Revelation 21:2, The Parousia, part III of III
And I saw the holy city, the new Jerusalem, coming down from God out of heaven like a bride beautifully dressed for her husband.
//Wrapping up this discussion of the parousia, let’s now turn to the final book of the Bible: Revelation.
In the Revelation story, the parousia occurs just before Christ begins his 1,000 year reign on earth. In other words, if we are to be “with the Lord forever” from that moment on, new life will at least begin on earth, not up in the sky.
So what are we doing up in the clouds, according to Revelation? Well, the New Jerusalem is about to float down to earth, and it is referred to as the bride of Christ. The adornment of the bride, as it settles upon Mount Zion, is God’s people. Thus, we might conclude that in the parousia, we fly up to the sky, welcome Jesus to earth, enter the New Jerusalem, and float back down inside the city of God.
This idea comes from the book of Jubilees, written in the second century BCE, in which a New Jerusalem descends from heaven and replaces the old Jerusalem. Never do we read in Revelation of this New Jerusalem ascending back up to heaven or of the saints leaving the city to go to heaven. Those Old Testament passages that speak of an afterlife (Job 19:25-27; Psalms 49:15; Isaiah 25:8, 26:19, 53:10; Daniel 12:1-3,13) do not mention dwelling in heaven.
Yes, I know this is very different from current Christian theology. Make of it what you wish.
4 Comments
Leave a Reply to Lee Harmon Cancel reply
Fantasy Football, Anyone?
Put on the whole uniform of the Team, that ye may be able to stand against the blitz of oncoming linebackers. Don the hip pads of truth, the shoulder pads of righteousness, the cleats of preparation. Don’t forget the facemask of faith and the helmet of salvation. Then clutch the pigskin with much Spirit, for that is what the Play Book of your Coach in Heaven demands.The River of Life
Twice before Lee Harmon has written about Christian topics, once on the gospel of John and once on the book of Revelation. But the question people keep asking him is this: As a liberal Christian, why do you care so much about the Bible? Others wonder whether he is truly a Christian at all.
The Way It Happened
|
|
| Revelation: A love story gone awry. | The Gospel: A love story set aright. |
What really happened 2,000 years ago? How did a persecuted minority of end-time believers known as Christians, with their dreams of Armageddon and a conquering Messiah named Jesus, evolve into the largest religion in the world? Author Lee Harmon explores the period in which the New Testament was written in his books about John's Gospel and Revelation.
(Bloggers: you may be eligible for a free review copy! Just contact us.)
Connect With Me!
A Top-100 Christian Blog
Named an Exceptional Website for Christian Theologians
Our Top Book Picks
Selected by The Dubious Disciple as Best Religion Books. Don't miss these!
Subscribers:
Twitter Followers
Facebook Fans
16806 Blog Members
354 Circles
603 Goodreads Friends & Fans
The God Show
Lee Harmon interviewed on The God Show about the History Channel's miniseries The Bible and Lee's latest book, John's Gospel: The Way It Happened.
About Lee
Hello! I'm an author, historical Jesus scholar, book reviewer, and liberal Christian, which means I appreciate and attempt to exercise the humanitarian teachings of Jesus without getting hung up on any particular supernatural or religious beliefs.
The Bible is a magnificent book that has inspired and spiritually fed generations for thousands of years, and each new century seems to bring a deeper understanding of life’s purpose. This is true of not only Christianity; through the years, our age-old religions are slowly transforming from superstitious rituals into humanitarian philosophies. In short, we are growing up, and I am thrilled to be riding the wave.
I avidly read all thought-provoking religion titles. New authors: I'd love to read and review your book!
Contact me here.
About Leslie
Hi! While Lee writes the articles and reviews the books, I edit, organize, and maintain the blog. The views expressed here are Lee's but I'm his biggest supporter! :-)
Lee, I’ve been with you all the way on this short parousia series, but now with one exception – why do you place the parousia before the 1,000 years ala premillenialism? Do you take the “Christ coming on horseback” image to be the parousia? I know I am letting my theology determine my interpretation, (don’t we all?) but it seems to me (as a post mil/amil kind of person) that the “binding of satan” occurs at Christ’s “first coming” (Mark 3 – yes, I know different authorship and so different school of christianity) and that after the “1,000 years” the New Jerusalem descending is the parousia.
I would take the 1,000 years to be the advance of God’s kingdom (“of the increase of his kingdom shall be no end..” and the parables of growth) and the final climax being the New Jerusalem/heaven/earth at the end of that time.
I know apocalypses are notoriously hard to decode unless you try to have the mindset of the original authors and hearers, so if I’m missing something, let me know!
Hi, Martin! Well, clearly, there is room for argument or there would BE no diverse views. But for me, it seems that Revelation’s writer/readers anticipated the newly-destroyed Jerusalem to be replaced immediately with a new one (who would get excited about waiting another 1,000 years for their dream?)
So in Rev 20:5-9, we see Satan attacking the city of God (surely the New Jerusalem) which is already populated with “God’s people.” This is after Satan has been bound 1,000 years, but these are apparently the people resurrected in the first resurrection, before the 1,000 years. Where have they been living all this time, if not in the New Jerusalem? Did God drop the New Jerusalem from the sky 1,000 years later, then move his people there, just before Satan is released? That scenario doesn’t make sense to me, and since we already know Revelation’s final few chapters aren’t chronological (the City that descends at the end of chapter 20 is attacked earlier in the chapter) it seems most logical that the city descends and provides a place for Jesus to set up rule for the 1,000 years.
That’s my take, as described more fully in my book about Revelation.
OK – but I think the “first resurrection” is spiritual (as in Eph “raised with Christ, seated with Christ” etc) and I have been influenced by theologians like J. Marcellus Kik with that view, so I realize that you are writing as a Biblical historian (with an interest in theology) and I am writing as a theologian (with an interest in Biblical history) … would that be fair to say? Maybe we are coming from two different starting points. But, never the less, I love your writing, so please keep it coming (and I am sure that, some day, God will tell us both that neither of our interpretations are the correct one)
😉
Yeah, I’d say that’s quite fair to say! 😉 I wouldn’t have a clue about any “correct interpretation” (one that would pass muster with God, I mean), it’s hard enough to guess what was in the heads of human authors as they wrote.
thanks for the kind words!