories live on, more than that find their fullness in our own resurected bodies – like us as we were but transformed in the same way as the resurected christ – the hope that we get our lives, our humanity, our identity fully back…

      1. Comment by Rupert Ward

        3.35 pm on 15 Jun 2007

        Fernando and Paul – thanks for the comments.

        I agree … some things will fade away, some will endure. I guess my point about washing machines etc was more about us creating God (and how he acts) in our image, or in light of the way the world works for us. I probably wasn’t a well made point, or that important for the rest of the post, but i was wondering if we see God as someone who is happy to destroy or throw away the earth, as that is what we do all the time?

        I have a 3 year old boy who constantly says when something breaks: “we can buy a new one!” I don’t really know where he gets this from, as we certainly aren’t constantly buying him presents, giving him things, and are pretty frugal in the way we live. But i think there is something in our culture, a spirit or a ethos, that runs very deep: we throw away when something breaks and get a new one. I was wondering how much of that has influenced our thinking about God making a new earth? What do you guys think?

        1. Comment by fernando

          7.23 am on 17 Jun 2007

          It’s a good question. I’ve certainly noticed amongst some of my daughter’s friends (she’s nearly 6), there is a tendency to say “we can buy another one” when things breaks. That’s a long way from my childhood experience.

          But something I’m thankful for is that daughter understands things can be fixed. I’m not sure theology is the reason, as much as spending three years in India, where most of her toys could not be replaced. She grew up knowing that her papa could solder and rewire electronic toys and there were some good tradesmen in the local village would could repair broken plastic and wood.

          Her reaction to a broken toy is to imitate Bob The Builder – “can we fix it?”

          1. Comment by Rupert Ward

            10.09 am on 18 Jun 2007

            Good comment Fernando – thanks. I think we have lost the VALUE of things in our culture, but in places like India or Pakistan (where i lived for a couple of years) there seems a much greater value that people have, as there isn’t the money to buy things again. I was constantly amazed at the ingenuity of people to recycle things when they had broken to make something else.

            Comments won’t nest below this level.

            Reply here

  3. Comment by Paul

    10.56 am on 15 Jun 2007

    Thanks rupert, great post! I can’t help but think that this applies to us as ‘new creations’ – we don’t get remade, a la nichademus’ wondering question to Jesus – but we are being made anew, our humanity being restored.

    Indeed it would seem from one reading of the scriputre that creation is being held back, waiting for us as God’s idol, the image bearer to take their place again in God’s temple palace. In that we look to Jesus as the example of full humanity [an other centred, life giving, loving, serving, existence] and the hope we have of dying with him to become like him, transformed now and fully transformed, resurected in the age to come…

    Indeed within the kingdom of god we see signs and wonders of this – in our own lives as we are changed/healed/find life and in the lives of others who we commit too, pray for, encourage and spur each other on as part of a shared transformation project…

    1. Comment by Rupert Ward

      3.37 pm on 15 Jun 2007

      Yes Paul. Good comment, and I agree.
      I wonder: what to you do see as the discontinuity of us as new creations as well as the continuity?

  4. Pingback by Rupert’s Blog » New Earth or Renewed Earth

    3.12 pm on 15 Jun 2007

    [...] have posted at Jason Clark’s site this morning, on “New Earth or Renewed Earth“. I have blogged on this before, most recently here, but also an older post about “New [...]

  5. Comment by Pastor Astor

    4.18 pm on 15 Jun 2007

    It really makes a big difference. From my perspective it has a lot to say about God – who He is and how He acts. Why would He wait for century upon century for His people to get it right if He is planning to burn it all in the end anyway? I think the renewed earth is in line with the God I know, who patiently waits, who in the beginning declared it all good, and who will make it good again in the end. It also has a bearing upon our mission as Gods people. So easily we become focused on the other worldly – being spiritual is being minimally human, minimally physical. I believe this is a great lie and misconception. Jesus – God himself – became flesh. In our central worship we are reminded of this again, and again. The essence of our faith is God who became flesh.

    We cant just sit back and wait to be airlifted out to heaven. THIS is our reality, THIS will STAY our reality. The gospel is that the Kingdom has arived HERE, and God will see it brought to completion.

    1. Comment by Rupert Ward

      10.11 am on 18 Jun 2007

      Thanks for the comment, Pastor Astor.
      I really agree!

  6. Comment by D.G. Hollums

    5.18 pm on 15 Jun 2007

    Way to go Rupert!

    I had an amazing professor in Seminary that caught this Theology in our Revelation class and has been teaching it for quite some time now… I highly recommend it:

    Revelation: Holy Living in an Unholy World

    But sadly it is out of print (unless you want to spend $278 on a copy… considering selling mine, heh)

    But this other Bible study is good and has a leader’s guide and student guide available:

    Journey Through The Bible Series: Revelation

    http://www.amazon.com/Revelation-Journey-Through-Bible-16/dp/B000AY033K/ref=sr_1_4/104-6233841-4530359?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1181923683&sr=1-4

    And of course you can always buy it through the United methodist Church’s publishing house, Cokesbury.com

    Mulholland does an amazing job with reading Revelation through the eyes of a 1st Century Jewish mindset. He mostly uses the Old Testament to find the imagery’s meaning found in Revelation. It is by far the best and most thought provoking reading of Revelation I had ever read. Highly suggested!

    1. Comment by Rupert Ward

      10.14 am on 18 Jun 2007

      Thanks for the tips on resources D.G. – much appreciated. I will look them out, as i was thinking about doing some more study on revelation.

  7. Pingback by Well . . . | iamjoshbrown.com

    3.32 am on 16 Jun 2007

    [...] Here’s a great little read about a more “positive” reading of creation/recreation/…. [...]

  8. Trackback by intersections

    5.20 pm on 16 Jun 2007

    New Earth or Renewed Earth?…

    We live in a disposable culture, where we often throw away something when we have finished with it. My parents had their first washing machine for nearly two decades; now we think we have done well if it lasts 8…

  9. Comment by Duncan McFadzean

    8.49 pm on 16 Jun 2007

    Rupert, I’m going through the same thought process and it’s turning my world upside down. Next question to work through though is does that mean we can save the world by works or do we still believe that God makes all things new at the end? And if so, why work for that renewal now? I think the answer is that it’s the wrong question. I think that we’re called to act as stewards of the earth right now, regardless of what we believe will happen at the end of time. What say you?

    Also, what do you think it means to store up treasure in heaven if heaven ends up being on earth?

    1. Comment by Rupert Ward

      10.19 am on 18 Jun 2007

      Good question Duncan.
      I agree i don’t think we accomplish this all by our works … so i think there is some kind of judgement on sin / evil at the end (the fire in 2 Peter, cleansing our world). I don’t think the hope that God will eventually finish this renewing work is an excuse not to co-operate with Him now.

      So for me the question becomes: what can we realistically hope to achieve? I am not sure i have any answers on that!

      I would interpret the “treasure in heaven” as spiritual treasure … i think jesus goes on to say where moth and rust doesn’t destroy … to it is things that will endure, that isn’t subject to the “chaos and darkness” of this present live. Just a thought!

  10. Comment by Elaine Nelson

    9.25 pm on 16 Jun 2007

    One of the tenets of Stoicism taught that the world would come to an end in fonflagration, then begin all over again. At that time, all the blessed would share in a happy future. Is there anything new under the sun?

    1. Comment by Rupert Ward

      10.24 am on 18 Jun 2007

      No! Thanks for the comment.

  11. Pingback by Heaven, New Earth, or Renewed Earth? « Running With the Lion

    5.17 pm on 17 Jun 2007

    [...] Heaven, New Earth, or Renewed Earth? Rupert Ward is asking an important question in a post on Jason Clark’s blog. You can find it here. [...]

  12. Comment by Alex

    7.21 pm on 17 Jun 2007

    Interesting post. I’m not being flippant but where would all the people go? Assuming more people will be included in the restoration of the earth than its current capacity could contain, wouldn’t it need to be bigger?

    1. Comment by Rupert Ward

      10.23 am on 18 Jun 2007

      Penetrating question Alex – thanks! For me there were a few thoughts, but i am not sure i really know. So anyone else have any thoughts?

      Are there really more people that current capacity? Sure there will be at some point, but isn’t it said there are more people alive now, than have ever lived previously?

      The other thought was thinking about Rev 21 – no sea … How do we interpret that? Is it literal and therefore there will be more land? Or does it mark a changing of the landscape of the world? Or is figurative?

      Or does God some other cunning plan up His sleeves that we haven’t thought about?

      1. Comment by Alastair

        2.20 pm on 18 Jun 2007

        I remember Tim Lahaye saying on is commentary on Revelation that the Sea was quite simply a waste of space, and God would remove it in his new creation, allowing mankind to build and expand into the great abyss that it had once been.

        I almost threw the book out of the window (only done that with a few books!). What complete and utter nonsense. Clearly, because we cannot pave over the sea and build a shopping mall there, it must be a waste of space. The fact that most of the world’s lifeforms live there is besides the point. The fact that God created the sea, and its creatures, in Genesis 1, is besides the point.

        However, take quick class in Hebrew Mythology/Worldview, (or biblical theology/OT Survey for that matter) and an alternative interpretation comes to the fore. The Sea, in ANE (ancient near-east) belief, represents forces of chaos and/or evil. The Psalms clearly show God battling in some way with the Deep, or the Abyss. The Deep seems to be a throwback to the primordial chaos we see in Gen 1 (The Spirit hovering over the face of the deep, whilst the world was tohu and bohu — formless and void, or chaotic). The writer of Revelation is telling us that, when God completes his work of redemption, he will remove this ever-present chaotic element from creation once and for all, and creation will be remade without this chaos/natural evil..

        As for the lack of space, I would suggest:

        1) maybe God will increase the size of the earth when he renews it

        2) maybe we will colonise other planets. OK so I am a sci-fi fan, but I’ve always thought the vastness of the universe is a waste of space if we can never one day explore and conquer it, along the lines of the original creation mandate in Gen 1.

        3) maybe space will work differently. We know from the Resurrection accounts that Jesus’ body was trans-physical: it didn’t obey our current laws of physics.

        Just a few thoughts…

        1. Comment by Rupert Ward

          8.11 pm on 18 Jun 2007

          thanks alastair – i would tend towards an allegorical interpretation of sea, along the lines you have presented here … partly because i love the sea! Seriously, i think it does make sense…
          I was throwing out some thoughts on how to fit everyone in … i rather like you sci fi idea!

    2. Comment by Paul

      4.45 pm on 18 Jun 2007

      I heard recently that mathamaticians have proved that there are at least 12 dimensions if not more – maybe we’ll go there :)

      I remember someone suggesting that we might get to tend and serve not just this earth but a whole planet, solar system etc – joining God in caring for all of creation

      Another thought – where is the risen christ with is transformed body now???

      What else are we gonna do with my resurection body after i get tired of the walking thru walls party trick ;)

      1. Comment by Rupert Ward

        8.12 pm on 18 Jun 2007

        good question paul … maybe Jesus exists in the spiritual dimension that we call heaven … but sometimes he seems to appear to people in the physical?

        1. Comment by Alastair

          8.57 pm on 18 Jun 2007

          I think one thing we have to be careful of is to avoid this Greek idea of heaven being a non-pysical, non-material, “spiritual” airy-fairy kind of place. Even more so regarding the new creation itself. I used to think of heaven and God’s domain like this, but then I realised that Jesus was in heaven in bodily form. He resurrected and ascended into heaven! Now, even though I can’t make sense of it, I understand the spiritual world more like another spatial dimension, rather than some sort of floating on the clouds in a bodiless spirit sort of thing. But not just any old alternative spatial dimension: heavenspace has some sort of supremacy over our space, hence Jesus’ wall-walking party trick…

          I’m rambling, but I think I make sense!

          1. Comment by Rupert Ward

            11.58 pm on 18 Jun 2007

            Makes good sense alastair – thanks.

            Comments won’t nest below this level.

            Reply here

          2. Comment by maz

            1.33 pm on 28 Jun 2007

            Hallelujah!! :)
            I’ve used almost the same words and comments on a forum a couple of years ago as I began to see this.
            Greek/Hellenistic thinking about ’spirit’ is one of the culprits.

            Comments won’t nest below this level.

            Reply here

  13. Comment by Jonas Lundström

    9.52 am on 18 Jun 2007

    Rupert, I definitely agree. To me, though, it seems that the biggest problem is that loads of christians don´t even have a new earth in their thinking, they only have heaven. And this is even more devastating, then earthly things like bodies, practises, environment etc don´t really matter at all, except in a very limited way. I think no one will go and live in heaven. But this really pisses people off sometimes.

    Duncan, I believe it is the mission of God´s people to live out the powers of the coming, earthly, rule of God in our lives together. We cannot change the earth, but we have the privilige to already step into the coming world and making it visible. More than trying to change the system, we have to be a light from the coming (renewed) earth, a people of pioneer societies.

    Is that a way of thinking that might work?

    Jonas Lundström, Sweden

  14. Comment by Rupert Ward

    10.27 am on 18 Jun 2007

    Thanks for the comments everyone.
    We have had pretty much consensus on this … anyone wish to disagree?

    BTW – the link didn’t come through to the paper by Michael Goheen.
    Here it is:
    http://www.biblicaltheology.ca/blue_files/%28Re%29New%28ed%29%20Creation-The%20End%20of%20the%20Story.pdf

  15. Comment by Alastair

    2.09 pm on 18 Jun 2007

    Good one, Rupert. I think this is fairly non-controversial ground for a lot of emerging types, but perhaps still a shock to some. I used to believe that God will just blow the whole freakin’ world away, because that is what Peter seems to say. But after reading more scripture, and reading some commentaries, I came to your conclusion.

    I recently heard N T Wright refer to this topic, and he said that we (the church) have tended to make two mistakes:

    – either to think that what we do now in this world (apart from evangelism) has no consequence for the world to come. So we adopt a hunker-down wait-for-the-rapture type approach, and attempt to stay away from the evil tainted world and form a holy-huddle. I think many of us have experienced that attitude, or people that seem to espouse that lifestyle.

    – the other mistake is the opposite: to think that by our effort we will fully usher in and establish the Kingdom. Again, this mistake has been made from both sides of the spectrum, from crazy charismatics to left-wing liberal Christians. But the end result is the same: our efforts, whether in the Spirit/by the Spirit or just by good works, will usher in Christ’s Kingdom. Wright reminds us that the ushering in of God’s Kingdom will in the end be a surprise, and that God’s end-of-time intervention will clearly mark a discontinuity between what came before and what will come after.

    The truth, as always, is somewhere in the murky middle…

    1. Comment by Paul

      4.48 pm on 18 Jun 2007

      makes sense – since Jesus came to initiate (or maybe to ignite) the kingdom project and we are invited to participate within it… clearly it is not our kingdom or timetable :)

      1. Comment by Rupert Ward

        8.18 pm on 18 Jun 2007

        Yup … i occupy that murky middle ground too!

        One of the things that has intrigued me is that as i have done a bit more research on this, this is actually not an emergent theology, but actually a very reformed stance on the new earth. Wayne Gruden in his massive “systematic theology” takes this position (not very well arguing i have to say … he only takes a paragraph or two on it!). He says this is the traditional reformed position.

        If that is the case, I wonder why I / we haven’t heard more about it? Maybe, as we grapple with what is the gospel and environmental issues, we are realising the implications of seeing it this way?

        1. Comment by Alastair

          9.01 pm on 18 Jun 2007

          Right you are, Rupert. Come to think of it, I think I came across this doctrine from Anthony Hoekema, classic ammilenial reformed theologian. I must admit I prefer him to Grudem any day (in a strictly theological fashion naturally). Reading Hoekema gave me a renewed appreciated for reformed theology. Also note that some of the emerging churches are charisimatic reformed, like Mars Hill Seattle.

          Perhaps this is an example of the emerging church building on the strengths of previous movements?

          I think the voices of the dispensationlists have drowned out some of the good classic reformed teaching.

          1. Comment by Rupert Ward

            11.59 pm on 18 Jun 2007

            The dispensationalists have a lot to answer for! Not come across Hoekema … will keep my eye out for him.

            Comments won’t nest below this level.

            Reply here

  16. Comment by maz

    1.28 pm on 28 Jun 2007

    I’m really glad that someone else is looking at this too, as I haven’t found much understanding around about it.
    I’ve thought about it loads in the last few years, and read stuff on it, and written some thoughts myself.
    John Stott writes some good thoughts on it.
    I’ll try and find them.

    1. Comment by Rupert Ward

      2.55 pm on 2 Jul 2007

      Thanks Maz … I’d be interested to know what Stott says about it…

      1. Comment by maz

        10.26 am on 3 Jul 2007

        Hi Rupert…I’m afraid I can’t find the John Stott comments, although they may be in a post I made on a forum a couple of years ago, so I might go looking.

        These are the thoughts and quotes I posted on my own forum a while ago…
        please remove or edit if too long, Jason.
        ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

        Here are some thoughts which express the way God has led me in studying the Word about ”End Times.” …
        (initially, as a newish Christian, I did believe, from one or two scriptures, that the earth would be destroyed and then a new one made…literally)
        I believe something along these lines now…

        God’s plan is “through him to reconcile to himself all things, whether things on Earth or things in Heaven” (Col 1: 20). At the heart of Romans, Paul wrote this: “The creation waits in eager expectation for the Sons of God to be revealed. For the creation was subjected to frustration… in hope, because the creation itself will be liberated from bondage to decay, and brought into the glorious freedom of the children of God” (Rom 8:19-22).

        “These words of Paul point not to the annihilation of the present material universe on the day of revelation, to be replaced by a universe entirely new, but to the transformation of the present universe so it will fulfil the purpose for which God created it.” F F Bruce

        There is a unity in Biblical truth, that “all things” will be “destroyed”, literally ‘loosened’ (luomenôn, 2 Pet 3:11), “restored” (Acts 3:21) and “renewed”, literally ‘born-again’ (palingenesia, Matt 19:28). Regarding the ‘end of the world’, what ends is not creation’s identity, but its present cursed condition or state, described by Paul as “bondage to decay” and “frustration” (‘not fulfilling the purpose for which God intended it’ ). Continuous identity + change of state = hope This change will not come by evolutionary progress. Nor will it come through an annihilation and replacement of creation, as the Bible makes clear in a number of places.

        1. God’s curse on Adam included the ground (Gen 3). Since the curse on the earth is rooted in Adam, so just as Christ lifts the curse from Adam, it lifts also from the earth, since; “the fate of creation is indissolubly linked with that of man” Martyn Lloyd-Jones

        “Through the redemptive work of the second man [Jesus] the fall’s entail is broken not only for man himself but [also] for the creation.” F F Bruce

        2. God’s decree establishes the earth forever (Ps 78:69, 148:1-3).

        God’s creation is not lost, for “the mystery of his will [is] to bring all things in heaven and on earth together under one head, even Christ” (Eph 1:10).

        4. God’s judgement is ‘good news’ for the creatures on earth; “they will sing before the Lord, for he comes, he comes to judge the earth” (Ps 96:12, 145:21, Rev 5:13). God’s work of art is the church, set upon the earth, and God’s restoration project is being revealed.

        God will restore the present fallen world to perfect condition. John Calvin ‘Apocalypse’ in English acquired an entirely negative meaning, but is from the Greek word for ‘revelation’.

        The End of the World ? “The world (kosmos) of that time perished (apôleto) by water… the heaven and earth of this time is stored up for fire, the day of destruction of ungodly men” (2 Pet 3:6-7) Peter says the world (kosmos) was ‘utterly destroyed’ (apôleto) by the Flood. Yet he knew that even outside the Ark, fish and seeds survived (Gen 8:11). He is using terms like ‘world’ to refer to a passing state of creation. In fact, Peter mention three states of creation; 1. “the world of that time”, (2 Pet 3:6) which is “the ancient world ” before the Flood (2 Pet 2:5); 2. “the present heaven and earth” (2 Pet 3:7); 3. “a new heaven and a new earth” (2 Pet 3:13).

        New Testament view of the Ages of creation In the Bible, ‘the end’ refers to “the end of the age” (eg Matt 13:40, 24:3), which is followed by the beginning of “the age to come” (Mark 10:30) and an Eternal time.

        Some identify Judgement Fire pseudo-scientifically with volcanic lava, comets or H-bombs, and suggest that it will physically melt the surface of the earth. But biblical Judgement Fire has qualities unlike any of these fires, for it tests (1 Cor 3:13); it discriminates (Mal 4:1-3, 2 Thess 1:7); it reaches into heaven (2 Pet 3:7) and destroys the spiritual Powers (Rev 20:10). The ‘elements’ (stoicheia) which this Fire ‘melts’ (2 Pet 3:10) are not the kind that you see on a Periodic Table! When ‘stoicheia’ is used in the Bible (Col 2:8,20, Gal 4:3,9, Heb 5:12) it always refers to non-material entities.
        In 2 Peter it may refer to evil ‘heavenly powers’.

        What kind of fire is this? God’s fire amazed Moses by burning in a bush without consuming the bush (Exodus 3:2). Peter had seen this Fire upon the disciples’ heads at Pentecost, preceded by a rushing noise (Acts 2:1-4), and he knew a greater ‘roar’ would accompany this Fire when it fills heaven and earth on Judgement Day (2 Pet 3:10). At that time “the earth will be laid bare” literally ‘discovered, found’ (heurethêsetai 2 Pet 3:12) suggesting a world-wide judicial scrutiny. This view fits the letter’s context. Peter was dealing with men of unrestrained lusts (2 Pet 3:3) − the prospect of an indiscriminate universal annihilation would simply spur them on to sin faster ‘for tomorrow we die’! Instead, Peter warns them of a coming discriminating judgement.

        In Jesus, death is destroyed, and the body is changed; ‘glorified’.
        Similarly, the transition from old to new creation is not a loss of identity, but a change of state, with physical continuity and change. Here are two illustrations.
        1. “Jesus… will transform our lowly bodies so that they will be like his glorious body” (Phil 3:21, Romans 8:11, 1 Cor 15:37), indicates change rather than replacement.
        2. The special case of those who are alive when Jesus returns makes it clear that our original bodies are not discarded and replaced, but “changed”, for Paul says “we shall not all sleep, but we will all be changed, in a flash, in the twinkling of an eye” (1 Cor:15:51).
        Man’s way is to give up on what is spoilt; to throw it away and get a replacement. God’s way of going from old to new is to restore what has been spoilt; to make it new.
        This applies to us, and to the rest of creation, for “the old order of things has passed away… I am making every-thing new!” (Rev 21:4-5).

        The ‘new’ creation is the ‘old’ creation renewed! “There is going to be both continuity and discontinuity in the regeneration of the world, as in the resurrection of the body.” John Stott “God will one day change our bodies and then he will change this world itself. We expect to see this world that is now full of sin turned into a paradise, a garden of God.

        In this very place, where sin has triumphed, …grace will much more abound.” C H Spurgeon “We shall live in the body, on this renewed, renovated, regenerated earth.” Martyn Lloyd-Jones

        The Return of King Jesus Christ is coming to reign over all the earth. There will be a miraculous meeting and welcome at his homecoming. The young church at Thessalonika seems to have worried that only those “still alive, who are left till the coming of the Lord” would see the Kingdom. Paul reassured them that those who died would be raised up from their graves and together with those still alive be “caught up… in the clouds to meet the Lord in the air” (1 Thess 4:15-17).
        A popular belief is that this refers to a permanent ‘escape’ from earth. But a different picture emerges from the text. The ‘coming’ (parousia) alludes to an ancient custom in which “an official visits a city… when [he] got near, all the citizens would stream out and line the road to welcome him” (J Balchin). Also, the word here translated ‘meeting’ (apantêsin) is only used twice elsewhere; once when the vigilant guests go out to meet the bridegroom to escort him into the feast (Matt 25:6), and again when the Christians of Rome go along the road some distance to meet Paul and escort him into their city (Acts 28:15).
        When Jesus returns to earth (Acts 1:11) His people will go out to meet him and join in His triumphal procession. The Second Coming is a ‘coming’ not a ‘going’! God’s Eternal Reign on Earth

        “I saw the New Jerusalem, coming down out of heaven from God… Now the dwelling of God is with men, and he will live with them” (Rev 21:2-3) “The kingdom of the world has become the kingdom of our Lord and of his Christ, and he will reign for ever.” (Rev 11:15).

        Christ’s kingdom on earth is not temporary. This is the inheritance promised to Jesus (Ps 2:8), and His co-heirs such as Abraham (Rom 4:13). “Blessed are the meek, for they shall inherit the earth” (Matt 5:5), and “they will reign on the Earth” (Rev 5:10).

        We await “the restoration of the whole creation, not only to what it was before, but to something yet more glorious… this is not temporary, it is final, it is full, it is permanent.” Martyn Lloyd-Jones

        “It is God’s purpose that his supernatural kingdom be spread in this natural world.” Colin Urquhart “[Since] there is going to be total redemption in the future, not only of man, but of all creation, the Christian… should be the man who, with Gods help… is treating nature now in the direction of the way nature will be then.

        Suggestions for further reading: Wayne Grudem, Systematic Theology, IVP, 1994

        Tony Higton, I Believe in Heaven on Earth, Hodder and Stoughton, 1999

        David Lawrence, Heaven… it’s not the end of the world!, Scripture Union, 1995

        Martyn Lloyd-Jones, The Perseverance of the Saints, Romans 8:17-39, IVP, 1975

        Stephen Travis, End of Story?, IVP, 1997

        N T Wright, New Heavens, New Earth, Booklet B11, Grove Biblical Series, Grove Books, 1999

        Albert Wolters, Creation Regained, Paternoster Press, 1985
        This brief was prepared for the John Ray Initiative by John McKeown. Thanks are due to Dean Ohlman, Prof Tom Finger, Dr Ron Elsdon, Rev Dr Ernest Lucas, the JRI Trustees and others for many helpful comments.

        1. Comment by maz

          10.28 am on 3 Jul 2007

          sorry, just noticed, John Stott IS in there…that must be what I was remembering.

  17. Comment by Alastair

    12.29 pm on 29 Jun 2007

    Another thought of the dangers of a spiritual only heaven type thing: just saw the film Pan’s Labyrinth, where a priest who is colluding with the Fascists, when asked on his opinion of rounding up and killing the rebels, says “God already has their souls. He hardly cares what happens to their bodies”.

    I know this is just a film, but I think this is the sort of evil that can result from the gnostic belief that heaven is a spiritual realm only, and that the earth is bad, and we just need to get off this dump and get into the pure spirit world of heaven.

Comments are now closed.