The New Heaven and New Earth, Millennium, New Jerusalem -
Explained!
(Just what, when
and where is the
By MS
(
There is much
confusion regarding just what and where the
Many if not most
Preterists believe that we are now living in the New Heavens and New Earth
period which is also the New Covenant period, the promise of eternal
inheritance made to many of the faithful in the Old Testament, to the Apostles
and early disciples, and to us in this New Testament (New Covenant) period. Or is the New Heavens and New Earth to be realized only in a
future Millennium rule, or in a future Holy City of New Jerusalem, as most
Futurists believe?
Hopefully, by the
end of this short paper, I would have succeeded in sharing with you the logic
and consistency of Scriptures in answering the above title question and in
identifying the What, When, Where and How of these symbolic elements.
The New Heaven and New Earth
Before I start on
this section, allow me to share with you an amusing segment of an email I
received from my good friend, Bill of Pinehurst,
‘A
short story about our grandson, 4 years old, Tyler. His mom kept telling him about the new year coming, and he wanted to stay up all night to see
it. Well, he went to bed at 9 and the next morning came running into his mom's
room and asked if the new year came in. She said it
did, then he ran to the window to look out and said,
"Well, it looks just like the old one...." Ah, from the mouths of
babes....’
That
interestingly brings out a point. When the New Heaven and New Earth appeared
(or to appear in the future, according to our Futurist brothers), was anyone
(or will anyone be) aware of its manifestation?
Rev 21:1 And I saw a new heaven and a new
earth: for the first heaven and the first earth were passed away; and
there was no more sea.
Surprisingly,
this verse is devoid of any cataclysmic events typical of the book of
Revelation! I mean, if we are talking of the planet Earth being destroyed and a
new planet being created in its place, one would have expected at least a few
verses describing its catastrophic destruction and a glorious creation (as in
Genesis 1). No, none whatsoever. It was as if it was a non-event, or as if the
‘New Heaven and New Earth’ has already existed! It is just like the old year
giving way to a new year – nothing really obvious has changed!
It is true (from
preterists’ viewpoint) that ‘heaven’ has been used in the Old Testament to
depict the religious-political system (the government) and ‘earth’ as the
social-religious system (the people), based on the Old Covenant’s Laws and
Commandments. And so, it is a natural assumption for preterists to take “New
Heaven and New Earth” to mean a new socio-religious-political environment, a
new order in the New Covenant era, extending it even unto now. (Futurists
simply believe that it is still to be fulfilled as the physical Earth is not
destroyed as yet).
This, I believe,
is not exactly correct. I would take “New Heaven and New Earth” as just a
colloquial expression understood by the ancient Jews to mean “a new beginning”.
No more, no less. As such, while the new beginning may have heralded in a new
social, religious and political change, it does not have to carry that meaning.
When Paul wrote
in 2 Cor
This phrase was
only used twice in the OT; once each in chapter 65 and in chapter 66 of Isaiah
(and we have developed multiplicity of doctrines out of just 2 verses!). It was
also used twice in the New Testament books, once by John in Rev 21:1 in
referencing Isa 65 and another by Peter. Substituting “new heaven and new
earth” with ‘new beginning’ into the below 4 verses would not made any of them
less ambiguous and less clear.
Isa 65:17 For, behold, I create new heavens
and a new earth: and the former shall not be remembered, nor come into mind.
Isa 66:22 For as the new heavens and the new earth,
which I will make, shall remain before me, saith the LORD, so shall your seed
and your name remain.
2Pe
Rev 21:1 And I saw a new heaven and a new earth: for the first heaven and the
first earth were passed away; and there was no more sea.
‘New Heaven and
New Earth’ is not a place per se. ‘New Heaven and New Earth’ is not the New
Covenant era. ‘New Heaven and New Earth’ is not the New Jerusalem either,
though it was paired with it. It is simply an expression used to denote a new
beginning – especially the beginning of the manifestation of the sons of God
into the
The New Jerusalem
Many of us simply
assumed ‘New Heaven and New Earth’ and New Jerusalem as being one and the same
thing when reading Rev. 21. But they are not the same! (It is like stating that
the classical piano is the Baroque period.) ‘New Heaven and New Earth’ marks
the new beginning of ‘men in Heaven’, of men born again as spiritual beings,
becoming sons of God and living with God, and reigning with Christ in New
Jerusalem. The Holy City of New Jerusalem has existed way before the creation
of heavens and Earth in Genesis 1. It is where the very Throne of God is! (Rev
22:3)
Heb
Heb
2Pe
That was
basically what Peter was saying in 2Pet
Now, the new
beginning having started in Rev 21:1, from verse 2 onward, the vision is
totally focused on New Jerusalem (until Rev. 22:17). Rev. 21 and 22 portray New
Jerusalem coming down to earth (to men) and saved men entering into the City
through its gates, living in it with God and reigning with Christ.
Rev 21:1 And I saw a new heaven and a new
earth: for the first heaven and the first earth were passed away; and there was
no more sea.
Rev 21:2 And I John saw the holy city, new
Jerusalem, coming down from God out of heaven, prepared as a bride adorned for
her husband.
Rev 21:3 And I heard a great voice out of heaven saying, Behold, the
tabernacle of God is with men, and he will dwell with them, and they shall be
his people, and God himself shall be with them, and be their God.
We should not
jump to conclusion that the New Jerusalem physically descended from Heaven
(God’s Throne) onto Earth. NO! It is ‘out of heaven’. It is a vision and in the
vision, John saw the New Jerusalem descending down out of clouds of heaven (the
sky) and onto the earth (land). It is as symbolic as many portions of
Revelation and as the beasts of Daniel. In reality, the spiritual New Jerusalem
cannot be descending onto this physical Earth. I doubt the physical Earth can
literally accommodate the spiritual New Jerusalem either! The Builder and Maker
of that
The “coming down”
typifies God delivering on His promise, delivering His rewards to men, when the
first batch of harvest of men (“the first fruits”) were ‘caught up’ and clothed
with tabernacles of immortality in the First Resurrection. They were
spiritually born into the
Rev 22:5 And there shall be no night there;
and they need no candle, neither light of the sun; for the Lord God giveth them
light: and they shall reign for ever and ever.
God, Lord Jesus
and all the saints will reign over the world from Heaven above. These “men”
that God dwelt with are His sons made perfect. They are the ones who have done
His commandments and have earned the right to enter into the Holy City of New
Jerusalem and to the Tree of Life.
And anyone who is
not inside the spiritual
Rev 21:8 …. and all liars, shall have their
part in the lake which burneth with fire and brimstone: which is the second
death.
The pilgrims and
saints, many of them had been dead for a long time, finally received their
rewards when their King returned in A.D. 70 to welcome them into the Kingdom, a
kingdom that is not of this world. They were resurrected, together with those
saints living then and all were able then to enter into
Heb
Heb
Heb
Heb
Hence, we must
understand (and remember) that New Jerusalem - the promised Hope - is the
spiritual Mount Zion, many times also referred to as the Holy Mountain or Holy
City in the Old Testament. New Jerusalem is in the spiritual Heaven of God,
where all the spiritual beings, angels, cherubim and the likes are in.
Heb 12:22 But ye are come unto mount Sion,
and unto the city of the living God, the heavenly Jerusalem, and
to an innumerable company of angels,
Heb 12:23 To the general assembly and church of the firstborn,
which are written in heaven, and to God the Judge of all, and to the
spirits of just men made perfect,
When the Book of Hebrew was
written, Paul stressed the fact that they were at the gates - “ye are come unto
Isaiah 65 – ‘New Heaven and New Earth’ and New Jerusalem
In Revelation,
John saw a vision that resembled a prophecy in Isaiah 65, the very place where
the phrase 'New Heaven and New Earth' was first mentioned. And his recording of
this vision almost paralleled it phrase for phrase in meaning that one has to
conclude that they must be referring to the same event.
|
Isaiah 65 |
Revelation 21 |
|
Isa
65:17 For,
behold, I create new heavens and a new earth: and the former shall not be
remembered, nor come into mind. |
Rev
21:1 And I saw a
new heaven and a new earth: for the first heaven and the first earth were
passed away; and there was no more sea. |
|
Isa
65:18 But be ye
glad and rejoice for ever in that which I create: for, behold, I create
|
Rev
21:2 And I John
saw the holy city, new Jerusalem, coming down from God out of heaven,
prepared as a bride adorned for her husband. |
|
Isa
65:19 And I will
rejoice in |
Rev
21:3 And I heard
a great voice out of heaven saying, Behold, the tabernacle of God is with
men, and he will dwell with them, and they shall be his people, and God
himself shall be with them, and be their God. |
|
Isa
65:19 …. and the voice of weeping shall be no more heard in her,
nor the voice of crying. |
Rev
21:4 And God
shall wipe away all tears from their eyes; …. |
|
Isa
65:20 There shall
be no more thence an infant of days, nor an old man that hath not filled his
days: for the child shall die an hundred years old;
but the sinner being an hundred years old shall be accursed. |
Rev
21:4…. and there shall be no more death, neither sorrow, nor
crying, neither shall there be any more pain: for the former things are
passed away. |
But wait a
minute! There are 2 glaring contradictions. In John’s recording of his vision,
there was to be “no more death”. And in it “there shall in no wise enter into
it any thing that defileth” (
Because of this
apparent contradiction, some had proposed that the prophecy in Isaiah is yet in
the future and especially Isa 65:25 which literally has yet to be fulfilled –
“The wolf and the lamb shall feed together, and the lion shall eat straw like
the bullock: and dust shall be the serpent's meat”. Others have offered various
interpretations and shades of meaning for the phrase “the child shall die”.
But Rev. 21 is
indeed the fulfillment of Isa 65:17 onward and there is really no contradiction
if we have handled God’s word with care and attention. Allow me to expound Isa
65:17-20 below.
Isa 65:17 For, behold, I create new heavens
and a new earth: and the former shall not be remembered, nor come into mind.
As already
pointed out, ‘New Heaven and New Earth’ is not a place, but a phrase, an idiomatic
expression to mean ‘new beginning’. Verse 17 can be paraphrased as “For
behold, I made a new beginning; the former state will pass away, vanish and be
replaced.”
Isa 65:18 But be ye glad and rejoice for ever
in that which I create: for, behold, I create
Starting with
verse 18, the focus now shifts to the key object of that new beginning – the
New Jerusalem. God will make New
Isa 65:19 And I will rejoice in
God will rejoice
in New Jerusalem (as there are no literal new Heavens or new physical Earth
created). God shall wipe away all tears from their eyes; neither sorrow, nor
crying, neither shall there be any more pain, as John saw and interpreted in
Rev 21:4. (And of course God was joyful in that very first day of the new
beginning He had made (Isa 66:8,10). Which father
would not be when he adopted so many sons and daughters into his family?)
Isa 65:20 There
shall be no more thence an infant of days, nor an old man that hath not filled
his days: for the child shall die an hundred years old; but the sinner being an
hundred years old shall be accursed.
But how can it be
that there shall be no more death in New Jerusalem if a child is to die a
hundred years old? But as long as there is death, there will be weeping and
crying. To put it simply, this ‘contradiction’ is caused by a badly translated
verse (perhaps from wrongly presupposed belief of the KJV translators). Let
examine some of the key words used in the verse.
Isa
65:20 There shall
be no more thence an infant of days, nor an old man that[#834]
hath not filled his days: for[#3588] the
child[#5288]
shall die a hundred years old; but the
sinner[#2398] being a hundred
years old shall be accursed.
Isa 65:20 ought
to be translated as
Isa
65:20 There shall be no more thence an infant of days; an old man who hath not filled his days: that a young man
shall die a hundred years old; a sinning
hundred years old shall be accursed.
The big error is
in the word “for”. It corrupts the true meaning of Isa. 65:20. Fortunately, we
have John’s Rev 21 written under the guidance of the Holy Spirit, which works
as a good check-and-balance mechanism to put us back onto the right path.
Using the word “for”
as the conjunction makes the latter consequent phrases to be a result for its
earlier antecedent phrases. That is to say, 'There shall be no more an infant
of days FOR he shall die a hundred years old.', and 'There shall be no more an
old man who has not filled his days FOR the hundred years old sinner shall be
accursed.' But if young men die at a hundred years old, then where do old men
come from? Is everyone to die at the hundred years old threshold? We must
understand that this is a poetic rendering; else it just does not make sense.
We are talking of a spiritual
When we use the
word “that” as the conjunction to tie in the antecedent and consequent
phrases, it resonances and amplifies the overall meaning, ‘There shall be no more
thence an infant of days that young man shall die a hundred years old’,
and ‘There shall be no more an old man who hath not filled his days that
a sinning hundred years old shall be accursed’. No more death and no more sin
(unrighteousness), and no more contradiction.
Strong #834 [‘that’]: A primitive relative pronoun (of
every gender and number). Hence, “who” should be a better word relative to the
‘old man’.
Strong #3588
[‘for’]: a primitive particle (a conjunction
or preposition), indicating casual relations of all kinds, antecedent or
consequent. It has been translated in the OT as “that, for, because, when, as
though, as, because that, but, then, certainly, except, surely, since”. Using
the word “for” reverses the meaning in its antecedent phrase “shall be no more
thence an infant of days”, but using the word “that” retains and amplifies its
antecedent phrases. I believe contextual wise, “for” fit better here.
Strong #5288
[‘a child’]: a noun, used 238
times and have been translated as “young man-76, servant-54, child-44,
lad-33, young-16, children-7, youth-6, babe, boys, young’. And ‘young man’ and
‘youth’ are used more frequently than ‘child’ and ‘children’ in the OT.
Strong #2398
[‘the sinner’]: a primitive root, a verb, also used
238 times and have been translated as “sin (sinned, sinning)-188, purify-11,
cleanse-8, sinner-8, committed-6, offended-4, blame-2, done-2, fault, harm,
loss, miss, offender, purge, reconciliation, sinful, trespass;’. Almost 80% of
the times, it was translated as a verb - sin, sinned, sinning. In only 10 times
was it used as a noun like ‘sinner’. It was translated 8 times as ‘sinner’ –
twice in Proverbs, 5 times in Ecclesiastes (strangely, only in these 2 books of
‘wise sayings’) and the last one being Isa 65:20. While the word ‘sinner’ in
Isa 65:20 will not be a problem, I believe “sinning” (a verb) is a better
choice. (Hey, I am not a Hebrew expert).
And how would one
expect God to convey the blissfulness of spiritual life in New Jerusalem that
mortals could understand? God uses the language, analogies and experiences of
man, his anticipated supposition of Utopia – “They shall not build, and another
inhabit; …. They shall not labour in vain, …. They
shall not hurt nor destroy in all my holy mountain”.
But there are definitely more than what these words could describe. (1 Cor 2:9)
Rev 22:3 – “The healing of the Nations”
But if there will
to be no death, why is there a need for “healing of the nations” in Rev 22:2,
especially if these nations are consist of spiritual men?
Rev 22:2 In the midst of the street of it,
and on either side of the river, was there the tree of life, which bare twelve manner of fruits, and yielded her fruit every month: and the
leaves of the tree were for the healing of the nations.
Yes, it is due to
choice of word in the translation again. The word translated as “healing”
(Strong #2322 – “therapeia”) were used only 3 other times in the New testament,
as in the below verses.
Mat 24:45 Who then is a faithful and wise
servant, whom his lord hath made ruler over his household, to give them
meat in due season?
Luk
Luk
Of the 3 verses,
two are translated as “household” (‘family’, ‘clan’, ‘tribe’),
while Luke 9:is translated as ‘healing’. In fact, for
the context of Luke 9:11, “household” fits equally well too.
Luk
The Bible in
Basic English (1965) translated Luke
Rev 22:2 In the midst of the street of it,
and on either side of the river, was there the tree of life, which bare twelve manner of fruits, and yielded her fruit every month: and the
leaves of the tree were for the household
of the nations.
Does not that
read better and is compatible with Rev 21:4? Let face it. If one take it
literally as healing, can the leaves from just one Tree of Life be enough for
the millions of sons of Gods? The pure river of water of Life, and the fruits
and leaves of the Tree of Life may have esoteric meaning, but is evidently not
for literal healing.
The
Like New
Jerusalem, the
Rom
Rom
Rom 8:23 And not only they, but ourselves also, which have the firstfruits
of the Spirit, even we ourselves groan within ourselves, waiting
for the adoption, to wit, the redemption of our body.
This good news is
all over in the Old Testament scriptures, perhaps not as obvious then. But when
Jesus arrived on the scene, He fully amplified its magnificence and preached of
its glories. This was in fact preached in His Beatitudes Sermon, which
amplifies the prophecy of Isa 65 and 66 (which Rev 21 is paralleled)!
|
Revelation 21 |
Matthew 5 (Beatitudes) |
|
Rev
21:2 And I John
saw the holy city, new Jerusalem, coming down from God out of heaven,
prepared as a bride adorned for her husband. |
Mat
5:3 Blessed are
the poor in spirit: for theirs is the kingdom of heaven. |
|
Rev
21:3 And I heard
a great voice out of heaven saying, Behold, the tabernacle of God is with
men, and he will dwell with them, and they shall be his people, and God
himself shall be with them, and be their God. |
Mat
5:8 Blessed are
the pure in heart: for they shall see God. |
|
Rev
21:4 And God
shall wipe away all tears from their eyes; and there shall be no more death,
neither sorrow, nor crying, neither shall there be any more pain: for the
former things are passed away. |
Mat
5:4 Blessed are
they that mourn: for they shall be comforted. Mat 5:7 Blessed are the
merciful: for they shall obtain mercy. |
|
Rev
21:5 And he that
sat upon the throne said, Behold, I make all things new. And he said unto me,
Write: for these words are true and faithful. |
Mat |
|
Rev
21:7 He that
overcometh shall inherit all things; and I will be his God, and he shall be
my son. |
Mat
5:5 Blessed are
the meek: for they shall inherit the earth. |
|
|
|
|
|
Mat |
|
|
Mat |
|
|
Mat |
|
|
Mat |
|
|
Mat |
Likewise, the
Apostles and disciples preached the gospel of the
Note
1Co
1Co
1Co
1Co
At the last
trump, when the seventh and last angel sounded his trumpet, it signaled the
return of the Lord and the resurrection of the Saints. It marked the new
beginning of corruptible men putting on incorruption and entering into the
Futurists argue
that this cannot be as the Roman kingdom had continued to exist, and other
kingdoms had since rose (like the
Jesus had plainly
said that His Kingdom is not of this (physical) world. It cannot be seen,
though its citizens could be anyone in their midst. It basically means that the
So, the
Mat
Luk 9:27 But I tell you of a truth, there be
some standing here, which shall not taste of death, till they see the kingdom
of God.
When Christ came
in A.D. 70, He didn’t come to form His Kingdom. He came in His Kingdom and all
His hosts of Heaven with Him. Those folks who were “standing here which shall
not taste of death” saw the
The Millennium
Rev 20:4 And I saw thrones, and they sat
upon them, and judgment was given unto them: and I saw the souls of them that
were beheaded for the witness of Jesus, and for the word of God, and which had
not worshipped the beast, neither his image, neither had received his mark upon
their foreheads, or in their hands; and they lived and reigned with Christ a
thousand years.
Rev 20:5 But the rest of the dead lived not again until the thousand
years were finished. This is the first resurrection.
Full Preterists
believe that the resurrection of the dead saints and the then living believers
transpired in A.D. 70 at the Parousia of Jesus Christ. Rev 20:4 plainly shows
the saints of old and new testaments coming alive - those beheaded for the
witness of Jesus (like John the Baptist), and for the word of God (the prophets
of Old and New), and which had not worshipped the beast and were slain (in the
tribulation period [Rev 6:9]). Of course the resurrection includes those living
saints then. Since this is the FIRST resurrection, it has to be the same
resurrection which occurred in A.D. 70 at Christ’s coming.
And if they lived
and reigned with Christ a thousand year, then the Millennium must have also
started then in A.D. 70. And if this Millennium Reign started in A.D. 70, then
it is the same Reign, the same new beginning, as the New Jerusalem Reign
depicted in Rev 21 and 22.
Rev 22:5 And there shall be no night there;
and they need no candle, neither light of the sun; for the Lord God giveth them
light: and they shall reign for ever and ever (“for ages and ages”).
Yet, some
Preterists believe the Millennium to be only a 40 years period, stretching from
A.D. 30 to A.D. 70, when the Gospel of the
Rev 20:6 Blessed and holy is he that hath
part in the first resurrection: on such the second death hath no power, but they
shall be priests of God and of Christ, and shall reign with him a thousand
years.
And when did this
reign of a thousand years begin?
At the last
trump, as already mentioned, when the seventh and last angel sounded his
trumpet, it signaled the return of the Lord (1Co
But, what did
Christ and His Saints reign over? The Earth.
Jer 23:5 Behold, the days come, saith the
LORD, that I will raise unto David a righteous Branch, and a King shall reign
and prosper, and shall execute judgment and justice in the earth.
Rom
But the heavenly
“reign” is likely very different from earthly reigns by earthly kings. Jesus
had said, “My Father worketh, hitherto, and I work.” (John 5:17) And since
Jesus is reigning with His saints, the saints should be also working
(“reigning”, “serving”) with Jesus for our benefits!
Rev 20:6 Blessed and holy is he that hath
part in the first resurrection: on such the second death hath no power, but they
shall be priests of God and of Christ, and shall reign with him a
thousand years.
Jesus is our King
(in fact, King of Kings) and is also our High Priest. Likewise, the resurrected
saints are made both co-kings and priests. One of the main functions of priest
is to work for the people, looking after their salvation and the edification of
God’s Words.
After Millennium - Another New Heaven and New Earth?
Many Christians
believe that the Millennium and the ‘New Heavens and New Earth’ (or more
correctly, the New Jerusalem) are 2 distinct periods, and with a good reason.
The Millennium (in Rev 20) is mentioned after Jesus’ Second Coming (in Rev 19)
but before the New Heaven and New Earth (in Rev 21). This assumption has given
rise to confusion and diverse interpretations!
Perhaps, things
will be clearer if we understand that Rev 20 is an overview of a series of
events (over a very long period of time) that would happen after Christ’s
Parousia in A.D. 70. Upon His Parousia, Satan was bounded into the bottomless pit.
The Saints were resurrected into the
At an appropriate
time to come, when the “thousand years period” is
over, Satan will be let loose to deceive the nations once again to bring this
New Covenant age to a close. (Say, doesn’t it sound like history repeating
itself just like the first century 2,000 years ago?) We are now in that
Millennium timeframe. There are more to come. The loosing of Satan occurs after
the Millennium. (Failure to recognize this has forced many Preterists to accept
the Millennium as ending in A.D. 70 so that the massive destruction of Rev 20:8
and 9 can be equated to the destruction of the
Rev 20:11 And I saw a great white throne, and
him that sat on it, from whose face the earth and the heaven fled away;
and there was found no place for them.
First, remember
that this will be after the Millennium reign – when it had its new beginning
(“New Heaven and New earth”) in A.D. 70. But now, in verse of
The Book of
Revelation was what “God gave unto him (John), to shew unto his servants
things which must shortly come to pass” (Rev 1:1). It was also to be “the
things which are, and the things which shall be
hereafter” (
Perhaps, just as
Malachi ends our Old Testament, or more correctly, according to the Jewish’s
arrangement of ‘The Laws, Prophets and the Writings’ - the last book of
Chronicles ends our Old Testament scrolls, more revelations might be revealed
to begin another new age (just as the Holy Spirit through the Apostles did for
the New Testament) when the time is ripe.
Conclusion
So, to be exact,
the New Covenant period, ‘New heaven and New Earth’, New Jerusalem,
All of us as physical
beings are living in the New Covenant period now since it began in A.D. 30.
Another new beginning for mankind, proclaimed as ‘New Heaven and New Earth’,
started in A.D. 70, but it was for the first batch of men who was born as sons
of God into the
The
A Little Side Study on Chinese Phraseology
Incidentally,
even to today, the phrase “New Heaven and [new] Earth” expressed in the Chinese
language has the meaning of “a new beginning”, be it for a new start in life or
birth of a new nation or era. In the northern Mandarin dialect, it is
pronounced as “xin [new] tian [heaven] di [earth]”,
which means ‘new heaven [sky] earth [land]’. Newly married
couples are often said to be building their own new heaven and earth. Political
parties will promise new heaven and earth to their supporters. That is the
phraseology of the Chinese (oriental) language! That, I believed is also what
Isa 65 and Rev 21:1 should be understood as.
In historical
writings, history books and novels describing the Chinese dynasties and
emperors, each dynasty is usually termed as “Rivers and Mountains” (in
Mandarin, it is pronounced as “jiang [rivers] shan
[mountains]”). When a dynasty changes, it is phrased as a “change in
rivers and mountains” (“huan jiang shan” or “gai jiang San”). The emperor was
regarded as “Tian [heaven’s] Zi [son]” and was
addressed as “Wan [ten thousand] Sui [years old]”
(that is, to live for 10,000 years). The Prime Minister was addressed as “Qian
[thousand] Sui [years old]”, a magnitude lower.
“Sea” in some
idiomatic Chinese usage is associated to “sorrow”, like “ku [bitter] hai
[sea]” means misery. When one says “tou-li ku-hai”, it means to be
removed from sorrow (like as in death). This goes well with Rev 21:1 (“and
there was no more sea”) and Rev 21:3 (“neither sorrow, nor
crying, neither shall there be any more pain: for the former things are
passed away”). Mind or memory can be expressed as "nao [brain] hai
[sea]". This goes well too with Isa 65:17 - "and the former shall not
be remembered, nor come into mind."
PS: The above observations and conclusion are solely based my own
personal investigation and view. I hope the above analysis will bring forth
further harmony of the Bible, and delineates the various periods and events in
their proper frames. Though I am a preterist, it may not necessary reflect the
view and belief of other preterists. Whatever the case, please bears with me
and shares with me your thoughts, reasons and arguments if you think I am going
baloney and have not consider some other critical scriptures. (MS