I am a present studying the book what does the bible really teach,and am unable to counter the bit where they say the new earth is people and not the literal earth,ive pointed out scriptures that say it will be burned up e.c.t.But the guy relates it to noahs day when the earth was not literal earth that was destroyed but the wicked people,he says this is the same with the new world to come,it is the rightouse people, at the moment we agree to disagree but does anyone know a good way to counter this argument.Though doing a goggle search on the subject it seems to me that christians have all sorts of veiws on the subject which only leaves me more confused.
will the earth be destroyed.
by ajie 23 Replies latest watchtower bible
-
-
googlemagoogle
christians have all different views on any subject... that's why there are so many christian groups.
and the earth will probably burn somewhen in the future when the sun will suck it in. but not in our lifetime... -
Celia
Welcome ajie - - - and to answer your question.... Who knows ? The way it's going (over-population, destroying the environment, pollution, nuclear threat, fanatic fundies....) mankind itself will make the earth unfit to live in and will destroy it....
-
rebel8
am unable to counter the bit where they say the new earth is people and not the literal earth,ive pointed out scriptures that say it will be burned up e.c.t.But the guy relates it to noahs day when the earth was not literal earth
Please take notice of the fact that JWs pick and choose what is literal and what is figurative in the Bible. There is no rhyme or reason to what is taken literally and what is not, except whatever is to the Watchtower Society's liking.
Then take notice of the fact that JWs indeed do claim the literal earth is going to be destroyed (or all that's on the earth, at least). Here are some excerpts from their own literature: http://quotes.watchtower.ca/pictures.htm
More info at www.jwinfo.50megs.com Keep asking questions; keep thinking.
-
peacefulpete
Jews and Christians had a number of opinions about the future of the physical earth. These conflicting views are reflected in the writtings that were compiled into the Bible.
-
Legolas
Welcome to the board!
Stick around and all your questions will be answered!
-
Leolaia
I wrote a thorough post on this subject a month or two (or three) ago, filled with info on this, but I just spent an hour going through my post history and have been unable to find it, and without a working search utility (and Google is of no help) I doubt I will be able to find it anytime soon.... :(
-
Frogleg
No. Why destroy a perfectly good planet because of the fuzz growing on it's surface? But that's using logic, which is anathema in a religious conversation.
-
Leolaia
ive pointed out scriptures that say it will be burned up e.c.t.But the guy relates it to noahs day when the earth was not literal earth that was destroyed but the wicked people,he says this is the same with the new world to come,it is the rightouse people
You are probably thinking of 2 Peter 3. Actually, from the OT point of view, it was the literal earth that was destroyed in the Flood. The Hebrew word for "earth" ('rts) usually refers to the dry "land" and thus has this meaning in Genesis 1:9-10. The "earth" was created by extracting the water from the original primeval "deep", producing "land" and "seas". Thus, initially the earth was "formless" and "void" because the water was not yet gathered in a single place but was spread everywhere. The Flood was thus an undoing of creation. The water that had been raised into the expanse of heaven was brought down to the earth, and the water that had been relegated to the "seas" was again permitted to cover the earth. So in a very real sense, the earth and everything on it was destroyed.
In the NT, it is also the literal earth that is conceived as being destroyed. 2 Peter 3 likens the destruction of the earth by water in the Flood with the future destruction of the earth by fire. The reference to the "elements" (stoikheia) melting because of the heat is a clear allusion to Stoic philosophy, which claimed that the cosmos is destroyed in intervals by conflagrations of the four elements: water, air, fire, and earth. The earlier conflagration was due to water, the future one expected by Stoics was one by fire. This was perceived as a gradual process, over many generations, during which the passions and hatreds of people would become more and more intense until the world would reach a flashpoint of fire and all the other elements (earth, water, air) would catch fire and transmute (= melt) into their constituent elements, destroying the world while at the same time preparing a new world to replace the old one. The author of 2 Peter similarly believed that the end was not immediate but that it would take some time, so that God would give time for people to reach repentance (and for the saved to exercise self-control and reason over their passions and lusts) before the world is to be destroyed by fire.
There is also an OT eschatological expectation of the heavens and earth being destroyed in the theophany of the Day of Yahweh, which Revelation draws on. In the post I cannot find, I also examine the OT and NT passages that seem to claim an eternal populated earth, and show that these have either been misinterpreted or refer to a new earth (= not the current earth) or represent a worldview entirely separate from the eschatological/apocalyptic tradition.
-
BluesBrother
If I were still teaching the WT doctrine then I would say that 2 Peter refers to both "New heavens and a new earth" Are we to expect a re created heavens too? and refer to Gen 8 21.22 "Never again will I call down evil upon the ground........for all the days the Earth continues........will never cease"
But now that I have a broader outlook , I would question the very concept of a loving god destroying mankind because they chose, or perhaps only knew. the wrong religion. Is it reasonable, is it godly, can we love god who would do that? Whatever may be written is Scripture, or whatever spin is put upon individual verses, stop and think whether you can serve a god who is like that.
If one thinks"Outside of the box" I believe the idea is just not reasonable. But stay around and read the posts of those more eloquent than me . Make up your own mind.