C. Wright's End of the World (Part 3)

The New Beginning is the final chapter in Christopher Wright's The God I Don't Understand. We saw in an earlier post that Wright subscribes to N. T. Wright's characterization of "life after life after death." Heaven is a "transit lounge" on the way to the new creation. So what can we say about the new creation?

New Creation

Wright is emphatic that we are not leaving the created order for some spiritual order. The "… new reality is not a fundamentally different reality. (195) It is still "heaven and earth," not "heaven instead of earth." Drawing on Revelation 21-22, Wright lists the following things that will not occur in the new creation:

• There will be no more sea (21:1). The sea represented chaotic, restless evil in Old Testament symbolism, the place from which the rampaging beasts in Daniel's visions had come to trample the nations. All such unruly rebellious hostility will have gone.
• There will be no more death, mourning, crying or pain (21:4). All suffering and separation will be ended for there will be nothing any longer to cause them.
• There will be no more sin, for there will be no more sinners (21:7-8); the new creation involves exclusion as well as inclusion – exclusion of the unrepentantly and persistently wicked.
• There will be no more darkness and night (21:25; 22:5), in the sense of all that they represented. The light of God's presence will dispel the darkest evils.
• There will be no more impurity, shame, or deceit (21:27) – things that are among the original marks of our falleness.
• There will be no more international strife (22:2), for all the nations will find healing through the tree of life and the river of life.
• There will be no more curse (22:3). With the reproach of Eden lifted at last, earth will be freed from its subjection and its redeemed inhabitants freed from bondage to its curse. (196)

But Wright asks, "What will there be?"

The Garden City

As I've noted repeatedly at this blog, the Bible begins in a garden and ends in a city. This is significant. But as Wright notes, the New Jerusalem incorporates the garden into the city.

• The garden included gold and precious stones (Gen. 2:12). The city likewise shines with precious stones and is paved with gold (Rev. 21:11, 19-21)
• The garden was watered by four rivers. The city likewise contains the river of the water of life flowing from God's throne right down the main street. (Rev. 22:1-2, a picture that John owes to Ezek. 47:1-12)
• Most important, the garden had the tree of life at the centre, but human beings had been barred from access to the source of eternal life in their condition of sin and rebellion (Gen. 3:22-24). The tree of life spans the river of life in the city of God (Rev. 22:2), and those once barred from it will have eternal access to it (22:14) – a vivid picture of the wonderful promise that there will be no death at all in the new creation. (196-197)

Cities have a mixed reputation in the Bible. While God planted the garden, cities are the apex of human achievement, incorporating human undertakings like commerce, government, religion, art, and community. Yet the first city mentioned in the Bible is Cain's city of Enoch, built as an expression of defiance to God. Wright says cities and sin were "… so interpenetrating as to be almost synonymous." Still, God chooses an existing Canaanite city, establishes his temple there, and transforms it into "the city of God," Jerusalem. God incorporates that which is uniquely human into his new creation.

The Glory of Civilizations

Wright decries platonic conceptualizations where the material world (evil) is destroyed, and the spiritual world (good) is preserved. He also rejects the idea of "… a great fiery obliteration that will leave nothing of the present world in existence." (199) This notion comes primarily from 2 Peter 3:10, where, in the King James Version, it says the earth "will be burnt up." Earlier manuscripts discovered since that time show that something more like "will be laid bare" or "exposed" is a more accurate translation. Leading up to this verse, Peter refers to the flood in which the world was not destroyed, but all that was evil was washed away. In 1 Peter 1:7, the idea of judgment as a refining fire is given. So the idea is one of radical purification, not obliteration.

Then Wright quotes Revelation 21:24-27:

The nations will walk by its light, and the kings of the earth will bring their glory into it. Its gates will never be shut by day – and there will be no night there. People will bring into it the glory and the honor of the nations. But nothing unclean will enter it.

So what is "the glory and honor of the nations?" Wright says:

What brings honour to nations is the accumulation of cultural achievement over many generations. Art, literature, music, architecture, styles of food and dress, the richness of language and culture – and so much else – these are the things that national distinctive are built on, which at their best enrich our humanity and at their most trivial support the tourist industry. (201)

To this list, I would also add things like governance and modes of commerce that may or may not translate directly into the new creation, but I expect they will be redeemed and brought into the new creation.

The Healing of the Nations

The leaves of the tree of life will bring healing to the nations. Peace and justice will reign.

The Harmony of Creation

Something about nature will fundamentally change. The predator and prey relationship will end, and a renewed animal kingdom will exist. (I confess that I'm not as confident as Wright about the nature of this renewed animal kingdom. I'm still exploring that one.)

That will do it for this post. In the closing post, we will look at redeemed humanity and the presence of God.

What do you think of Christopher Wright's claims here so far?

[Previous] [Next] [Index]

Comments

[Travis Greene]

This sounds right on to me, though what the symbolism translates to in reality, who knows? I get what the absence of the sea meant to the ancients, but will the renewed heavens/earth really have no oceans? No whales? Dolphins? How will Peter go fishing?

Of course, this is mostly speculation and the specifics (Will lions eat vegetables? What about mosquitoes?) don't really matter. The important point is to grasp that the world will be renewed, restored, and redeemed, and it will be a world, not an unphysical realm of spirits. Now we see through a glass, darkly; then we will see face to face. But what we see will be the fulfillment of the world, not its negation.

[Michael W. Kruse]

"... we see will be the fulfillment of the world, not its negation."

Bingo. Specifics aren't the key issue.

As someone who neither likes fishing or seafood, the oceans disappearing is okay by me. :-)

[Rick McGinniss]

"There will be no more sin, for there will be no more sinners (21:7-8); the new creation involves exclusion as well as inclusion – exclusion of the unrepentantly and persistently wicked."

My wife asked me a really good question about this the other day: if there is no more sin in the new creation, does that imply the loss of free will? i.e. if we are resurrected to be fully human in the image of God (w/the ability to make real choices) could we still not decide to sin at some point?

[Michael W. Kruse]

Interesting question. I'd be curious to hear what others think.

I think we have free will and when it comes to the consummation of the New Creation we will have chosen (or rejected) communion with God and his Kingdom. As resurrected beings we will be in perfect relationship with God, others, and creation, and perfectly enabled to choose to live according the world of the new creation.

Earlier in the book, Wright deals with the issue of the origin of evil. His basic point is that we don't know its origin and God has chosen not to reveal that to us. We are merely called to trust God when he says he will eliminate evil. I think that also includes that we will be able to freely choose the good in a world without evil.

[William Apel]

Our Wednesday lunch church group has been reading Henri Nouwen's 'The Return of the Prodigal Son.'

We have repeatedly commented on how Nouwen is interpreting - the meaning he ascribes - to what Rembrandt had painted.

Nouwen's words and thoughts are beautiful. But he lived more than 300 years after Rembrandt. Did Rembrandt really mean all those things the Nouwen said about the painting? Who knows?

Now C. Wright is ascribing all manner of ideas to God, heaven, and the afterlife. To me it's just another example of man trying to control/limit the mind of God.

Shalom,
Bill

[Michael W. Kruse]

"To me it's just another example of man trying to control/limit the mind of God."

I'm unclear what you're reacting to, Bill. Can you be more specific?

[William Apel]

I’m reacting to all of the:

“There will be no…” statements. And maybe some of the “There will be” ones as well.

I guess I just agree with Niebuhr (Kruse Kronicle – May 17, 2009)

“It is unwise for Christians to claim any knowledge of either the furniture of heaven or the temperature of hell; or to be too certain about any of the details of the Kingdom of God in which history is consummated.”

[Michael W. Kruse]

Thanks.

I don't think Wright is talking about "the furniture of heaven," ... or the house or the neighborhood for that matter. :-) He simply relates the very imprecise sense of a heavenly city.

For the most part, he seems to me to be addressing broad themes about the new creation. He is sticking pretty close to scriptural descriptions, though metaphors are clearly a major part of these descriptions.

I also think God intends for us to know more about the future other just the fact that get eternal life. He gives us a glimpse of some of the contours of the new creation and we are called to give witness to those contours in the present. That is why I find Wright's summary helpful.