I understand your point, but 22:11 is also after the Great White Throne, New Heaven, New Earth, ect.

Why is it not possible that as John receives this revelation that at this point (21:27), for a moment, the eternal state is being contrasted with the state of the world in John's day and ours?

Everybody on earth has access to the eternal city as far as the text clearly indicates. The statement that some things will not be there may contrast the eternal state and the heavenly city with the current state of John's day and ours. Rev 22:11 certainly seems to refer to a time prior to the inauguration of the eternal state since the filthy are mentioned.

What in the text requires that which defileth, worketh abomination, etc to be present in the eternal state? Such an understanding is not certainly not consistent with the rest of Scripture. Hence, our discussion in the first place, right.

I cannot see any other way to harmonize the passage.

I am back at my own PC now and have access to all my Bible S/W.

Rev 22:3 says "and there shall be no more curse". This is a reflection from the eternal vantage point back to the way things used to be before the NH and NE. So it is not inconsistent with the passage to at least admit that in close context there is a contrast between present state and eternal state.

Regarding the possible presence of unsaved during the eternal state, have never heard that before. If we hold that this is all in strict time sequence with no possible reference to what was before but is then no more, do they all get saved? When will there be another judgement? Great White Throne was in chapter 20. I see far to many problems with this idea to give it serious consideration, especially on the basis of an uncertain interpretation of a statement that is somewhat less that crystal clear.

Never interpret what is clear in light of what is unclear. When you come to an unclear passage, cling ever more tightly to the things that are clear!

RJP--

Well, I'll take a few minutes to post an answer.

In ch. 21, verses 9 to 27, everything is about the New Jerusalem...

Re 21:27 And there shall in no wise enter into it any thing that defileth, neither whatsoever worketh abomination, or maketh a lie: but they which are written in the Lamb's book of life.

"And there shall in no wise enter into it...", enter into what? The city...if there were nothing to defile, or that worked abomination, or that made a lie, this statement would have no meaning. If this is speaking to John's day, or our day, or the millineum reign, then this statement is out of place with the rest of the chapter.

Now lets look at ch. 22...

Re 22:9 Then saith he unto me, See thou do it not: for I am thy fellowservant, and of thy brethren the prophets, and of them which keep the sayings of this book: worship God.
10 And he saith unto me, Seal not the sayings of the prophecy of this book: for the time is at hand.
11 He that is unjust, let him be unjust still: and he which is filthy, let him be filthy still: and he that is righteous, let him be righteous still: and he that is holy, let him be holy still.

Verses 9-11 are talking about Johns day and ours, all the way up to the New Jerusalem.

Ch. 22:14, 15...

Re 22:14 Blessed are they that do his commandments, that they may have right to the tree of life, and may enter in through the gates into the city.
15 For without are dogs, and sorcerers, and whoremongers, and murderers, and idolaters, and whosoever loveth and maketh a lie.

The city here in verse 14 is the New Jerusalem, and without the gates (verse 15) of the city (the New Jerusalem) "are dogs, sorcers, etc..."

Re 2:7 He that hath an ear, let him hear what the Spirit saith unto the churches; To him that overcometh will I give to eat of the tree of life, which is in the midst of the paradise of God.

It would seem that the tree of life is not in the city, New Jerusalem, but in what is now Heaven; but according to verse 14, access to the city is by having the right to the tree of life. Only those saved individuals have access to the tree of life.

Noticed you jumped to 22:9. Granted from 22:6 the scene does shift with the words "and he said unto me..." When we move to look at chapter 22 we cannot skip verse 1-5 and go directly to 22:9 without doing injustice to the text.

Rev 22:3 is still well within the context of the discussion of the NH and the NE (not just the Heavenly City, 21:1). And, within that context there is a look back to life before the NH and the NE when the curse was still in effect. Is that “out of place” with the rest of the passage? From the immediate context, 21:24-22:5, what prevents 21:27 from being a similar backward glance?

And, on what basis (addressed earlier) can we suggest that there may be unsaved people present in the eternal state? How can the idea that there may be lost in the eternal state fit with 21:5, "behold I make all things new..."

Again, I see no other way to harmonize the apparent difficulties with 21:27.

I am always refining and readjusting my own theology to balance it out with the whole of God's Holy Word. Yet, I do not see where I need to make any significant adjustments here.

SailorJerry,

Hope I have not come on too strong with my position here. Kinda feel that I may have, 'cause I think I sense a little bit of defensiveness in your responses. I don't mean to incite others, but I realize that I do tend to bring out an argumentative side in many people.

Are you defending a position that your pastor suggested? I would never mean to criticize another Man of God. But I have taken my share of constructive criticism and have brought my own ideas more into line with the Word because of it. Yet I am still...

RJP--

Don't worry, I am not offended easily, I go on a lot of websites that have nothng to do with God or the Bible to witness and get treated a lot worse than anybody on this board has treated me. No problems.

I am not defending a position with this thread, just stated an interesting possibility that my pastor showed a couple of men in our church. I nor my pastor are saying there will be lost people on the New Earth, but the last two chapters of Revelation seem to possibly indicate there might be. I love my pastor, he is the greatest Christian I know, but I don't always agree with him, and he tells the other members not to take everything he says as gospel but to study for themselves to make sure he is right.

Well, I was going to post an answer tonite but am very tired, so I will post tomorrow. Have a good night all, God bless.

RJP--

In 22:1-5, John is contuning his description of the New Jerusalem. In verses 6-21 he is summerizing and finishing his letter. In verses 14 & 15, he again cites the New Jerusalem with a promise and a warning.

Re 22:14 Blessed are they that do his commandments, that they may have right to the tree of life, and may enter in through the gates into the city.
15 For without are dogs, and sorcerers, and whoremongers, and murderers, and idolaters, and whosoever loveth and maketh a lie.

In verse 15, "for without", what is he talking about? Outside of the city "are dogs, sorcerers, etc...". Is he talking of those who are already in hell? He had already shown where their eternal destination will be in Ch. 21:8. Will hell be outside the New Jerusalem?

If there will be no more sin, why would there be conditions on entering the city? In ch. 22:14, the condition of entering the city is having the right to the tree of life. If there will be no more sin, why would he have to state in ch. 21:27 that no defiling thing would enter into it?

Again, this is not my stand, just questions.

Jim quoted Daniel 9:24 and emphasied(?) "and to make an end of sins", does this mean all sin will eventually be gone, or is this verse pointing to the result of Christ's sacrifice taking away our sin?

Regarding Dan 9:26 and “to make an end of sins”. In an earlier post I pointed out that often times the OT prophets linked events that were separated by many centuries (Isa 61 w/ Luke 4).

In Ezekiel 26, we have a very detailed account of the destruction of Tyre. The amazing thing about this is that when Ezekiel wrote he was years ahead of the events of which he was speaking. In verses 6-11 the prophet predicted that first the daughter cities (suburbs) would be taken and then the main city itself. He said that the actual city would be thrown into the sea (verse 12); even stating that the very dust of the city would scraped up and the site of the city would be left as clean as the top of a rock (verse 4). Ezekiel further promised that the city would become a place for the "spreading of nets in the midst of the sea" (verse 5) and just for good measure he added that the ancient city of Tyre would never be rebuilt (verse 14).

All of these prophecies must have seemed a bit unusual, to say the least, in light of the fact that Tyre was probably the richest, strongest, and most prominent city in the world at the time. The prophecy concerning being cast into the sea and becoming a place for the fishermen to spread their nets must have especially seemed ridiculous since Tyre was at that time the "mistress of the seas" with the most powerful navy of her day. (Carthage was only a colony of Tyre and history tells us that the troops of Carthage, under Hannibal almost conquered Rome.)

The fulfillment of these prophecies is history. We know that Babylon, under Nebuchadnezzar, first captured the cities surrounding Tyre and then in 585 BC he overthrew the main city itself. After the battle the city was burned to the ground by the conquering Babylonian army. Many of the people of Tyre escaped to a neighboring Island which lay about a half mile offshore. With their strong navy they continued to defy the armies of Babylon from this new place of safety. At that time they appeared to be quite safe since Babylon had neither the time nor the money to attack them in their new place of safety.

The remaining part of the prophecy waited a few more centuries before final fulfillment. In 333 BC, Macedonia under the leadership of Alexander the Great, overthrew the Persian empire. Before going on to conquer Egypt, he decided to attack the new city of Tyre, now on the Island. During the two hundred year interval between the war with Nebuchadnezzar and this time the city had become almost impregnable. The entire island was surrounded by a 150 foot high wall and the waterways approaching the island had been mined with under water obstructions which would sink any vessel running upon one of them.

Alexander knew that his navy was no match for that of Tyre so he decided to build a causeway from the mainland out to the island. To get the material for the causeway he decided to use the rubble from the old city which had lain in ruin since the time of Nebuchadnezzar. In order to complete the project his engineers had to use even the dust from the former city to fill in the causeway. As the centuries have passed, sand from the sea has turned the causeway into a peninsula upon which fisher man now spread their nets. The prophecy has been fulfilled to the smallest detail. BUT, over several centuries. The events that were described together in the prophecy were separated by hundreds of years!

Peter Stoner, a mathematician, once applied the law of compound probabilities to seven biblical prophecies concerning Tyre. He assigned conservative estimates of probability to each of the seven statements to see if Ezekiel's prophecy could have been fulfilled by chance. He concluded that Ezekiel's chances of writing this prophecy and having it come true by luck amounted to one chance in 75,000. Yet everything came true, to the letter, to the minutest detail. (John Phillips, Exploring the Future, Nashville: Thomas Nelson Publishers, 1983, p. 17, the preceding was not a direct quote, but Phillips was the source for most of the info. re Ezekiel’s prophecy).

Bible prophecy is not organized like lecture notes and multiple passages must often be compared to balance out the correct sequence of events. We need to keep this in mind in our study of the Word of God.

Back to Daniel 9:24, it reads, “Seventy weeks are determined upon thy people and upon thy holy city, to finish the transgression, and to make an end of sins, and to make reconciliation for iniquity, and to bring in everlasting righteousness, and to seal up the vision and prophecy, and to anoint the most Holy.”

Verse 26 indicates that “after threescore and two weeks shall Messiah be cut off, but not for himself: and the people of the prince that shall come shall destroy the city and the sanctuary.” This is clearly a gap of nearly 2000 years now since the cutting off of the Messiah. Yet, Daniel gives no clear indication of any gap between the 69th and 70th week. Some conservative (not liberal) premillennial Bible Scholars even suggest a gap between the 7th and the 8th week based on verse 25, “seven weeks and threescore and two weeks”. Why put a break in listing the weeks unless there is one in actuality. I'm not convinced, but it may be a possibility.

In any case, the seventy weeks prophecy relates to the Jews and to Jerusalem (v. 24) the seventieth week will be the tribulation. We are in a gap between the 69th and the 70th that was not revealed to Daniel. The purpose of the 70 weeks are “to finish the transgression, and to make an end of sins, and to make reconciliation for iniquity, and to bring in everlasting righteousness, and to seal up the vision and prophecy, and to anoint the most Holy” (v. 24).

Reconciliation for iniquity was accomplished on the cross. The most Holy has not yet been anointed as the Messiah and Heir to David’s throne (yet we must note that many amillennialists see His baptism and the subsequent descent of the HS as an anointing and fulfillment of this). The finishing of transgression could mean that Israel’s rebellion will finally come to an end. This will happen at the close of the 70th week. However, everlasting righteousness will not be complete until the final judgement at the end of the 1000 years (Rev 20:7-10). This rebellion could hardly be classified as anything less than sin. So, the “end of sins” could hardly be understood as the complete cessation of all sin since that does not occur at the end of the 70th week.

One possible way to reconcile the passage to understand the millennial reign as the inauguration of Christ’s rule which will be a rule of righteousness and power. The brief rebellion at the end of the 1000 years will not significantly disrupt His righteous reign. So, His return to Earth at the close of the 70th week would then be understood as the beginning of everlasting righteousness.

It may also be best to understand that as Jesus' death did bruise the serpent’s head, it also laid the foundation for the end of sins. Sometimes Scripture views things that are a certainty as having already occurred even though they are yet future ("glorified", Rom 8:30; "sit together" Eph 2:6). It may be that Daniel states the certain thing as though it had already occurred.

Not a perfect solution to the issue, but the best I have got for now. Will try to go back through my notes on Daniel from my last study to see if I can find anything better.

Will deal with Rev 21-22 next week.

Saturday does not have much discretionary time. As a pastor I usually only work HALF days most days. It's GREAT! I only work from about 8 am to 8 pm (longer on some days). The other 12 hours I get to do whatever I want! Spend time with my family, eat, sleep, or just relax! Have not played golf since my vacation 7 weeks ago. Will probably get to play again sometime, oh say, probably next July!

OK. Friday is almost always a day off. Most of Saturday is family time. Mow the grass, fix the lawnmower, work on the car, that kind of stuff. Till about 8:00 pm. Usually 8-12 pm Sat is study time.

Did not want to make it sound like I am a workaholic or anything. Oh, and I almost always play tennis for a couple of hours on Tuesday evening. And no, most of my days are not really 12 hour days. Some are, but not most. I may have exagerated when I said I usually work 12 hour days. Probably less than half of my days are 12 hour days. Did that at another church, learned from it. Not doin it anymore, at least not regularly.

Just saw a mention of the sins in the new heaven and earth on another post. After checking back I found that I never completed my reponse on this. Was "off air" far several days. Will get back to this by Wed.

Sorry,

RJP

SEVENTY WEEKS
The following were all fulfilled by the Lord Jesus

Seventy weeks are determined upon thy people and upon thy holy city,
to finish the transgression, I would refer you to Matt 23: 30-32. Fill ye up then the measure of your fathers. They did this by putting to death the Lord. Likewise the Jews completed the transgression of their fathers.
and to make an end of sins, . Jesus made an end to sins by his death and ressurection.
and to make reconciliation for iniquity, Likewise
and to bring in everlasting righteousness, Likewise
and to seal up the vision and prophecy, Lu 16:16 The law and the prophets were until John: since that time the kingdom of God is preached, and every man presseth into it
and to anoint the most HolyLuke 4: 18 The Spirit of the Lord is upon me, because he hath anointed me to preach the gospel to the poor; he hath sent me to heal the brokenhearted, to preach deliverance to the captives, and recovering of sight to the blind, to set at liberty them that are bruised. Luke 4: 34 Saying, "Let us alone; what have we to do with thee, thou Jesus of Nazareth? art thou come to destroy us? I know thee who thou art; the Holy One of God." In Acts 4 Jesus is shown as the annointed and the Holy One.

The 69 weeks extend to the baptism of our Lord. He confirmed the covenant with the Jews for one week being cut off in the midst of the (70th) week. The last 1/2 week extended till the conversion of Cornelius

Much is made of the Prince that shall come, even books been written about it, but if you read carefully the prince is only incidental, he does nothing in this prophecy. It is his people who will destroy the city and sactuary. This was wonderfully, but tragically fulfilled by the troops of Titus, who destroyed the temple against his orders.

The "he" in v27, refers not to the prince, as he is not the subject of the verse, his people are. The "he" refers back to Messiah, v26.
In the middle of the week the Lord made the sacrifice to cease, as when the veil was rent, there was no further need for sacrifice. Heb 10:10 By the which will we are sanctified through the offering of the body of Jesus Christ once for all.

THe sacrifice finally failed, not because of the Romans, as Titus begged the Jews to keep the sacrifice, but due to the civil war going on in the city. All the high priests were killed. The house of archives, which held the genealogies, was destroyed, so no-one could prove that they were a priest. The sacrifice failed due to there being no priest to offer it. This is why there will never be an old testament sacrifice again, not a legitimate one anyway.

I am also concerned that many, including some in my own church seem to differentiate between Jewish believers and Christians. They have 2 classes of Jewish saint, plus "The Church." I think this is a very dangerous teaching for Ga 3:28 There is neither Jew nor Greek, there is neither bond nor free, there is neither male nor female: for ye are all one in Christ Jesus.

With Christian love

David

Davo, I am not sure how on earth you managed to come to this conclusion but you missed so much it is not even funny. I refer you to this chart:



The seventieth week has yet to be fulfilled. It will be fullfilled during the tribulation period.

Read the entire book here:

http://www.apibs.org/books/prop/prop01.htm


Love in Christ,

Jim

his view is called preterism, unless I misunderstand what he wrote.

Ray

Yes, that is my assessment as well.

I think Davo's post is accurate to the extreme. I disagree that he's a Preterist, though. A Preterist is someone who believes that the book of Revelation was fullfilled by 70 AD but Davo is talking strictly about Daniel's prophecy of the "70 weeks". The entire pre-millenial doctrine of the end-times 7 year Great Tribulation and the rapture doctrine hinge on how one reads and interprets Daniels prophecy of the 70 weeks. Personally, I think to pull the last week (seven years) out of the prophecy and push it to the end of time has been the greatest error in interpretation of Biblical prophecy in the 20th century and is why we are where we are in our thinking. Charles Larkin did much to push this doctrine into mainstream Christianity in the early 1900's and everyone since just seems to mimick what he said. To remove the 70th week of Daniel's prophecy is to do inestimable damage to the prophecy itself and to the consistancy of scripture. The 490 year time period (70x7) appears again and again throughout scripture and if it's broken then the 490 year cycle taught in scripture becomes meaningless. Even by changing Christ's words in answer to Peter about how many times we should forgive someone, the NIV replaced 70x7 to "77 times" and their claim is the expression was really meant to be "many times". 490 is a period of grace which God extends to a people or nation at the end of which He brings judgment if there is no repentance. Removing the last week from Daniel's prophecy and pushing it to the end of time is an attempt to force and justify an otherwise indefensible position.The other scriptures used to promote these end-time doctrines are every bit as tenuous.