The “New Heavens and a New Earth” of Isaiah 65:17

Posted on      by      Leave a Comment on The “New Heavens and a New Earth” of Isaiah 65:17

Visits: 391

[Note:  This MS is available in larger font on our Manuscripts  page.]

Introduction

For, behold, I create new heavens and a new earth; and the former things shall not be remembered, nor come into mind.

Jehovah promised through Isaiah, near the close of his great book, the following: “For, behold, I create new heavens and a new earth: and the former shall not be remembered, nor come into mind” (Isa. 65:17).1 The Lord had Isaiah repeat this prophecy in almost the closing words of his oracle: “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” (66:22). The same terminology also appears twice in the New Testament (2 Pet. 3:13; Rev. 21:1).

  • When we read these words about this new “universe” God has promised, questions immediately arise concerning its application.
  • Are these words to be taken literally or figuratively?
  • Did these promises relate to fleshly Israel (to whom Isaiah originally wrote/spoke them) and to something that God would do for them in their national experience upon their return from the exile?
  • Are these words of Isaiah a prophecy describing the time of a supposed literal one-thousand- year reign of Christ on the earth, as millennialists aver?
  • Is Isaiah prophesying the concept of “Heaven” advocated by the Max King/A.D. 70 adherents?
  • Does Isaiah’s prophecy refer to the final, eternal abode of the righteous?
  • Do these words refer to God’s plans on earth for His spiritual “Israel,” the church (Rom. 2:28–29; 9:6–8; Gal. 6:15–16)?

The reader can see that a wide range of explanations has been offered for the meaning of new heavens and a new earth.

I will first examine what I perceive to be the incorrect interpretations of the Lord’s promise through Isaiah and demonstrate why I believe them to be incorrect. I will then set forth what I believe to be the correct application of the prophecy, along with the bases for my conclusion.

Incorrect Interpretations of New Heavens and A New Earth

Not to Be Literally Fulfilled upon the Return of Exiled Israel

Barnes offers the following opinion as to the primary meaning of the new heavens and a new earth: “The immediate reference here is, doubtless, to the land of Palestine, and to the important changes which would be produced there on the return of the exiles.”2

There are three major natural divisions of the book of Isaiah. Chapters 1–35 consist of the iteration of God’s judgment upon Judah and Israel, and against the nations that affected both of them. Chapters 36–39 contain somewhat of an historical interlude, concluding with the prophecy of Judah’s Babylonian captivity. Chapters 40–66 consist of words of comfort and hope to God’s people in captivity. First among these words of comfort is the promise of the eventual end of the captivity and the literal restoration of the remnant of Israel (Judah and Israel once more united during the captivity period) to their homeland (40:1–2; 44:28—45:1–13; 47:1–6; 48:20–21; et al.).

Also interwoven with the restoration prophecies are the dramatic prophetic descriptions of the Suffering Servant (42:1–4; 49:5–8; 50:5–9; 52:13–15; 53:1–12; et al.). This special Servant of Jehovah would usher in a glorious Messianic Age when He came, which is the principal subject of the final seven chapters of the book (60–66). The new heavens and a new earth promise is a part of the prophecy pertaining to things that would result from the coming and work of Jehovah’s Servant, the Messiah. Hence the promise of the “new heavens and a new earth” is no more to be taken as a literal promise to be fulfilled to the returned Jews as a part of their restoration than is the “new Jerusalem” (65:18–25). (I will say more about the “new Jerusalem” later.)

Not to Be Fulfilled in a Literal Millennial Kingdom on Earth

Lange commented as follows on Isaiah 65:17ff:

If we had only the present passage [Isa. 65:17, DM] to testify of new heavens and a new earth we might say, as many good interpreters do, the language is figurative, and indicates nothing more than a great moral and spiritual revolution. But we cannot thus explain 2 Pet. 3: 10–13…. The proper view then of ver. 17 is to take its prediction literally, and to hold at the same time that in the following description [i.e., vv. 18–25, DM] (which is that of the millennium) future things are presented to us which are really prior, and not anterior to the promised complete renovation of heaven and earth.3

Premillennialists thus see in the promises of the “new heavens and a new earth,” in both the Old and New Testaments, a reference to their millennial kingdom concept.

Perhaps never has a more intricate, anti-Biblical, and ill-conceived system of theology been contrived than the fanciful conjectures loosely known as “premillennialism.” Generally, adherents of this system (which includes most of Protestant denominationalism) hold to the following broad outline of doctrine, though differing considerably on various sub-points:

  1. The Old Testament prophets foretold a literal kingdom, which was to be established and ruled by a son of David, the Messiah.
  2. Jesus was that Messiah who attempted to establish such a kingdom, but the Jews who rejected and crucified Him thwarted His kingdom plans.
  3. God had not anticipated this eventuality, so as an emergency measure, He came up with the church to serve as a substitute for the kingdom till He could send the Christ the second time to establish His kingdom.
  4. When the Lord returns, He will then set up His kingdom on earth and reign over it for a literal one thousand years.
  5. This alleged literal one-thousand-year reign will take place in the “new heavens and a new earth.”

This theological labyrinth is utterly false in every major point, as seen in the following:

  1. The Old Testament prophets did not say that the new kingdom of David’s son was to be a literal kingdom. In fact, it could not have been a literal, political, earthly kingdom because it was to have no end, as all earthly kingdoms do/will (2 Sam. 7:12–13, 16).
  2. Jesus did not come to establish an earthly kingdom (John 6:15; 18:36).
  3. The church is by no means an afterthought on the part of God, but it is according to His eternal purpose through Christ (Eph. 3:9–11). It is not a substitute for the kingdom (or for anything else)—it is the kingdom of prophecy (Mat. 16:18–19, 28; Mark 9:1; Col. 1:1–2, 13– 14; Heb. 12:23, 28; et al.). Moreover, it is blasphemous even to imply that God neither knew nor expected the Jews to reject the Christ. Contrariwise, He inspired Isaiah to foretell this very thing some seven centuries before He sent His Son (Isa. 53:2–3).
  4. When the Lord returns it will not be to set up His kingdom, but to “deliver up” His now- existing kingdom, the church, to the Father for eternal rest and bliss (1 Cor. 15:20–24). A one-thousand-year reign is mentioned twice in the Bible (Rev. 20:4, 6). It appears in a book that is written in signs and symbols, which are often couched in numbers (1:1). It appears in a context filled with figurative terminology (Rev. 20:1–8). Yet this is the tiny “tail” that the millennial theorists allow to wag their gigantic speculative “dog” of error.

Since the entire millennial system is Scripturally bankrupt and nothing more than the vain speculations of overworked imaginations, it is obvious that Isaiah was not referring to any such thing in his prophecy of the “new heavens and a new earth.”

Not to Be Fulfilled in Max King’s Heretical Speculations

The only system of theology of which I am aware that may equal the convoluted doctrinal maze of premillennialism is that which Max R. King of Warren, Ohio, has popularized. According to King’s A.D. 70 theology (also knows as “realized eschatology,” “Kingism,” and “hyper-preterism,” all of the “new heavens and a new earth” passages in both the Old Testament and the New Testament (therefore, including Isa. 65:17, 66:22) refer to circumstances and events which began upon and immediately after the A.D. 70 destruction of Jerusalem. Since I believe the two Isaiah passages refer to something different from the “new heavens and a new earth” passages in 1 Peter 3:13 and Revelation 21:1, I obviously deny King’s interpretation, if on no other ground than this alone. However, I also deny his sadly mistaken application of the New Testament passages that refer to the “new heavens and a new earth,” as I indicate below:

Some of the salient points of King’s system are the following:

  1. The final, second coming of Christ occurred when Jerusalem was destroyed in A.D. 70. Thus, all of the promises and prophecies concerning the second coming of Christ were fulfilled in that event. (Indeed, the system avers that all previously unfulfilled prophecies of every kind were fulfilled either before or by the A.D. 70 catastrophe; thus, there are no unfulfilled prophecies in the Bible.)
  2. Based on the above premise, A.D. 70 devotees have concluded that:
    • The final resurrection occurred in A.D. 70 (i.e., the church was “resurrected” upon the destruction of Judaism, its persecutor).
    • The final Judgment occurred in A.D. 70 (i.e., God’s judgment upon corrupt Judaism).
    • The world ended in A.D. 70 (i.e., the “world” that was destroyed was Judaism).
    • The “new heavens and a new earth” were ushered in upon the destruction of the “world” (Jerusalem) in A.D. 70—there will be no future “new heavens and new earth.”4
    • Hence, it must follow that the eternal rewards for all men of either Heaven or Hell were announced in A.D. 70 and everyone is now in one or the other of those eternal realms here on earth
  3. New heavens and a new earth therefore refers to the earth upon which we now live, which is also Heaven, the eternal abode of the righteous.

The only thing more incredible than this system of theology and its utterly irrational and anti-Biblical tenets is that anyone could be persuaded to believe it. However, it often seems that the number of adherents of any religious doctrine or practice increases in direct proportion to the degree to which such things are foreign to the Scriptures. Please consider the following:

  1. While it is true that a coming of the Christ in judgment upon the nation of Israel occurred in A.D. 70 (Mat. 24:29–34), the second coming of Christ did not then occur, and, at this writing, has still not occurred. The King/A.D. 70 heresy makes the fatal mistake of applying all of Matthew 24 to the destruction of Jerusalem (even as the premillennialists make the fatal mistake of applying all of it to the second coming of Christ). However, the Lord clearly divides His prophecies in Matthew 24 into two sections: 

a. Those things which would occur before the passing of the generation of which    He was a part (i.e., the destruction of Jerusalem and the signs that would precede it [vv. 4–34]).

b. Those things which pertained to His second and final coming, the day or hour of which neither angel nor man could know, and for which there will be no warning signs (vv. 35– 51). (When He comes again, it will be a literal, personal coming comparable to His first coming [John 14:3;Acts 1:11] which “every eye shall see” [Rev. 1:7]. These elements were not true of His figurative coming in the destruction of Jerusalem.)

     2. Further, the following other things did not occur in A.D. 70:

a. The general, universal, bodily resurrection of the dead; all humans since Adam who have ever lived and have since died, except the Christ, are still dead. Furthermore, men continue to die. But when the general resurrection occurs (after the Lord comes again [John 5:28–29; 1 Cor. 15:22–23; 1 The. 4:15–17]), death itself shall be no more (1 Cor. 15:21–26). Therefore, the general resurrection did not occur in A.D. 70. Thus, the prophecies concerning the great universal resurrection (Mat. 25:31–32; John 5:28–29; 1 Cor. 15:52; Rev. 20:12–13; et al.) are yet in the future as I write these words.

b. It is obvious to all rational persons that the universal Judgment described in the New Testament (Mat. 25:31–46; Acts 17:31; 2 Cor. 5:10; Rev. 20:12–13; et al.) has not occurred, so it is also still in the future.

c. The entire material universe (not merely Jerusalem) will pass away, be dissolved, be burned up when the Lord comes again (Mat. 24:35; 2 Pet. 3:10–13; Rev. 20:11–21:1). Since we still live in this material universe, its destruction has not yet occurred.

d. The “new heavens and a new earth” described by Peter and John will be the habitation of the saints only after the coming of the Lord, the resurrection of the dead, the final judgment, and the destruction of the material universe (2 Pet. 3:10–13; Rev. 21:1–8). Thus, the “new heavens and a new earth” described by Peter and John are still to come in the future.

e. It is also obvious that saints are not now in Heaven and sinners are not now in Hell, unless one adopts the ridiculous premise that the “Heaven” and “Hell” of the Scriptures are mere figures of speech, “spiritualized” concepts, rather than actual eternal habitations of the souls of men. However, such a position destroys one of the very doctrinal pillars of the Word of God (the doctrine of eternal rewards and punishments) and amounts to a denial of the faith. No! If we can understand and believe anything the Bible teaches, Heaven and Hell are real places.

If the present existence of Christians is Heaven, then God must have either been unable or unwilling to fulfill His promises concerning it, or He must be a celestial sadistic jokester! God’s faithful ones are still in a world that is subject to death and is overburdened with wicked men, temptation, sin, suffering, and tears, but the Heaven of Scripture will have none of these (1 Pet. 1:3–5; Rev. 21:1–8, 26–27; 22:1–5).

God must have also been either unwilling or unable to fulfill His promises to those who refused to serve Him. Their present existence is not one of perpetual pain, torment, and tears, which will be their eternal lot in the Biblical Hell (Mat. 25:41, 46; 2 The. 1:8–9; Rev. 20:10, 15; 21:8; 22:15), but one in which many positive elements are present. Eternal Heaven and Hell are the future respective abodes of the righteous and the unrighteous.

The “new heavens and a new earth” are certainly not the “Heaven” conjured up by the A.D. 70 speculators. Most definitely, God’s people are not now in Heaven and the devil’s people are not in Hell.

Not to Be Fulfilled in Heaven, the Eternal Abode of the Righteous

It is common for expositors to make the two promises in Isaiah (65:17; 66:22) dependent for their meaning upon and thus a reference to the two similarly-worded New Testament promises of the “new heavens and a new earth” (2 Pet. 3:13; Rev. 21:1). Roberts,5 Barnes,6 Coffman,7 and Woods,8 all of whom are able expositors, do this. I readily agree that the two New Testament promises are descriptions of the same place—the final and eternal abode of the righteous, usually designated as “Heaven.”9

However, a comparison of the larger contexts of the Isaiah promises with the descriptions given of the “new heavens and a new earth” in the New Testament (particularly in Rev. 21:1ff) prevent my connecting Isaiah’s prophecies with Heaven itself. While both Isaiah and John say that weeping will cease in the new universe (Isa. 65:19; Rev. 21:4), there will still be death and sin in Isaiah’s model (Isa. 65:19–20). But in the model given by Peter and John absolute life and righteousness will prevail because death, all sinners, and sin will be forever banished (2 Pet. 3:13; Rev. 20:15; 21:4b, 8, 27; 22:4, 15, 19). I am unable to see how Isaiah could have been referring to Heaven as a place where sin and death exist. Indeed, one of the powerful attractions of Heaven is the eternal banishment of both of these curses.

I therefore agree with Wayne Jackson’s conclusion on the distinction between Isaiah and John: “It is clear that the new heavens and new earth of Isaiah 65:17ff are not the same as that mentioned in Revelation 21:1ff…”10 Since Peter and John both refer to Heaven in the new heavens and a new earth phrase, I conclude that Isaiah was referring to something different from that to which both Peter and John referred. By other elements in the larger context of the book of Isaiah I also hope to demonstrate that Isaiah was not referring to eternal Heaven, the home of the soul, in his prophecies of “new heavens and a new earth.”

The Correct Interpretation of Isaiah’s “New Heavens and a New Earth”

I believe Isaiah used this descriptive term to prophesy the Messianic kingdom, the church, and the Christian Age, on the following bases:

The Immediately Preceding Context

Isaiah 65 begins with the great prophecy of the calling of the Gentiles: “I am inquired of by them that asked not for me; I am found of them that sought me not: I said, Behold me, behold me, unto a nation that was not called by my name” (Isa.. 65:1). This is an undeniable reference to the beginning of the Christian age when the Gospel was to be taken to all the nations, to all the world, and to the whole creation—manifestly to the Gentiles (Mat. 28:19; Mark 16:15).

This is not merely my view of the prophecy; it is the Holy Spirit’s declaration of its meaning through Paul (Rom 10:20). The apostle next dropped back to what God had to do to Israel as a nation because of her sins (v. 21), and to prove his case he quoted Isaiah 65:2: “I have spread out my hands all the day unto a rebellious people, that walk in a way that is not good, after their own thoughts.” Verses 2–7 describe the iniquities of Israel, because of which God had to cast them off as His chosen nation and send them away into captivity. However, He would spare a remnant that he might “bring forth a seed out of Jacob” (vv. 8–9) so as to fulfill the Abrahamic promise (Gen. 22:18; cf. Gal. 3:16). Only a remnant did return from the captivity to inhabit the old homeland again and Israel never regained real independent national status. Out of that physical remnant from the captivity the baby Jesus, King of kings and Lord of lords, was born.

The “seed out of Jacob” and “inheritor” of God’s “mountains” out of Judah are called God’s “elect” and His “servants.” It is these very ones whom Paul calls the “remnant according to the election of grace” (Rom. 10:5, 7). This is a description of those few Jews who believed on and obeyed the Christ (the spiritual remnant that came out of the physical remnant). Thus, again we see that Isaiah is describing things pertaining to the church and the Christian Age. Isaiah draws figures from the beloved Canaan to describe the spiritual blessings of those who have sought the Lord (Isa. 65:10).

Isaiah 65:11–16 is a description of the stark contrast between the faithful remnant who seek God (v. 10) and those who forsake Him (v. 11). God repeats that He will put His nation as a whole to sword and slaughter (i.e., He would no longer be their God, v. 12), but His servants would be bountifully blessed, including being given a new name (v. 15). That name is “Christian” and it pertains to those who are in the church (Acts. 11:26; 1 Pet. 4:16). God would be the God of these people of a new name, rather than the God of old fleshly Israel who had forfeited their relationship with Him. God would eventually “forget” the “former troubles” and they would be hidden from His eyes (v. 16). This would be possible only because the Suffering Servant would come and make the atonement (53:4–6, 10–12). This would occur with the enactment of the new covenant in which sins and iniquities are no longer remembered (Jer. 31:31–34; Heb. 8:8– 12).

It is unarguable that the promise of the “new heavens and a new earth” (v. 17) flows out of the material preceding it. Heavens and earth is simply a phrase describing man’s total environment, his universe. Of course, Isaiah’s “new heavens and a new earth” does not refer to a physical, but to a spiritual habitat or environment. To what could this refer but to God’s new order inaugurated by His Son? If my analysis of Isaiah 65:1–16 is correct, verse 17 is indeed a reference to the glorious new Christian System in contrast with the old Mosaic System. The new (i.e., the religion of Christ) would be so different in its beauty and superiority from the old (i.e., the religion of Moses) that it would make one totally forget the old. Practically the entire letters both to the Galatians and the Hebrews are devoted to demonstrating this very fact—the vast superiority of the New Testament system compared to that of the Old Testament. I therefore conclude from the context immediately preceding Isaiah 65:17 that the “new heavens and a new earth” refers to the Christian Age and the Kingdom of the Christ, His church.

The Immediately Succeeding Context

I remind the reader that we are dealing with highly figurative, rather than literal, descriptions throughout this context. Isaiah 65:18 speaks of a rejoicing “Jerusalem” which God will create in His “new heavens and a new earth.” This Jerusalem is not the old literal city, however. It is not actually a city at all, but a “people” that belong to God (vv. 18–19). This new Jerusalem not only rejoices, but weeping is not heard in it (v. 19). However, we must not be too quick to conclude that it is the same “new Jerusalem” John saw (Rev. 21:2). While this atmosphere of “no weeping” is also true of the “new Jerusalem” John saw (v. 4) (i.e., the glorified church, Heaven itself), the dissimilarities between the two far outweigh this one similarity, as previously noticed. Perhaps Isaiah’s intent in reference to no weeping is to emphasize further the great joy that will characterize this “new Jerusalem” (65:18) by describing it in negative terms, rather than to indicate that its people will never know any sadness. God could not have intended to convey literal, absolute banishment of grief in the “new Jerusalem” described by Isaiah because the grief-producing elements of sin and death will still be present therein (v. 20). While these conditions do not apply to Heaven, they do apply to the Christian Age and to the church. God’s people experience wonderful joy in the church (Phi. 4:4), but it is mingled with sorrow due to sin and death (Rom. 9:2). Moreover, the church on earth is described in the New Testament as a figurative “Jerusalem” (Heb. 12:22–23).

Verses 22–23 depict the spiritual blessings that will come to the residents of this spiritual “Jerusalem” in figures with which the Jews of Isaiah’s time could readily identify. They would not only build houses, but dwell in them. They would not only plant crops, but eat them. They would enjoy the work of their hands. Their labor would not be in vain because of the Lord’s blessings, a promise repeated to God’s spiritual Israel in the New Testament (cf. 1 Cor. 15:58; Gal. 6:9; Heb. 3:14; 10:35–39). This is all in contrast with their previous lives as fleshly Israelites, in which they often saw their crops, houses, and cities destroyed by their enemies.

Isaiah 65:24 describes the way God will attend to the prayers of His people in the “new Jerusalem.” God will not only answer their prayers as He had done of old, but He will anticipate their needs and respond accordingly. Jesus prefaced the instructions to His disciples on how they were to pray by saying that the Father knows the needs of His children, even before they ask (Mat. 6:8).

Isaiah 65:25 clearly links the “new heavens and a new earth” with the Christian Age. The description of the peace between wild and domesticated animals (which are normally mortal enemies) is but an abbreviated repetition of 11:6–9. If we can determine the meaning of Isaiah’s fuller description in 11:6–9, we can know what he referred to in 65:25. Paul helps us here by quoting Isaiah 11:10 and declaring that the events described therein refer to events being fulfilled in the Christian Age (Rom. 15:12).

The future-kingdom millennialists grossly abuse Isaiah 11 so as to make it serve their literal millennial kingdom theories. However, those who respect the words of the inspired interpreter (Paul) have no choice but to see in it a glorious figurative description of Messiah’s rule. Here we have the coming, identity, qualifications, and work of the Christ (vv. 1–5, 10), the preaching of the Gospel to all nations (vv. 9–10), and the conditions that would (and do) prevail in God’s “holy mountain” (the church, 2:2–4) when men fully submit their wills to Him.

Notice now another clear link between Isaiah 65:25 and Isaiah 11. In the concluding words of 65:25 is the following phrase: “They shall not hurt nor destroy in all my holy mountain,” which is a verbatim repetition of 11:9a. Once more, if Isaiah 11 is fulfilled in the coming of Messiah and the Christian Age He ushered in (and it is), then we must likewise apply 65:25 to the Christian Age. However, since 65:25 is but a part of the contextual description of the “new heavens and a new earth” (vv. 17–25), I am compelled to conclude that the “new heavens and a new earth” of verse 17 is a figurative description of the Christian Age in which we have the glorious church of Christ with all of the blessings common to it.

Furthermore, God’s “holy mountain” (65:25) must be identified with the “mountain of Jehovah’s house” (2:2–4), the church, which Isaiah said was to be (and was) established “in the latter [last, KJV] days” (cf. Acts 2:17). This identity is made the more solid by the description of the church in Hebrews 12:22–23:

But ye are come unto mount Zion, and unto the city of the living God, the heavenly Jerusalem, and to innumerable hosts of angels, to the general assembly and church of the firstborn who are enrolled in heaven, and to God the Judge of all, and to the spirits of just men made perfect.

It is not the old fleshly nation of Israel that will remain and endure as recipients of the promises and choicest blessings of God, as many millions yet falsely believe and teach. It is rather the “new heavens and a new earth,” the church, the spiritual Israel of God who have been so constituted by their obedience to the Gospel of Christ, whose seed and name shall be perpetuated, even to eternity (Isa. 66:22).

Conclusion

I therefore join with Homer Hailey in his explanation of Isaiah’s “new heavens and a new earth” is correct:

We conclude that while Isaiah’s new heavens and new earth are the present order under Christ (65:17), which followed the passing of the old heathen systems (34:3–4) and the Jewish order (51:6, 16), the new heavens and new earth of Peter and John are the eternal arrangement of God beyond the judgment. In neither of the new orders—the one prophesied by Isaiah and the one prophesied by the apostles—is there a place for a millennial reign of Christ on earth, for modern-day concepts of a “new planet earth,” or for a utopian “world of tomorrow.” Such theories are figments of man’s imagination, illusions of error bereft of all truth.11

All who have obeyed the Gospel can rejoice in the gracious provisions God has made for His spiritual Israel, which we can now enjoy in the church. These truly constitute a spiritual “new heavens and a new earth” even in this life. Those who faithfully serve the Christ may joyously and longingly anticipate the everlasting “new heavens and a new earth” which will be their eternal abode, “wherein dwelleth righteousness” (2 Pet. 3:13).

Endnotes

  1. All Scripture quotations are from the American Standard Version unless otherwise indicated.
  2. Albert Barnes, Notes on the Old Testament—Isaiah (Grand Rapids, MI: Baker Book House, 1983 rep.), 6:418 (sec. 2).
  3. John Peter Lange, Commentary on the Holy Scriptures:Isaiah–Lamentations (Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan Pub. House, 1960 rep.), pp. 712–13.
  4. Max R. King, The Spirit of Prophecy (Warren, OH: Max R. King, 1971), pp. 358–59.
  5. J.W. Roberts, The Living Word—I & II Peter and Jude (Austin, TX: R.B. Sweet Co., Inc., 1963), pp.129–30.
  1. Albert Barnes, Notes on the New Testament—James, Peter, John, and Jude (Grand Rapids, MI: Baker Book House, 1961 rep.), pp. 263–66.
  2. James Burton Coffman, Commentary on James, 1 & 2 Peter, 1, 2, & 3 John, and Jude (Austin, TX: Firm Foundation Pub. House, 1979), p. 347.
  3. Guy N. Woods, A Commentary on the New Testament Epistles of Peter, John, and Jude (Nashville, TN: Gospel Advocate Co., 1954), pp. 188–89.
  4. For a good statement of this case on 2 Pet. 3:13, see Woods, pp. 188–89.
  5. Wayne Jackson, Isaiah, God’s Prophet of Doom and Deliverance (Abilene, TX: Quality Pub., 1991), p. 132.
  6. Homer Hailey, A Commentary on Isaiah (Grand Rapids, MI: Baker Book House, 1985), p. 539.

[Note: I wrote this MS for and I presented a digest of it orally at the Houston College of the Bible Lectures, hosted by the Spring, TX, Church of Christ, June 16–19, 1996. It was published in the book of the lectures, Isaiah, Volume 2, ed. David P. Brown (Bible Resource Pub., Spring, TX)].

Attribution: From thescripturecache.com; Dub McClish, owner and administrator.

 

 

 

Author: Dub McClish

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *