New Heaven and New Earth

I found this article by a fellow OMFer from the Philippines interesting. What do you think? Peter talks about a new heaven and a new earth in 2 Peter 3:13

This maybe a long email for you but I get this courage to write because I am truly intrigued about this theological development of 'new heavens and the new earth' within the evangelical circle. I write this for the purpose of self edification and not part of my requirement at ATS. This means I appreciate if somebody out there would like to respond to this query.

Last Feb 12-13, ATS held a theological forum at Union Church of Manila. There were excellent plenary presentations as well as different topics at break out sessions. Our theme was "Reflections on Stewardship in the Asian Context."

One of the things that really struck me during the forum was the presentation of the Japanese Bible scholar, Dr. Katsoumi Shimasaki, a former ATS professor but now heading Japan Bible Society. In his presentation he pointed out that our theological stand about the "new heavens and new earth" is foundational to our stewardship of the earth. The very new thing to me is that the earth that we are living at present will be the heaven in the future. The earth is God's design for human to live and it is destined as human's home for eternity. This means that the 'new heavens and the new earth' symbolizes the eternal rule of Christ - His kingdom. In fact, the heaven on earth is God's fulfillment of Jesus' prayer when he said, ".... Your kingdom come and your will be done on earth as it is in heaven." (Matthew 6). Literally, the heaven that we are expecting, beyond and somewhere, is not a different place but it will be physically on earth. The earth will be recreated, renewed and transformed. Everything will be then restored into a new creation order.

Implications: The kind of theology we embrace about 'new heavens and new earth' determines the way we care our environment - the mother earth. If we understand that mother earth is our eternal home then God has a clear message that our stewardship includes the whole creation, not only human salvation. If our theology says the earth will soon vanish away then we may become like others who are labeled as consumerists. We are here on earth to consume the resources of the earth and thus disregard our stewardship of the creation.

Dr. Shimasaki's presentation has created some chaos to my mind. As you all know I'm a person shaped in systematic theology and particularly holds the view of a dispensationalist. In other words, I believe that heaven is a separate place from earth; it is above the earth somewhere but not the earth. I believe that heaven is a place where we are going; heaven is not coming. The doctrine of dispensation says that 'the new heavens and the new earth' is the 1,000 years rule of Christ on earth; it is temporal but also transitory to his eternal rule in heaven. This means, the rule of Christ on earth for a thousand years is the initial stage that will usher his people (not the creation on earth) to eternity. What will happen to earth? I have the view that earth will be destroyed and will be completely annihilated by fire according to 2 Peter. In my view it is implied that the creation on earth will vanish away but we will join with Christ in heaven for eternity. Shimaki's view is that the earth will be restored into a new creation order, the reason why our stewardship is vital to this transformation event. When Christ comes, he will see his followers fulfilling this task and Jesus is going to perfect everything. The story about Noah and the flood supports this view. Noah did his task as God instructed. God judged the earth and cleansed it, but afterwards, the transformed earth is the same earth where the people used to live.

Some said that the theological forum may impact only when it brings some trouble. In a sense, this is correct because it is exactly my experience. Because of this trouble, I was pushed to make a survey and to my surprised, everyone that I asked outside ATS said that heaven is a different place from earth. It is the home of God where we are bound to. I think this is the most popular view right now in the evangelical circle. I also intentionally asked at least three professors at ATS about this trouble in my mind and I found out that all of them asserted their support to Shimasaki's view. Please do not misunderstand this. Shimasaki's view as well as the other professors at ATS is not ATS' view. The survey I am doing is actually a mere response from individuals; they are personal opinion or view but does not represent any institution.

My arguments

Honestly, I am now 60-40 in relation to this issue.60% still holds the view of a dispensationalist; 40% inclines to Shimasaki's view. But I still have my arguments. Jesus said in John 14, "I go to prepare a place for you... where ever I go there you maybe also." I assume this as Jesus preparing mansions in heaven and someday God's home will be complete to be our home. So when Jesus ascended to heaven, he physically left the earth and went up to a place called heaven. This brings a sense to view heaven as a different place. Never in my life I've heard a preacher who said we are living on earth when comforting to the bereaved family over someone who died. Instead, every preacher assumes that heaven is God's home, our eternal destiny and we are on that pilgrim. Jesus' parable about Lazarus and the rich man, reminds me that when they died, the angel took their spirits into their specific destinations. So we have a picture about souls departing from earth; they are brought to specific places, but definitely not on the earth.

Implication to OMF Vision

Granted that Shimasaki is right about his view, isn't this a challenge to our vision? If we only care for the welfare and for the redemption of humanity, wouldn't this mean that we are like other institutions who are humanists? When we use the term in our vision" transformed communities" what does it mean? Does it mean we include both human and the rest of creation? I think the challenge that Shimasaki has brought about gives me one piece of the puzzle in relation to mission and I know that I need to reflect on my own vision in light of my theology. I think Shimasaki has pointed out a valid biblical content. Our stewardship is not only the redemption of humanity but the entire creation order.

Any response to this would really very helpful to me. I struggle and thank for your patience.

In Christ,

H

--It is today for which we are responsible. God still owns tomorrow.-- by: Elizabeth Elliot