Truth about Heaven

Will there be a forbidden fruit in your heaven scenario?
Not mine.

Romans 8:32
“He that spared not his own Son, but delivered him up for us all, how shall he not with him also freely give us all things?”
Wow, you grasp at everything. We know very little about Eden. What it was like, would have been like, etc. What I know of heaven was that Adam had a real relationship with God, the very reason God created man. Walked among them. This is what I think of when I think of heaven. Jesus has regained this that Adam lost. I don't think I will sweat over a heaven with a forbidden fruit or one with it removed.
 
Wow, you grasp at everything. We know very little about Eden. What it was like, would have been like, etc. What I know of heaven was that Adam had a real relationship with God, the very reason God created man. Walked among them. This is what I think of when I think of heaven. Jesus has regained this that Adam lost. I don't think I will sweat over a heaven with a forbidden fruit or one with it removed.
I can see to a point what you are saying. Jesus came to restore what Adam lost. Eden is where Adam lived.
There is something there to this relation.

I would enjoy spending eternity in a restored garden but how does this appear spiritually with a restored city?

True the main part is walking with God but why is there this description of a city? It sounds more like a replacement of what Israel lost than Adam. A New Jerusalem, a restored Jerusalem.

From Eden to the New Jerusalem? I can see something. Something is there. Perhaps even working a temple into the equation. Cultivate, keep, serve, guard. Creation, covenant.
It's definitely there.

We don't know what Eden was, we don't know what the New Jerusalem will be. Spiritual? Physical?
 
Restoration is a big part of God's plan through Christ. Jesus must restore what Adam destroyed. That may be be from the Garden all the way to Jerusalem.
The Garden, the world, Jerusalem. A new Garden, new world, new Jerusalem.
“a new heaven and a new earth."
"a new Jerusalem, coming down out of heaven."

A new temple as well. Has the restoration started? Is it complete?
Jesus answered them, “Destroy this temple, and in three days I will raise it up.”

We do know very little of what Adam lost. Walking with God, eternal life, living in paradise?
 
Last edited:
Wow, you grasp at everything. We know very little about Eden. What it was like, would have been like, etc. What I know of heaven was that Adam had a real relationship with God, the very reason God created man. Walked among them. This is what I think of when I think of heaven. Jesus has regained this that Adam lost. I don't think I will sweat over a heaven with a forbidden fruit or one with it removed.
Yes. What you are describing is what we have NOW, through Jesus. This is only the "earnest" of our inheritance. The full inheritance is yet to come. This is what I've been trying to help you see. That you are underestimating and cheapening the full inheritance by declaring only the earnest. I hope this doesn't offend you as my only intention is to help. Bless you brother.
 

ambush80

Senior Member
“The wall of the city had twelve foundations … decorated with every kind of precious stone. The first foundation was jasper, the second sapphire, the third agate, the fourth emerald, the fifth onyx, the sixth ruby, the seventh chrysolite, the eighth beryl, the ninth topaz, the tenth turquoise, the eleventh jacinth, and the twelfth amethyst” (Revelation 21:14, 19, 20 NIV).

“The angel measured the wall using human measurement, and it was 144 cubits thick. The wall was made of jasper” (Revelation 21:17, 18 NIV).
https://www.biblegateway.com/resources/commentaries/IVP-NT/Rev/Vision-City

I saw the title of this thread and I was intrigued.

I'm following this thread earnestly.
 
https://www.biblegateway.com/resources/commentaries/IVP-NT/Rev/Vision-City

I saw the title of this thread and I was intrigued.

I'm following this thread earnestly.
Interesting commentary. We've had a few debates on what the bride of the Lamb is. Some say the New Jerusalem while others say the Church;

"The notion of the city as people is conspicuous both in John's first sight of the city (vv. 9-14) and in the angel's measurement (vv. 15-21)."

https://www.biblegateway.com/resources/commentaries/IVP-NT/Rev/Vision-City
 
Who's arm are they going to use to determine how long that 'cubit' is?
I'm not sure, wouldn't they have a standard of human measurements? At least it shows something physical with dimensions. A new city descending from above.

This is interesting;

The angel's measurement (vv. 15-21) reveals that the city's great, high wall rises to a height of 144 cubits (about 216 feet), which is impressive enough for an ordinary city, but ridiculously small for a city 1500 miles high! Consequently the NIV renders the measurement as 144 cubits thick (see also Beckwith 1922:761). This is unlikely because (1) the first mention of the wall (v. 10) called attention to its great height, not its strength or thickness, and because (2) the wall is not built for protection or to keep people out, for its gates are always open (v. 25). Moreover, the word "thick" is not in the text, which says simply "144 cubits." The correct interpretation is "144 cubits high" (as in the NIV margin).

https://www.biblegateway.com/resources/commentaries/IVP-NT/Rev/Vision-City
 
I'm not sure, wouldn't they have a standard of human measurements? At least it shows something physical with dimensions. A new city descending from above.

This is interesting;

The angel's measurement (vv. 15-21) reveals that the city's great, high wall rises to a height of 144 cubits (about 216 feet), which is impressive enough for an ordinary city, but ridiculously small for a city 1500 miles high! Consequently the NIV renders the measurement as 144 cubits thick (see also Beckwith 1922:761). This is unlikely because (1) the first mention of the wall (v. 10) called attention to its great height, not its strength or thickness, and because (2) the wall is not built for protection or to keep people out, for its gates are always open (v. 25). Moreover, the word "thick" is not in the text, which says simply "144 cubits." The correct interpretation is "144 cubits high" (as in the NIV margin).

https://www.biblegateway.com/resources/commentaries/IVP-NT/Rev/Vision-City
I believe its all figurative. Abraham was looking forward to a city who's builder and maker was God. Scripture gives indication that were waiting for the full number to come in. Which could be figurative of measurements.
 

Miguel Cervantes

GON Severe Weatherman
I'm not sure, wouldn't they have a standard of human measurements? At least it shows something physical with dimensions. A new city descending from above.

This is interesting;

The angel's measurement (vv. 15-21) reveals that the city's great, high wall rises to a height of 144 cubits (about 216 feet), which is impressive enough for an ordinary city, but ridiculously small for a city 1500 miles high! Consequently the NIV renders the measurement as 144 cubits thick (see also Beckwith 1922:761). This is unlikely because (1) the first mention of the wall (v. 10) called attention to its great height, not its strength or thickness, and because (2) the wall is not built for protection or to keep people out, for its gates are always open (v. 25). Moreover, the word "thick" is not in the text, which says simply "144 cubits." The correct interpretation is "144 cubits high" (as in the NIV margin).

https://www.biblegateway.com/resources/commentaries/IVP-NT/Rev/Vision-City
Depending on which King of the day was ordering the building was the determining factor, which ranged from just over 17" to just over 20", point of elbow to fingertip. Must have been small fellas back then. That would put the wall between 200 and 240 ft. tall.
 
Depending on which King of the day was ordering the building was the determining factor, which ranged from just over 17" to just over 20", point of elbow to fingertip. Must have been small fellas back then. That would put the wall between 200 and 240 ft. tall.
"ridiculously small for a city 1500 miles high!"
 
Do you believe it is just a spiritual place?
No, I believe it's a literal place. But I believe the New Jersulam is a typology of believers. "God does not live in houses made by man". A city is nothing more than houses gathered.
 
No, I believe it's a literal place. But I believe the New Jersulam is a typology of believers. "God does not live in houses made by man". A city is nothing more than houses gathered.
Not houses made by man but God. A city has walls, streets, fountains, rivers, and houses. Lots of scriptural references to a city.
If just a typology, where will all of the physically resurrected people live? Not that they will all be in the city, but the city is the center.
 
Perhaps a garden;

Genesis 2:9 “And out of the ground the Lord God made to spring up every tree that is pleasant to the sight and good for food. The tree of life was in the midst of the garden, and the tree of the knowledge of good and evil.”
Genesis 2:10 “A river flowed out of Eden to water the garden, and there it divided and became four rivers.”

Revelation 22:1 “Then the angel showed me the river of the water of life, bright as crystal, flowing from the throne of God and of the Lamb.”
Revelation 22:2 “through the middle of the street of the city; also, on either side of the river, the tree of life with its twelve kinds of fruit, yielding its fruit each month. The leaves of the tree were for the healing of the nations.”

Then again the garden of Eden may have been a shadow of the future city.
Garden-Temple-City, there is a connection, a restoration, paradise restored.
 
Last edited:
Not houses made by man but God. A city has walls, streets, fountains, rivers, and houses. Lots of scriptural references to a city.
If just a typology, where will all of the physically resurrected people live? Not that they will all be in the city, but the city is the center.
The illusion of the city "coming down" and "outside are the dogs" confuse matters even more
 
The city "as a bride" points to something. Jesus would not marry a city.
 
The city "as a bride" points to something. Jesus would not marry a city.
Could it be filled with the saints that were in the intermediate Heaven when it came down?
John sees it coming down out of Heaven prepared as a bride.

You said a city is houses. Isn't it also people? Perhaps it was already occupied when it arrived.
 
The illusion of the city "coming down" and "outside are the dogs" confuse matters even more
Another mystery often asked is "Why will the nations need healing in the New Jerusalem?"

John writes, “Then the angel showed me the river of the water of life, as clear as crystal, flowing from the throne of God and of the Lamb down the middle of the great street of the city. On each side of the river stood the tree of life, bearing twelve crops of fruit, yielding its fruit every month. And the leaves of the tree are for the healing of the nations. No longer will there be any curse.
 
Top