Eternity in heaven, or on earth?

[darinhouston]

This view sees the rooms that Jesus promised his disciples he would be preparing as the new Jerusalem (currently in heaven but to be relocated later to the new earth).

Are you thinking of John 14:3 here?

[psimmond]

darinhouston,
Yes, I was thinking of John 14:2-3 as well as Revelation 21:2.

[darinhouston]

I take the John dwelling place which he went to prepare as the hearts of those in the church here on earth before the resurrection. I take the Revelation dwelling place as similar but universal. I don't see either as being mansions or homes or the like that we will live "IN". We don't know for sure, but I expect he will dwell with us in the Resurrection in a different way from the way he dwells with us now, perhaps more like the garden. I note also he dwells AMONG us in Revelation. I think we dwell In Him now -- where He is, we are there too (in Him and He in us).

[psimmond]

darinhouston,
That's interesting. I've never heard that view before. Just to clarify, are you saying that when Jesus said in v.3 that he would "go", he may have been speeking of his death and when he said he would "come again" he may have been speaking of his resurrection? So preparing a place was a metaphor for building the faith of his disciples, i.e., getting their hearts ready to accept him as the Son of God or perhaps getting their hearts ready to receive his Spirit at Pentecost?

Do you see Jesus' statement to his disciples that like a groom he would come back and receive them to himself as synonymous with his statement that if he were lifted up he would draw all men to himself?

[darinhouston]

I think this thread may be of interest...


http://www.theos.org/forum/viewtopic.ph ... &sk=t&sd=a

and Steve on Youtube

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PQw9Y56n0gk

[psimmond]

Thanks for the links. I enjoyed the video.

I still think the wording doesn't fit as well as I would like with the ideas Steve presented. I'm a bit stuck on the phrases "going away to prepare a place for you" and "so that where I am you may be also." Also the phrase "receive you to myself" in v.3 reminds me of what Jesus said about people being "welcomed into an eternal home" in Luke 16:9.

Luk 16:9 Jesus continued, "I'm telling you that although wealth is often used in dishonest ways, you should use it to make friends for yourselves. When life is over, you will be welcomed into an eternal home.

Also Revelation 13:6 refers to God's dwelling/tent/tabernacle/place (skēnē) as those who are living in heaven.

Rev 13:6 It opened its mouth to utter blasphemies against God, blaspheming his name and his dwelling, that is, those who dwell in heaven.

I've also heard the teaching that "monē" in v.2 refers to a temporary dwelling for our spirits in heaven who are waiting for the new earth, glorified bodies, etc. N.T. Wright says the word monē "denotes a temporary lodging."

I also found this interesting:

“To prepare” (ἑτοιμάζω, hetoimazo) does not necessarily mean to build or construct an edifice.
The verb is frequently used of making preparations in advance of someone’s arrival. Philemon was to
prepare a lodging for Paul (Philemon 22). ἑτοιμάζω (hetoimazo) is used especially of preparations for a
meal (Mt 22:4; 26:19; Mk 14:16; Lk 17:8; 22:13). 56 In this connection, Neyrey’s comment is interesting:
We may recall how Jesus, the day before (Mark 14.12-16) had sent two of his disciples ahead to
secure “a large room upstairs” for the Last Supper. They did not ‘know the way,’ but had to follow
the owner. Arriving, they found everything ‘prepared’ as Jesus had said. It looks as if here Jesus has
made the disciples’ journey of the previous day into a parable of “eternity” in which the upper room
foreshadows the home of God with its many habitations.

http://www.pre-trib.org/data/pdf/Gunn-J ... her%27.pdf

I plan to study this further. Thanks for opening my eyes to another possibility .

[darinhouston]

Steve, can you expound? In light of your position on John 14, I was a bit surprised to see you acknowledge that we would be raised to heaven post-resurrection to spend a time in dwelling places God prepared for us there awaiting return to the new earth.

[verbatim]

Hi All greetings,
1 Thessalonians 4:17, “Then we which are alive and remain shall be caught up together with them in the clouds, to meet the Lord in the air: and so shall we ever be with the Lord.” The Latin translation uses the word “rapturo,” and this is where the word “rapture” is derived. The Greek word is “harpazo,” and it means:
1. To seize, carry off by force
2. To seize on, claim for one’s self eagerly
3. To snatch out or away
Most preterists believe that the Book of Revelation speaks to particular circumstances and events that were fulfilled within the lifetime of the book’s original first-century audience and that there is nothing in it about our future. Rather, it was concerned fully and exclusively with the first century and not with subsequent periods. This view places its date of writing prior to ad 70—most likely, between ad 63 and 68—and its soon fulfillment in ad 70 in conjunction with Christ’s divine visitation, coming, and return in the destruction of Jerusalem and the Temple.
J. Stuart Russell, a nineteenth-century pre-terist author, portrayed the Book of Revelation as being concerned “primarily and principally with events with which its first readers only were immediately interested . . .events all shortly to come to pass.” He believed that “the Apocalypse is nothing else than a transfigured form of the prophecy on the Mount of Olives. . . . expanded, allegorised, and . . . dramatised. . . . First and chiefly the Parousia. . . .” In other words, and in the opinion of most preterists, the Book of Revelation is only another version of Christ’s Olivet Discourse, since “the subject of both is the same great catastrophe, viz. The Parousia, and the events accompanying it. . . . an event which He [Jesus] declared would happen before the passing away of the existing generation, and which some of the disciples would live to witness. http://www.etsjets.org/files/JETS-PDFs/ ... 96_Noe.pdf

In my actual experience in life (I’m now 65 years) I can testified of myself that my NDE near to death experience that I had been raptured for 4 times. While in treasure hunting I fell in a deep ravine with a depth about 90 meter when I am miraculously survived by a powerful hand and lift me without any injuries. In Jan, 2006, Nov.2007 and Jan.2012 I was hospitalized for heart failure or cardiac arrest and I thanks God for He is always with me and those who loves his name. I knew that this things happen to manifest what was written in Act 2:21 And it shall be, that whosoever shall call on the name of the Lord shall be saved.

[steve]

Darin wrote:

Steve, can you expound? In light of your position on John 14, I was a bit surprised to see you acknowledge that we would be raised to heaven post-resurrection to spend a time in dwelling places God prepared for us there awaiting return to the new earth.

I don't recall ever expressing that view. Are you referring to something I said on the air, or in this thread? I re-read all that I wrote here, and couldn't find any statements of mine to that effect, unless it was my statement that I found "probable" psimmond's chronology (sans the 1000 years, of course), which he posted as follows:

1. Christ returns with fanfare.
2. The believers (including the dead in Christ) go to meet him in the air clothed in new imperishable bodies.
[*] 1000 years?
3. After believers depart, the earth is destroyed/purified by fire. (The seas disappear Rev 21:1 and possibly the sun and moon as well Rev 21:23.)
4. The final judgment takes place - many are cast into hell at this point.
5. The New Jerusalem populated by the elect decends to the new/renewed earth.
6. The elect dwell with God on this new earth forever.

I did not understand this to include resurrected saints spending time in heaven. I think the resurrected saints, with the raptured saints, will probably be off the ground at the time that Jesus burns things up here (point 3), but I don't see that as taking much time. I expect it to me almost instantaneous, so our time in the air with Christ, prior to completing His (and our) descent might be only moments. I do not believe that He takes us back up to "prepared" places in heaven.

I also don't think Wright's points (cited above) are compelling. My comments on John 14:1-2 are on record, and have not been changed anytime recently.

Along with Luke 16:9, I believe that we anticipate an eternal habitation, but that verse does not specify that it happens at death, but only at some future time "when you fail" (or "when tour wealth fails")—that is, after this life's opportunities are a thing of the past.

Revelation 13:6 calls heaven God's dwelling, which certainly agrees with many other passages which tell us that this is where God's throne is (especially in the Psalms), and where our Father is (in the teaching of Jesus). I have never denied that God dwells in heaven. What I deny is that God's "house" is ever a reference to heaven in the Bible. The Old and New testaments invariably speak of God's "house" as the place on earth where God dwells among men. I am prepared to be shown an exception, though I do not think there are any.

[Paidion]

In what sense will the heaven and earth be destroyed and replaced by the "new heaven and earth"? Will this be a total destruction of the present heaven and earth, and a new heaven and earth created? Or will this present heaven and earth continue to exist, but be renewed?

The prophecy of Isaiah in chapter 65 as translated by the Septuagint seems to affirm the latter. It does not mention "creating" the new heaven and earth as in the Masoretic text of the Hebrew. Doubtless it is translated from the other main text type found in Cave 4 of Quamran, which differs from the Masoretic text.

For there shall be a new heaven and a new earth: and they shall not at all remember the former, neither shall they at all come into their mind. But they shall find in her joy and exultation; for, behold, I make Jerusalem a rejoicing, and my people a joy and I will rejoice in Jerusalem, and will be glad in my people: and there shall no more be heard in her the voice of weeping, or the voice of crying. Neither shall there be there any more a child that dies untimely, or an old man who shall not complete his time: for the youth shall be a hundred years old, and the sinner who dies at a hundred years shall also be accursed. (Isaiah 65:17-20, a translation of the Septuagint)

So, in this "new heaven and earth" people will be long-lived, but will eventually die. The earth will be a much better place in which to live, but even in that new earth, there will be sinners.

On the other hand, Revelation, if translated literally, indicates the former thesis, that the present heaven and earth will be utterly destroyed. The author of 2 Peter is very clear concerning the utter destruction of this present heavens and earth:

But the heavens and the earth which are now preserved by the same word, are reserved for fire until the day of judgment and perdition of ungodly men. But, beloved, do not forget this one thing, that with the lord one day is as a thousand years, and a thousand years as one day. The Lord is not slack concerning his promise, as some count slackness, but is longsuffering toward us, not willing that any should perish but that all should come to repentance. But the day of the lord will come as a thief in the night, in which the heavens will pass away with a great noise, and the elements will melt with fervent heat; both the earth and the works that are in it will be burned up. Therefore, since all these things will be dissolved, what manner of persons ought you to be in holy conduct and godliness... (2 Peter 3:7-11 NKJV)

So which are we going to accept? Isaiah's prophecy? Or the word of the author of 2 Peter?

If we consider the fact that 2 Peter seems to have been unknown prior to 200 A.D. and that right into the fourth century, it was considered to be non-genuine or was even rejected completely, we might be inclined to accept Isaiah's version over that of the author of 2 Peter. It seems that the first to accept it as canonical was Cyril in 348 A.D. Even as late as 324 A.D. Eusebius considered it as non-genuine and not part of the canon:

One epistle of Peter, that called the first, is acknowledged as genuine. And this the ancient elders used freely in their own writings as an undisputed work. But we have learned that his extant second epistle does not belong to the canon... (Eusebius Church History, Book 3, Ch 1, Pt 1)

So it seems, in the days of Eusebius, that Peter was not even considered to be the author of 2 Peter, nor was it considered to be canonical. The canonicity of the book of Revelation was also disputed in those days.

It seems significant the the only two books of the Bible which teach the utter destruction of the present heaven and earth and the creation of a new heaven and earth, happen to be the same two that were considered non-canonical, or even inauthentic, by the early church.