There is much ado at the end of Revelation about a new heaven and a new earth, along with new Jerusalem, the Holy City, and the statement that God “will dwell among [mankind] and they shall be his people, and God himself will be with them” (Rev 21:3, REB†). Orthodox Christianity interprets this as a “never before” future event (excepting Jesus Christ’s brief incarnation) that wraps up history and ushers in the glorious redemption of all Creation from sin and death.
Obviously the question of “what is heaven?” is a popular one and many books have been written on the subject. But my curiosity drifted back to the beginning, perhaps spurred by John Hobbins’ fresh consideration of Genesis 1, and I asked the question: “when is the first mention of heaven?” Specifically, I was curious about the earliest references to heaven as the dwelling place of God.
As it turns out, the first singular reference (in my English translations) to “heaven” is Genesis 6:17, where God is counseling Noah that he is going to “bring the waters of the flood over the earth to destroy from under heaven every human being that has the spirit of life; everything on earth shall perish.” 
Note the structure: “the waters of the flood over the earth” is a clear reference to Genesis 1:6-8, when God separated the waters above and below with a vault called “the heavens”. The image of earth as a virtual snowglobe, encompassed in the womb waters of heaven remains clear in this early historical narrative.
The next reference to “heaven” is Genesis 14:19, when Melchizedek is blessing Abram:
Blessed by Abram by God Most High,
Creator of the heavens and the earth.
Again, though, this is the creation motif and not indicative of God’s dwelling place. It is not until Genesis 21 and the story of Hagar’s banishment from the camp of Abraham that we get the first clear description of God in heaven:
God heard the child crying, and the angel of God called from heaven to Hagar, ‘What is the matter, Hagar?’ (Genesis 21:17)
This language is repeated in Genesis 22 and the story of the sacrifice of Isaac, where the angel of the Lord calls to Abraham twice from heaven. The next clear image occurs in Genesis 28 through Jacob’s dream of “a ladder, which rested on the ground with its top reaching to heaven, and angels of God were going up and down on it” (Genesis 28:12). Finally, we come to Moses and the discourses recorded in Deuteronomy:
Be sure to bear in mind this day that the Lord is God in heaven above and on earth below; there is none other. (Deuteronomy 4:39)
Clearly, the image of God dwelling in heaven progressively emerges from the post-flood narratives and by the time of Moses, God and his angels are clearly removed from any possible residence on earth.
But what about before the flood? Are “the heavens” recorded in the creation story to be equated with the dwelling place of God, or is this language that just reflects man’s perception of the simple separation of earth and sky? There are numerous clues that suggest God and his angels spent considerable time on earth, if not dwelling on it, in the pre-flood days. A few passages to consider:
The man and his wife heard the sound of the Lord God walking about in the garden at the time of the evening breeze, and they hid from him among the trees. (Genesis 3:8)
The Lord God made coverings from skins for the man and his wife and clothed them. [...] The Lord God banished him from the garden of Eden… When he drove him out, God settled him to the east…” (Genesis 3:21, 23-24)
In due season Cain brought some of the fruits of the earth as an offering to the Lord, while Abel brought the choicest of the firstborn of his flock. (Genesis 4:3)
At that time people began to invoke the Lord by name. (Genesis 4:26b)
The sons of the gods saw how beautiful these daughters [of humans] were, so they took for themselves such women as they chose. (Genesis 6:2ff)
Those which came [into the ark] were one male and one female of all living things; they came in as God had commanded Noah, and the Lord closed the door on him. (Genesis 7:16)
Now, obviously, all of these references can be accepted supernaturally, as any intervention by an omnipotent God (or gods) in the physical created world. But can we also consider the possibility that the created earth was the original tabernacle of God, that it was natural for God and humans to dwell together and that perhaps it wasn’t until God withdrew his spirit of life from human beings (Genesis 6:3ff) that he removed himself to Heaven (capital “H”) and made a new home away from the expanding stain of sin?
Perhaps a new heaven and earth in Revelation is not just the redemption of creation, but also a return to a natural, incarnate state of relationship between God and humans that might have persisted for generations after Adam’s sin? Or do we just have a literary evolution of human myth and deity tradition documented in early narrative fragments?
† All scripture quotations are from the Revised English Bible (REB) unless otherwise noted.
18 Comments
I think pre-incarnate visitations of Christ are indicated in many Old Testament stories. In addition to the ones you mention, there are many others, including Moses, Jacob, Gideon, Balaam, and David. After all, Jesus did say: “before Abraham was, I am.” ESV
Interesting post, my brother! Your analysis of heaven commends itself.
But I’ll go for a literal interpretation of a New Heaven and a New Earth because of the 2 Peter 3:13 reference.
But the incarnation of the Father, I don’t know. But I do like you allusion to the Genesis account of the Father’s theophany.
@Vance: Indeed, I agree that there is evidence of incarnate visitations by God on the physical earth throughout the OT (whether those are of Christ depends IMO on whether you can separate God from the Word in the OT).
However, I was more curious about whether, at least in pre-flood history, whether God’s primary dwelling was also on physical earth – that he tabernacled with his creation. Clearly after the flood, he has removed himself – Jacob remarks that the site of his ladder dream “is the gateway to heaven”.
@TC: Thanks for the comments. Am I interpreting your comment correctly in that you believe the New Heavens and the New Earth are entirely new physical creations that we will be resurrected to, and not the promised redemption of what we know today?
I would point back at 2 Peter 3:5ff and say that Peter also uses destruction language to describe the flood, but surely we’re not interpreting that as the flood completely destroyed the material object called a planet? The surface features and all living things, yes, but the continuity of the entire rocky ball that orbits the sun?
I take Peter’s dissolution of the universe in vs.11ff to parallel the resurrection of our physical bodies: we will be redeemed and recreated in ways we may never be able to imagine, but there is continuity and identity that persists through the resurrection. The same with the heavens and earth – the planet may be transformed, but we will still identify with it and have a continuous relationship with its features.
ElShaddai, whatever distinctions are made in REB and other English translations, in Hebrew there is no distinction between “heaven”, “heavens” and “sky”. The one word used for all of them, singular and plural, shamayim which is dual in form and sometimes understood as a plural, is first found in Genesis 1:1. And here, and as far as I can see everywhere else in Genesis, it is simply the part of the created world above the earth. God speaks “from heaven” in that the voice seems to come from above. In Deuteronomy 4:39 God is as much God of the earth as God of heaven, because he made them both. I don’t see any real evidence in any of the verses you quote for the idea that God lives in heaven, which I suspect is an idea derived from the metaphor that God is high in status and so his dwelling place must be high. This idea does seem to be expressed in Deuteronomy 26:15, but this is apparently a unique reference in the Pentateuch, echoing the language of Chronicles and so potentially a later gloss.
My own understanding is that of Solomon in 1 Kings 8:27, that even the heavens are not large enough to be God’s real dwelling place. He is omnipresent and has no specific home within the created world, although at times he has specific places where he chooses to reveal himself. There is no change in this situation in time, although the incarnate body of Jesus is one of those specific places. But as he is omnipresent he has no trouble speaking to Adam and Eve in the garden, or to us today if we will listen to him.
Thanks for the insight on shamayim, Peter. I appreciate that, as well as the reference from 1 Kings:
What are your views on the scope of a physical, incarnate presence of God in the pre-flood history? Certainly God can be and is larger than the heavens or earth, but do you see the mentions in early Genesis as literal incarnations or historical-literary devices to define early human history?
I guess the point of my post was that the point of perspective of humans’ dealings with God changed at the flood from directly interacting with God on earth to hearing God from heaven. God seems, from a literary device perspective, to have left humans by themselves on earth after the flood.
I think that your assumptions concerning the incarnate existence are correct. I find it easy to believe that this is the death of which God spoke to Adam. Death = separation from God.
It was expected by Adam that God would walk in the Garden with Man. It seems with the tree of life mentioned in Revelation, that a return to the place were God and man walked is natural
Well, ElShaddai, I don’t take the Garden of Eden scenes as literal history. But I understand the fellowship which Adam and Eve had with God to be the same in principle as that which Abraham and Moses had, which Paul had and which I have, except much more perfect because they were unfallen. “Walking in the garden in the cool of the day” I understand as metaphor: when they heard the evening breeze in the trees they were reminded of God’s presence with them. So, no pre-incarnate physical presence, on my understanding. But as Christians we too can walk today in the garden with God and hear him speaking to us, if we will listen.
Fair enough, Peter, I actually have sympathy for that position. Is it your belief then that the Genesis narrative up to Abraham (or perhaps even after) is historical myth, representative of humans’ ability to suppose the beginnings of the world around them and literarily derived from the cultural traditions contemporary to Abraham, Isaac and Jacob?
My tentative belief is that there is not much real history in the Bible before Abraham, but from his time onward it is basically historical, of course with theologically motivated presentation. I don’t rule out a historical Noah’s flood, but it was not a worldwide one. But that does not really affect the issue here.
Elshaddai, in 2 Pet 3:6 Peter uses ἀπόλλυμι, and then in vv.10, 11 we have a different word, λύω. Does Peter want us to make a difference in how we understand these words?
Furthermore, Peter was referring to a literal earth in vv.5ff and not some mystical earthiness. I think he does the same in reference to the new heaven and the new earth.
Then Peter says of this new dimension, “But in keeping with his promise we are looking forward to a new heaven and a new earth, where righteousness dwells” (v. 13, TNIV). I see nothing mystical about this verse.
Yes, early Genesis really does seem to be the “who we are and why we’re here” documentation for the Hebrew tribe moving into Canaan. Lots of themes and motifs borrowed from contemporary and historical cultures to better “fit in”, but with a monotheistic twist to set them apart from (above?) their neighbors.
It would be interesting to further compare the theophanic episodes in Genesis with those of the other Canaanite cultures and/or those from Mesopotamia.
If I’m processing this correctly, I understand the argument to be that the new heaven and new earth could mean either a newly created physical earth and heaven, or is a re-created and pre-existing heaven and earth.
If there is no “heavenly realm” where angels sing (as in Revelation) in the early Old Testament, it may mean that it just wasn’t written about yet by the biblical writers.
Kevin, yes, though I’d say that another way of saying “a re-created and pre-existing heaven and earth” is “the redeemed creation”.
Thanks for the Greek, TC – I didn’t mean to suggest that the earth itself was mystical or incorporeal in any way, just that the recording of pre-flood human history had an aura of mythology to it. Again, that gets back to hermeneutics…
Interestingly the last part of 2 Peter 3:13, “where righteousness dwells”, parallels the end of Revelation (21:3), where God comes to dwell (again?) with his people on earth.
Elshaddai, I believe that at the end of the day we might be saying the same thing.
Hear Paul:
“The creation waits in eager expectation for the children of God to be revealed. For the creation was subjected to frustration, not by its own choice, but by the will of the one who subjected it, in hope that the creation itself will be liberated from its bondage to decay and brought into the freedom and glory of the children of God” (Rom 8:19-21, TNIV).
This earth is going to be redeemded. I believe that’s the meaning of a new heaven and a new earth.
Yes, God will dwell with His people, but I don’t see the parallelism that you see between 2 Pet 3:13 and Rev 21:3.
This earth is going to be redeemed. I believe that’s the meaning of a new heaven and a new earth.
Yep, we’re saying the same thing.
Well, after reading somethings that you said above, I discovered that.
Did Satan know that Jesus was God in the flesh when he was tempting Jesus in the Wilderness?
How many angles were orginally created? 1/3 of the angles were kicked out with Satan so how many are left in heaven?