JESUS WILL NOT DESTROY THE WORLD
- Micah J. Stephens
- Mar 4, 2020
- 11 min read
Updated: Jun 10, 2020
A common view of the last days is that Jesus will one day destroy the earth, burning it up with fire. Here's the main passage used to support this: "The heavens will pass away with a roar, and the elements will be destroyed with intense heat, and the earth with its works will be burned up" (2 Pet. 3:10).
A surface-level reading of this text with no further thought can easily lead one to think this verse refers to the literal world burning up. However, since the Bible is an ancient text, it is imperative that we consider audience relevance when studying this verse to make sure we are interpreting it correctly. What I mean by considering audience relevance, is considering how the original readers (who this letter was written to) would have interpreted these words, terms and concepts.
Ancient Hebrew text is chock full of idioms, metaphors, and hyperbolic terms that 21st-century English speakers are quite unfamiliar with; to take these terms as literal without understanding how the original readers would have understood these terms would be like someone from another country interpreting the term “raining cats and dogs’ as literal cats and dogs falling from the sky. This is why it is so important to consider audience relevance. The way most biblical scholars say we can do this is by searching for the words, terms, and concepts throughout the Bible, reading them in their context, then allowing those meanings to shed light on their meanings in the passage(s) we're examining.
THE MEANING OF HEAVEN AND EARTH
So let's see if we can identify the meaning of the words "heaven(s)" and "earth" &/or even the phrase "heaven(s) and earth" by applying this principle. In Isaiah 13 we find a prophecy of the destruction of Babylon by the Medes: It says, "I will make the heavens tremble, and the earth will be shaken from its place at the fury of the Lord of hosts in the day of His burning anger" (v. 13).
Surely we don't believe these things literally happened, that is the skies didn't tremble, and the planet didn't shake; what happened was that the Medes destroyed the city of Babylon.
In Isaiah 34:4 we find a prophecy of the destruction of Edom, saying that "All the host of heaven will wear away, and the sky will be rolled up like a scroll; all their hosts will also wither away as a leaf withers from the vine or as one withers from the fig tree." Do we believe all these things occurred in actuality? Surely not. What happened was that an army destroyed the nation of Edom.
In Nahum 1:5 we find a prophecy of the ruin of Nineveh: "The mountains quake at Him, the hills melt, and the earth is burned at His presence, even the world and all who dwell therein" (KJV). These things also didn't actually happen. The earth obviously didn't burn up; otherwise, I wouldn't be writing this book right now. The only thing that happened was that an army destroyed Nineveh.
So from these (and several other passages with the same language) we conclude that the shaking or burning up of the earth … or the fleeing away or rolling up of the heavens was symbolic language for a city or nation being demolished by an army; it's the same case for when the Scriptures speak of the sun, moon, and stars darkening &/or falling from the sky. In Isaiah 13:10 (the same chapter speaking of Babylon's destruction by the Medes), it says that "the stars of heaven and their constellations will not flash forth their light; the sun will be dark when it rises, and the moon will not shed its light."
In Ezekiel 32 there's a prophecy of the fall of Egypt, and it says of this destruction, "I will cover the heavens and darken their stars; I will cover the sun with a cloud and the moon will not give its light" (v. 7).
The reason the Scriptures speak of heaven and earth, and the sun, moon, and stars as undergoing cataclysmic events when only a city or nation was being destroyed by an army was because, in early Middle-Eastern thought, the phrase "heaven and earth" was often used to describe socio-political systems or governing establishments, and at times also the subjects of those systems; the leaders or authorities of those systems were described as the sun, moon, and stars. So when the Scriptures speak of heaven and earth, and the sun, moon, and stars trembling, shaking, or burning up, it's speaking of the city's or nation's government or socio-political establishment coming to an end, especially along with their corrupt leaders
.
OF WHICH HEAVEN AND EARTH WAS PETER SPEAKING IN SECOND PETER 3?
Here's where things get interesting: In Second Peter 3:2, Peter stated that he was about to remind them what was spoken by the Lord, and in verse 9 he said that the things he was saying were promises of the Lord. Obviously when he said "the Lord" he was speaking of Jesus; so what Peter was speaking of here were things spoke about by Jesus—things which, of course, should be found somewhere in at least one of the gospel accounts of Matthew, Mark, Luke, & John. And guess what: We can actually find the majority of what Peter wrote about here in Matthew 24. Note the parallels:
Second Peter 3 Matthew 24
coming of the Lord (vs. 4) coming of the Lord (vs. 3) the last days (vs. 3). the end of the age (vs. 3)
the days of Noah (vs. 6). the days of Noah (vs. 37-38)
come like a thief (vs. 10). come like a thief (vs. 43)
heaven and earth pass (vs. 10) heaven and earth (vs. 36)
So what Peter was talking about in Second Peter 3 was precisely what Jesus was talking about in Matthew 24. Why is this important? Matthew 24 foretells the Roman destruction of Jerusalem in AD 70, not the end of our globe and skies. Let’s look at a few key points of this chapter.
In verse 2, Jesus told His disciples that all the temple buildings would be demolished, with not one stone left on top of another. This is the subject for the entire chapter, the conversation does NOT change subjects.
Throughout chapter 24, Jesus told His disciples that they were the ones who'd see the signs, indicating that the end of the age was happening or about to happen. This means that the events of Matthew 24 (aka The Olivet Discourse) had to have occurred within the first century while some of disciples where still alive.
In verse 16, we find Jesus only warning those in Judea to leave. Firstly, if this event were worldwide, what would be the point of fleeing from one area to another? And, secondly, why wouldn't Jesus also mention those in Galilee, Samaria, Damascus, Ephesus, and Dallas, TX? Because this event would clearly be focused on Judea.
In verse 34 (just as He did in 23:36), Jesus said these things would occur in "this” generation. Jesus wasn't projecting all this into some future generation who'd witness these signs, but to His own generation. How do we know? Jesus said “this” generation, not “the generation to see all these signs.” However, even if Jesus did mean “the generation to see all the signs,” He spoke to the disciplines saying they were the ones to see the signs. Also, one of the things to happen in the generation Jesus is speaking of would be the destruction of the temple (vs. 2); the temple was demolished in the year AD 70 and so the generation Jesus is speaking of had to exist at that time. Also, every other time Jesus used the phrase “this generation” (Matt. 11:16; 12:41, 42, 45; & 23:36), He was always speaking of His own generation, not a generation of the future.
Since Second Peter 3 echoes Matthew 24, this means Second Peter 3 is also speaking of the Roman destruction of Jerusalem in AD 70, not the end of our globe, etc. By Peter saying that the heavens would pass away and the earth would burn up, he was using the same language that was used in the Old Testament to describe a city and its governing or socio-political system being destroyed in order to warn of the demise of the city of Jerusalem with its temple and governing or socio-political system.
In fact, at the beginning of verse 10, Peter called this event a "day of the Lord"; the heavens passing and the earth burning up were therefore speaking of a "day of the Lord," and throughout Scripture, such a day was always used to describe the demise of a city via an army (Isa. 13:6 & 9 speaking of the destruction of Babylon). The heaven and earth to be destroyed in Second Peter Three was therefore the heaven and earth (the socio-political or governmental system) of the Jews.
THE SOCIO-POLITICAL SYSTEM OF THE JEWS
The socio-political, governing system of the Jews (their heaven & earth) was the Old covenant system —the Mosaic Law. In Deuteronomy 4:25-26, 8:19, 31:21, & 26 we read that the Law was the witness against Israel, but in 4:26, 30:19, & 31:28 we read that "heaven and earth" was the witness against Israel; this is because their "heaven and earth" was their Law, the Old Covenant. Check out this verse in Isaiah where God said to Israel, "I have put My words in your mouth … to establish the heavens and to found the earth and so to say to Zion, 'You are My people" (v. 16).
The literal heavens and earth existed long before Israel existed, so this heaven and earth God is speaking of here cannot be the literal ones. The Lord putting His words in the mouths of Israel is an old biblical expression meaning that He spoke to them or commanded them. There were of course many occasions when this happened, but the most notable time was when God spoke to them at Mt. Sinai: At that time He didn't create the material skies and planet earth, but He did give them the Law. The "heaven and earth" the Lord established at Mt. Sinai was the Law! Israel's governing system.The Law or Old Covenant was Israel's socio-political system, i.e. their "heaven(s) and earth."
THE ELEMENTS WOULD BURN WITH FERVENT HEAT
When Peter wrote that "the elements will burn with fervent heat," he wasn't referring to the physical elements of the material earth. The Greek word translated "elements" is stoicheion (4747); every other time it's found in Scripture (Gal. 4:3 & 9; Col. 2:8 & 20; & Heb. 5:12), it's translated in version after version as "principles"; and if we look at the contexts of those individual verses, we discover that stoicheion always refers to the principles of the Old Covenant, never having anything to do with the physical earth or our modern-day periodic table of elements, things that were unknown to humanity until recent centuries! Peter wasn't saying that the physical elements of our planet would be destroyed, but that the principles and works of the Old Covenant Law system—because they would've fulfilled their purpose—would be destroyed; and they were —when the temple and everything related to the Old Covenant system (such as the temple which was, by the way, called heaven and earth by the Jews per Josephus) was burned to the ground in AD 70.
DIDN'T THE LAW END AT THE CROSS?
A very common misunderstanding is that the Law ended at the cross, so all this talk about the Law ending in AD 70 may seem a bit confusing. Let me explain this situation as briefly as possible. Jesus said in Matthew 5:18 that not one bit of the Law would pass away until all of it was fulfilled. In Deuteronomy 28 (part of the Law, of course) it says that, if Israel disobeyed (which they did repeatedly), then a great destruction would come upon her. This wasn't fulfilled at the cross, and so the Law could not pass away until Israel experienced this judgment. But it was fulfilled in AD 70. This is when the Law could and did pass away. In the book of Hebrews it states that God "made the first [covenant] obsolete; and what'sobsolete and outdated will soon disappear" (v. 13).
Sure, with His sacrificial death Jesus founded the New Covenant, but it wasn't established until every single letter and stroke of the Law had been fulfilled, which didn't happen until (as Jesus said in Luke 21:22) the events surrounding the AD 70 destruction of the temple with its city, priesthood, sacrifices, genealogical records, etc.
Notice as we read through the New Testament letters, we come across several passages speaking of the Law in the present tense for an entire generation after Jesus' death (Rom. 7:4, 12-14; 2 Cor. 3:6-15; etc.), but also that it was becomingobsolete, was about to vanish away and would soon disappear altogether, just as the Hebrews' author stated in 8:13.
Some claim the book of Hebrews was written after AD 70, but this can't be possible because the author spoke of the temple as being "symbolic for the present time in which both gifts and sacrifices are being offered" (9:9), and all sacrifices ended when the temple was destroyed in AD 70. I hold to the widely accepted, alternative view that the book of Hebrews was written sometime early to mid-AD 60s. If this dating of Hebrews is true, and we know that—at that time—the author said that the Old Covenant would soon pass away, we must ask what cataclysmic event occurred soon from the early to mid-AD 60s that could be associated with the passing of the Old Covenant? Right—the AD 70 destruction of Jerusalem with its temple, priesthood, sacrifices, genealogical records—anything/everything related to that Old Covenant system of works!
This was when the Old Covenant was finally removed, and the New Covenant was fully revealed and established(note the present tense of Heb. 10:9). The Old Covenant was the heaven and earth Peter was speaking of that was going to be destroyed, not a destruction of planet earth in our future ... not to mention that such was also when the "new" heavens and earth, with actual righteousness, arrived on the scene (2 Pet. 3:13).
The reason why the New Covenant wasn't fully inaugurated until the Old had passed was because these covenants were and are marriage covenants. See, especially back then under God's tutelage for generations, people knew that He didn't condone a person remarrying unless or until the previous marriage had been abolished. Think of it this way: Say there's a man who has a wife who repeatedly cheats on him and leaves him; this man then falls in love with another woman, buys a ring, proposes to her, pays for the wedding, and builds a house. But the new covenant can't start with this woman until the old covenant with the previous wife has been brought to an end.
In the same way, God married all of Israel, but later they split into two kingdoms (the ten northern tribes calling themselves Israel, and the two southern tribes calling themselves Judah). After a time, Israel became an adulteress, so God said in Jeremiah 3:8, "I saw that for all the adulteries of faithless Israel, I had sent her away and given her a writ of divorce, yet her treacherous sister Judah did not fear; but she went and was a harlot also."
So God divorced Israel (the ten northern tribes) but was still married to Judah who had become a harlot (remember this for later). In Hosea, which also speaks of the divorce of Israel, it says in 6:11 that Judah's time was coming, meaning that God would do to Judah (the two southern tribes) what He did with the ten northern tribes. He, via His Son, proposed to a new love, the church, which was comprised of all of biological Israelites and Judeans who accepted His Son as the Christ, along of course with all the Gentiles who also believed. But God was still married to Judah, the harlot, meaning the marriage (New Covenant) to His new love (the church) couldn't become official until the old marriage (Old Covenant) had come to an end.
WHEN DID THE MARRIAGE (THE NEW COVENANT) BEGIN?
The king was enraged, and he sent his armies and destroyed those murderers [who beat/killed God's servants, i.e. the Pharisees & apostate Jews (Mat. 23:35)] and set their city on fire. Then he said to his slaves, "The wedding is ready…" (Mat. 22:7-8).
The New Covenant marriage occurred immediately after the demise of the city of the Pharisees and apostate Jews; this was the end of Jerusalem and Judah in AD 70, when the Old Covenant (marriage) ended and the New Covenant (marriage) began!
This why Jesus said, while describing the end of Jerusalem in Matthew 24, that "heaven and earth will pass away" (Mat. 24:35), and "the sun will be darkened, and the moon will not give its light, and the stars will fall from the sky" (Mat. 23:29). He was using Old Testament language to describe the fall of Jerusalem's governing system and corrupt leaders.
For more information on the last days, consider getting a copy of Micah's book, "How The End Times Ended in Ad 70" on Amazon by clicking the link below.
Comments