What does the Bible say about the end of the world?

[Data]

What does the Bible say about the end of the world? Was the end of the world to come in the lifetime of the NT authors or soon?

[Tcg]

What does the Bible say about the end of the world?

https://www.christianity.com/wiki/end-t ... world.html

Was the end of the world to come in the lifetime of the NT authors or soon?

I think Jesus was an apocalyptic preacher. He was wrong. The Bible was written later. The Bible writers obviously did not think the world was going to end with Jesus, as he was already long gone before the final canon was endorsed. But I'm willing to bet my life savings the NT writers did not think the world would last, as is, as long as it has.

The author of 2 Peter certainly didn't think the world would end with Jesus as he explained the totality of that destruction and it clearly hadn't happened yet:

2 Peter 3:10 But the day of the Lord will come like a thief, and then the heavens will pass away with a roar, and the heavenly bodies will be burned up and dissolved, and the earth and the works that are done on it will be exposed.

We shouldn't however expect the authors to agree on this. They don't agree on much of anything else. The gospel authors may have had a different view.


Tcg

[Data]

What does the Bible say about the end of the world?

https://www.christianity.com/wiki/end-t ... world.html

Was the end of the world to come in the lifetime of the NT authors or soon?

I think Jesus was an apocalyptic preacher. He was wrong. The Bible was written later. The Bible writers obviously did not think the world was going to end with Jesus, as he was already long gone before the final canon was endorsed. But I'm willing to bet my life savings the NT writers did not think the world would last, as is, as long as it has.

They thought the meek would live forever on earth, and the earth would last forever. (Ecclesiastes 1:4; Psalm 104:5; 2 Peter 3:13) The terms then for earth and world were interchangeable with various meanings. But in the context of a statement like the world will be destroyed but the earth will last forever, the world there means system or arrangement. Satan is the God of the world, for example. The earth will be destroyed in the sense that a city may be destroyed. A new heaven and new earth mean heaven and earth are cleansed of demonic presence.

[Data]

We shouldn't however expect the authors to agree on this. They don't agree on much of anything else. The gospel authors may have had a different view.

It seems to me that they do agree. I had intended to point out in response to POI that the world had been, according to the Bible, destroyed a few times before. For example, the flood of Noah's day. But also, in the sense that the word world can also be applied to, for example, the Jewish system, destroyed by Babylon then the Romans. Revelation is just a larger scale of that. So, skeptics sometimes read the book of Revelation and think the celestial phenomenon mentioned there is literal. Fear of the superstitious. Being described figuratively for that kind of destruction. The exact same terminology was used prior to that in the so-called OT which signified the same destruction on a smaller scale for Jerusalem. Different people, different leaders and different environment.

[POI]

What does the Bible say about the end of the world?

https://www.christianity.com/wiki/end-t ... world.html

Was the end of the world to come in the lifetime of the NT authors or soon?

I think Jesus was an apocalyptic preacher. He was wrong. The Bible was written later. The Bible writers obviously did not think the world was going to end with Jesus, as he was already long gone before the final canon was endorsed. But I'm willing to bet my life savings the NT writers did not think the world would last, as is, as long as it has.

They thought the meek would live forever on earth, and the earth would last forever. (Ecclesiastes 1:4; Psalm 104:5; 2 Peter 3:13) The terms then for earth and world were interchangeable with various meanings. But in the context of a statement like the world will be destroyed but the earth will last forever, the world there means system or arrangement. Satan is the God of the world, for example. The earth will be destroyed in the sense that a city may be destroyed. A new heaven and new earth mean heaven and earth are cleansed of demonic presence.

.
And like I said, Jesus thought it would happen sooner. Likely before all his direct followers perished. And then later, the Bible writers thought it would happen sooner, and may have had to also re-spin what Jesus thought. And yet, either way, seems we are yet to be "cleansed of demonic presence".

[1213]

Of course , this is indefinitely deferred such as not yet totally preached to all nations...

Obviously it has not yet been preached to all nations, otherwise end would have come. And I think it is clear also otherwise, because people don't seem to know about it.

but realistically, the end should have come long before.

I don't see any good reason to think so.

For the goddless, I or we see pretty clearly that the disciples, Paul and the initial gospel writers expected the End to come in their lifetimes. Though I suspect that Luke was late enough to realise it ought to have happened by his time and was toying with the idea that it had happened but only in the form of the church and inner faith, though I doubt even he was really convinced by that.

Yet Jesus said that only God knows the day.

And concerning that day and the hour no one hath known--not even the messengers of the heavens--except my Father only;
Matt. 24:36

[JehovahsWitness]

The terms then for earth and world were interchangeable with various meanings.

This is simply inaccurate.

EARTH : The Greek word ge refers to denotes earth as arable land or soil (as contrasted with seas or waters); it can refer to "earth" as a habitation for human creatures and animals; land, country or territory ground. The word can be used literally or (as is arguably the case in the letter of Peter, figuratively).

WORLD : Greek word kosmos basically means “order” or “arrangement" and in the Christian Greek Scriptures, is primarily linked to the world of mankind; In various contexts, it is used to refer to Humankind rather than the planet upon which humans and animals live.

AGE / SYSTEM : There is another word which some English translations also translate as "WORLD" which is aion. This refers to the current state of affairs or to features that distinguish a certain period of time, epoch, or age . Thus some bibles render this word "age" or "system"

.

It is impossible to accurately understand end time propecy without taking the above into consideration. Bible writers used these words, which were not interchangabl, to refer to distinct and different aspect of Christian theology. Serious bible students do well to check the Greek before coming to any conclusions about what the writer was trying to convey.

[JehovahsWitness]

... But given the end requires that death itself has been conquered, I would wager we're still pretty far off at this point.

I think the OP is asking about the end of the present world system of things; when Paul refered to "the end" in 1 Corinthians, I think he was referring to "the end" of DEATH itself (compare verses 54-57)

They are one and the same to me. ...

I can see that you believe they are one and the same. I can agree that it is indeed your opinion that they are one and the same.

The end that Paul speaks of is both the end of the present world order (/generation) and the end of death itself...

What else would Paul be referring to when he speaks of "all dominion, power, and authority" other than the present world order?

Paul does speak of the destruction of the present world system of things and the eradication of Adamic death but does he speak of the two events happening simultaneously ?

Notice Paul speaks clearly of a sequence of events (see verse 23a) leading ultimately to "the end" of [Adamic] death. But interestingly this "end" or the complete and permanent eradication of Adamic death , comes after Jesus' rule as king and his (Jesus) conquering of OTHER enemies (see verse 25). "For he must rule as king until God has put all enemies under his feet". So there is a beginning and an end to Jesus' rule (Kingdom) during which time enemies are conquered.

Which enemies and in what order? Jesus rule at some point leads to the the crushing of " all government and all authority and power" a clear reference to Christs return and the destruction of the wicked along with all rival kingdoms. Since death is spoken of as the "last enemy" the eradication of death must be AFTER (not simultaneous with) this event. In short, Paul points out that the world system ends BEFORE adamic death, the {quote} "last" enemy is eradicated.

We will need to look to other bible prophecies to see how long a period divides the two events but a clue is surely seen in his linking the end of [adamic] death with the end of Jesus Messianic rule (prophecied to be 1,000 years long) and the subseqent handing over of rulership to his Father.


JW

[TRANSPONDER]

Of course , this is indefinitely deferred such as not yet totally preached to all nations...

Obviously it has not yet been preached to all nations, otherwise end would have come. And I think it is clear also otherwise, because people don't seem to know about it.

but realistically, the end should have come long before.

I don't see any good reason to think so.

For the goddless, I or we see pretty clearly that the disciples, Paul and the initial gospel writers expected the End to come in their lifetimes. Though I suspect that Luke was late enough to realise it ought to have happened by his time and was toying with the idea that it had happened but only in the form of the church and inner faith, though I doubt even he was really convinced by that.

Yet Jesus said that only God knows the day.

And concerning that day and the hour no one hath known--not even the messengers of the heavens--except my Father only;
Matt. 24:36

Or it has in fact been preached to all nations and the end hasn't come because it isn't going to. And it isn't going to because the bible is false, and just one of the many reasons to think the Bible is false is because it pretty clearly shows it was expected in the lifetimes of those around at the time,and that did not happen.

I'd suggest (again I believe) that by the time the last stage Gospels were being written (or edited, rather) the Jewish war was over and that 'generation' were dying off and the writers were getting antsy about "Isn't it about time this happened?" So Matthew (1) reminded people that God wasn't specific about when it would go down. Luke (even later, I suspect) tried to hint that the coming of Kingdom of God was in the form of the Church.

But if one ignores all that then I suppose one could argue that it may have been preached to all nations but not everyone in those nations have heard about it. But is that ever going to happen? Are two year old Babies taught about it? Using that argument it can NEVER be preached to all nations and the end will never come. I think back to the drawing board on that one.

(1) I'll have to check whether only Matthew has this.

Interesting. Just in Mark and not Luke
Mark 13:32 “But about that day or hour no one knows, not even the angels in heaven, nor the Son, but only the Father.

Which makes it 'M' material - a similar thing to "Q$ - material in Matthew and Luke, but not in Mark. But I think in fact you have misunderstood the passage. It parallels the parable of the servants who think they can goof off and take it easy, but the master appears unexpected and they don't have the opportunity to look busy. Thus the passage is not about what time in the future the end will come, but that it will unexpected. The message being, keep right with God all the time.

I don't want to make this personal, but I often see this - Bible apologists not only don't comprehend what's in their Bible, but even misuse to out of context just to support their own opinions and doctrines.

[POI]

This is simply inaccurate.

******************************

It is impossible to accurately understand end time propecy without taking the above into consideration. Bible writers used these words, which were not interchangabl, to refer to distinct and different aspect of Christian theology. Serious bible students do well to check the Greek before coming to any conclusions about what the writer was trying to convey.

I'm not sure how serious a Christian is going to take a response, of this particular topic, from a JW. (i.e.):

"In 1876, Charles Taze Russell, founder of the Jehovah's Witnesses, predicted that Christ would return in 1914. Since that prophecy failed, the society has predicted at least seven other dates when Armageddon would occur."

[TRANSPONDER]

... But given the end requires that death itself has been conquered, I would wager we're still pretty far off at this point.

I think the OP is asking about the end of the present world system of things; when Paul refered to "the end" in 1 Corinthians, I think he was referring to "the end" of DEATH itself (compare verses 54-57)

They are one and the same to me. ...

I can see that you believe they are one and the same. I can agree that it is indeed your opinion that they are one and the same.

The end that Paul speaks of is both the end of the present world order (/generation) and the end of death itself...

What else would Paul be referring to when he speaks of "all dominion, power, and authority" other than the present world order?

Paul does speak of the destruction of the present world system of things and the eradication of Adamic death but does he speak of the two events happening simultaneously ?

Notice Paul speaks clearly of a sequence of events (see verse 23a) leading ultimately to "the end" of [Adamic] death. But interestingly this "end" or the complete and permanent eradication of Adamic death , comes after Jesus' rule as king and his (Jesus) conquering of OTHER enemies (see verse 25). "For he must rule as king until God has put all enemies under his feet". So there is a beginning and an end to Jesus' rule (Kingdom) during which time enemies are conquered.

Which enemies and in what order? Jesus rule at some point leads to the the crushing of " all government and all authority and power" a clear reference to Christs return and the destruction of the wicked along with all rival kingdoms. Since death is spoken of as the "last enemy" the eradication of death must be AFTER (not simultaneous with) this event. In short, Paul points out that the world system ends BEFORE adamic death, the {quote} "last" enemy is eradicated.

We will need to look to other bible prophecies to see how long a period divides the two events but a clue is surely seen in his linking the end of [adamic] death with the end of Jesus Messianic rule (prophecied to be 1,000 years long) and the subseqent handing over of rulership to his Father.


JW

Are you sure of that? I definitely got from Romans that Adamic death (sin -death) ended with Jesus' sacrifice on the cross. Thus all Gentiles have the opportunity to escape sin - death (The Jews are still under the Law - in Romans, anyway). Of course one has to be 'Righteous' in the Abrahamic sense - by trust in God, though Paul switches this to Faith in Jesus. But all this had come about because of the crucifixion, not to come when Jesus returned and judged everyone. In fact, how would it make any sense otherwise? People not getting the chance to escape sin - death until Jesus came? Mind, it'd be great . We can ignore religion until Jesus rolls up and says : "End of world time, Erbots, Now, who believeth in me?" And the backsliders and unbelievers will have as much chance of being saved as all the Church -goers, hassock - bashers and Bible - droolers.

Maybe you should reconsider that particular doctrine.