Revelation 21:1–22:5

Original Meaning

A New Creation (21:1–8)

THE NEW EARTH became a familiar topic of Jewish end-time discussion (1 En. 91:16), normally occurring after the resurrection of the dead (Ps-Philo 3:10).2 At a minimum, the earth had to be purified (cf. 1 Enoch 10:7). But in many end-time scenarios, the Day of Judgment would transform the heavens and the earth (1 Enoch 45:4–5). Two models of new creation—renewal and replacement—existed in early Judaism, but given such factors as the lack of sea, Revelation seems to use at least the image of the latter.3

The lack of sea may have been extrapolated from the fact that Isaiah’s promise mentioned only the new heavens and new earth, not any seas, but the absence of the sea probably also serves some other purpose. Some associate its absence with the defeat of the sea, connected with the destruction of evil, in Canaanite mythology and Israelite symbolism.4 Or the sea may be the place of the dead (20:13) or the realm of the Antichrist (13:1), though this view is hard-pressed to explain more positive sea images in the book (5:13; 15:2).5 One can connect its absence with the lake of fire in Revelation, in which believers have no part (cf. 15:2).

Some Jewish traditions implied an end-time destruction of the sea (Sib. Or. 5.157–59).6 Within Revelation’s own context, the drying of the sea may signify an end to any further need for mercantile trade (Rev. 18:17); God will supply all the needs of his people (22:2).7 In the whole context of Revelation the disappearance of the sea may well spell an end to the “many waters” of the followers of the beast (17:1, 15) that arose from the sea (13:1).

The new Jerusalem (21:2; see also 21:9–22:5) had become a familiar Jewish expectation. God prepared this city for his people (4 Ezra 8:52). That this city would descend from heaven (21:2, 10) is not surprising (Gal. 4:26; Heb. 11:16; 12:22).8 Some texts look for a restored and exalted Jerusalem (Tobit 13:7–16; Ps. Sol. 11:2–6); others speak of a currently hidden city that will then be revealed (4 Ezra 7:26; 2 Bar. 4:2–6).9 The point of its descent from heaven here is that the city comes from God, not by any human abilities (Rev. 3:12).10

Jewish people regularly called Jerusalem by the title “the Holy City,” as here (21:2, 10; cf. 11:2; 22:19); God renews a holy city once defiled (11:2).11 Just as Babylon in Revelation represents the people of Rome and not simply its location, and just as “Jerusalem” in the Old Testament usually included the people and not simply the site, “new Jerusalem” undoubtedly includes the people of God.12 This city is the “bride” (21:2), just as we know the church is (2 Cor. 11:2; Eph. 5:23).13 Jerusalem’s bridal adornment here is appropriate; other texts describe Jerusalem’s beautiful adornment (on the analogy of clothing) in the end time (Isa. 52:1; Ps. Sol. 11:7), including bridal array (Isa. 61:10).14 Probably both Christ (cf. Jn 14:3) and the church play roles in “preparing” her for her marriage; 19:7 uses the active voice for the bride preparing herself whereas 21:2 uses the passive voice.

The promise that God “will live” (skenoo) with his people (21:3) was a frequent Jewish hope that ultimately points back to a promise of God’s covenant for Israel (Ex. 25:8; 29:45–46; Lev. 26:12; 1 Kings 6:13; Ezek. 37:27; Zech. 2:10–11), including in the future temple (Ezek. 43:7, 9).15 This promise is spelled out more clearly when the text reveals that new Jerusalem is a temple city (21:22) and is shaped like the Most Holy Place (21:16). The restoration of the temple was a specific hope for restored Jerusalem (Ezek. 37:26–28; 41–48), but in Revelation this hope is transferred to the entire city.16 This will be the most explicit “tabernacling” of God with humanity since the Incarnation (see John 1:14, which declares that Jesus, the Word, “made his dwelling” [lit., “tabernacled”] among us, the only New Testament use of skenoo outside Revelation), though deceased believers in heaven have already experienced it (Rev. 7:15). This promise was expected for end-time Israel, but here all who “overcome” receive it (21:7).

Emphasizing the presence of representatives from all nations, the Greek may even read, “they will be his peoples” (plural) rather than the singular in the NIV.17 This may fulfill the promise that many nations will become God’s people and he will live among them (Zech. 2:11; cf. Isa. 19:25).

John describes the new creation (21:1) not to satisfy our curiosity about the future, but to comfort us about the eventual change in the nature of this world. The passing of “the old order of things” and the making of all things new (21:4–5) include the end of sorrow (see comment on 7:17) and its causes, especially death—the reality of which believers in the present merely experience a foretaste (2 Cor. 5:17).18 The passing of these “first things” (lit. trans. of Rev. 21:4; see also LXX of Isa. 65:16), including suffering, directly echoes the new creation promise of 65:16–17; the deliverance from both tears and death echoes 25:8. This passing of mourning is in stark contrast to the fate of the wicked (Rev. 18:7–8, 15, 19; cf. Matt. 8:12). John is then again commanded to write (Rev. 21:5; cf. 1:11, 19; 14:13) because these words are true (cf. 19:9).

The announcement “It is done!” (21:6) suggests completion, like an analogous saying of Jesus (using a different word) at the conclusion of his work in John 19:30; God’s purposes in history have come to their conclusion (cf. Rev. 10:7; 16:17) by creating a people with whom he will live (cf. Eph. 1:10). By declaring that he is “the Alpha and the Omega” (Rev. 21:6), God reminds us that he is able to accomplish what he promises (see comment on 1:8). By offering water from the spring of life, he recalls 7:17 and contrasts the polluted waters of the present era of judgment (8:10; 14:7; 16:4); this promise anticipates the fuller description offered in 22:1, 17. The thirst referred to here may be less an implicit exhortation (as in John 6:35; 7:37) and more an invitation to the weary who have suffered the traumas of this age (Rev. 7:16). Offering this drink “without cost” (21:6; cf. 22:17) probably echoes Isaiah 55:1, an invitation to Israel in the context of its promised restoration.

By itself suffering does not sufficiently qualify one for the kingdom; rather, one must overcome (21:7). In the context of Revelation, overcoming addresses such varied tests as compromise with the world’s values (2:14, 20), dependence on our own strength (3:17), and persecution (2:10); but persecution is the test Revelation particularly emphasizes for the end-time witnesses of Jesus (12:11; 13:7). Jewish texts often speak of inheriting the world to come (21:7), a common figure of speech among early Christians as well (e.g., Matt. 25:34; Rom. 8:17; 1 Cor. 6:9).19 Here the overcomers inherit “all this,” that is, the new and sorrowless world God has prepared for them (Rev. 21:1–6).

The promise that God will be his people’s God and they will be his people is the most basic component of the ancient covenant formula (Gen. 17:8; Ex. 6:7; 29:45; Lev. 11:45; 22:33; 25:38; 26:12, 45; Num. 15:41; Deut. 29:13). The prophets rehearse the same covenant formula (Jer. 7:23; 11:4; 24:7; 30:22; 31:33; 32:38; Ezek. 11:20; 14:11; 36:28; 37:23, 27; Zech. 8:8).20 But Revelation slightly adapts it: He will be the overcomer’s God, and the overcomer will be his own child (Rev. 21:7). God had earlier declared Israel his children (Ex. 4:22; Deut. 32:19–20; Hos. 1:10; 11:1), but here in the end time he publicly honors individual believers as his own children (21:7; cf. Matt. 5:9; Rom. 8:19; 1 John 3:2).21

All these promises culminate, however, in a warning: Those who fail to overcome, who prove disobedient, will be damned (21:8). Traditional cities kept some groups outside their walls, such as foreigners, traders, and prostitutes, though these groups could work inside the city; outside the new Jerusalem, however, is hell.22 The NIV’s “their place will be” is more literally, “they will have their part [or share] in”; this is the language of inheritance, a deliberate contrast with the inheritance of the overcomers in 21:7. The “fiery lake” is the destination for all who will not inherit the new Jerusalem and the new creation of 21:1–6. “The second death” (21:8) contrasts with the abolition of death in new Jerusalem (21:4).23 Those who begin as believers must “overcome”; apostates, like those who never professed Christ to begin with, will be lost.

The list of those excluded from the new Jerusalem (21:8) appears in related forms in 21:27; 22:15. Vice lists were a common literary form in ancient texts, but Revelation tailors this list to specific issues confronting its audience.24

• The “cowardly” may be those who fear persecution (2:10) more than they revere God (11:18; 14:7; 15:4; 19:5).25

• The “unbelieving” are those who prove faithless, unwilling to maintain their faith in the midst of testing (2:13, 19; 13:10; 14:12).

• The Greek word translated as “vile” (ebdelygmenos) is related to words that refer to “abominations” (17:4–5; 21:27), that which is disgusting before God (Deut. 14:3; 17:1; Prov. 15:9, 26). Most often in the LXX this word applies to two sins: sexual immorality (Lev. 18:22–29; Deut. 22:5; 23:18; 24:4; 1 Kings 14:24; Jer. 13:27; Mal. 2:11) and—by far most frequently—idolatry (over forty times).26 Those who compromise with the cult of the emperor or other forms of paganism and worldliness fall into the “abominable” or “vile” category.

• “Murderers” (cf. 9:21; 22:15) is a broad designation but includes those who kill God’s saints (2:13; 6:11; 13:10, 15); this may include those who betrayed Christians to the government (2:9; 3:9), who to save oneself refused to love sufficiently to withhold betraying others (cf. 1 John 3:14–16), or who would not meet a fellow Christian’s needs (1 John 3:17). Such murderers will justly suffer the second death (20:14).

• The “sexually immoral” (cf. 9:21) in Revelation often point to spiritual immorality (2:14, 20; 17:1–2, 5, 15–16; 18:3, 9; 19:2), but unless readers have this in mind, they would suppose it most naturally refers to the notorious literal physical immorality of paganism. In either case, the sexual unfaithfulness of the world’s citizens contrasts sharply with the sexual purity of the bride, the holy city, and her inhabitants (14:4; 19:7–8; 21:2).

• “Those who practice magic arts” (cf. 22:15) translates a word in Revelation that includes the world’s seductive signs (13:13–14) and perhaps even its seductive power (18:23); in the broader sense, it includes any deceptive tools of demons (9:20–21; Gal. 5:20).27

• “Idolaters” include all who have succumbed to the demands of the imperial cult or who worshiped the idols of the world system (2:14, 20; cf. 1 John 5:21); they worship the image of the beast (Rev. 13:15).

• “Liars” includes not only false prophets (2:2; cf. 1 John 2:22) like Balaam and Jezebel (Rev. 2:14, 20) but also those who falsely claim to follow the truth (3:9; cf. 1 John 2:4; 4:20), in contrast to the saints (Rev. 14:5).28

Bridging Contexts

TO OVERCOME. The summons to overcome (21:7) remains relevant regardless of how close or distant our trials seem analogous to those of John’s first audience. Even those with the most comfortable situations eventually face sickness, death, or bereavement. Each of the seven churches in Revelation had different trials, yet each was called to overcome (2:7, 11, 17, 26; 3:5, 12, 21); each of us today has different trials, but all are called to overcome (21:7).

The new earth and paradise. We return to our primary example of poor interpretive methodology in Revelation: A careful reading of this book reveals that Jehovah’s Witnesses are wrong about Jesus’ deity, wrong about the identity of the 144,000, and wrong about a number of other matters. But we should grant that they are right in one sense when they speak of life on the new earth. By contrast, many modern Christians have bought into a view of the future that the Bible normally restricts to the deceased in the present: heavenly bliss. Yet much of the biblical perspective for the future is earthly and physical, though also of the Spirit (1 Cor. 15:44) and portrayed in symbolic language. Western Christendom has inherited an allegorical view of heaven from the Platonism of some of its early interpreters, but the New Testament emphasizes resurrection for bodily existence, ultimately on the new earth.80

The graphic images of future paradise (and exclusion from paradise) would have moved John’s original audience, and we may retell images in such a manner as to move our own culturally different audiences. It is said that James McGready, an early leader of camp meetings that profoundly shaped Protestant religion in nineteenth-century North America, “would so describe Heaven, that you would almost see its glories.”81 Such graphic depictions follow John’s own method here. But we may struggle to translate Revelation’s images of hope into culturally intelligible images for our time; for many prosperous, nonagricultural Westerners, shopping malls may best epitomize full provision, but that image might evoke instead the consumerism and acquisitiveness more akin to Babylon. We must find other ways to articulate full sufficiency while focusing on the Lamb.

The description of new Jerusalem (21:9–22:5) responds to the deepest longings of the seven churches, especially those most steeped in their biblical heritage. If we were more immersed in the images of the Old Testament prophets, the description would connect more with us; the best way to establish that connection, therefore, is to immerse ourselves in Scripture. On another level, however, the narrative connects with anyone who understands the language; the hope of new Jerusalem includes the fulfillment of all human needs, including hunger, thirst, relationships, and relationship with God. That it is rooted in our biblical heritage in ancient Israel and the apostolic ministry indicates that it was designed specifically for us who embrace that heritage. Those who do not like history may not appreciate this heritage fully, but a taste for biblical history, as for healthy food, can be acquired.

What is more striking than the earthly site of paradise is its urban character. An urban ministries specialist points out that salvation history begins in a garden but ends in a city.82 This need not be a purely modern reading of the text: Tension between rural and urban communities ran high in the first century, allowing us to suppose that they often may not have appreciated one another positively.83 This perspective is certainly right in its basic point: God can be at home in the city as well as in the countryside; he is wherever his people are. Although Jesus’ following rose mainly from the Galilean countryside and villages, Paul focused his ministry on the cities as cultural centers from which the gospel began to spread (cf. Acts 19:10).

But while this passage reminds us that God can use cities as well as gardens, the differing images of paradise may say more about their different cultural settings than about God’s preference for gardens or cities. Whereas most of the earliest period depicted in Genesis was preurban, relevant for the seminomads who transmitted it, Revelation is written to urban churches who used Jewish symbols already circulating in urban contexts.84 In other words, God inspired biblical writers and provided visions that contextualized their message in images that their audiences could relate to. Perhaps we should do the same, though the power of the original images should be translated, not abandoned.

The relation between the Testaments. These passages in Revelation raise the question of the relation between the Old and New Testaments. How do we explain new Jerusalem’s lack of temple in light of Ezekiel’s detailed plan for an end-time temple? Some interpreters take both literally by placing Ezekiel’s temple in the Millennium of chapter 20, though it is not mentioned there. Others find in Ezekiel’s temple a symbolic portrayal of restoration in the second temple, fulfilled in Jesus; the New Testament applies the image to Jesus at least on a symbolic level (John 7:37–39). Some such reapplication of Old Testament imagery seems necessary; clearly the promise of eternal Davidic rule for Christians means not David himself but his line established forever in Jesus (Jer. 30:9; Ezek. 34:23–24; 37:24–25; cf. Hos. 3:5).85 But given God’s consistency in dealing with his people through history, an application in the short run does not necessarily exhaust the sense of the prophecy for the future.

It is, however, also possible that Ezekiel and Revelation both portray the same future in different symbolic ways. The central point of both images is glorious restoration, but Revelation’s image of no temple is more glorious than Ezekiel’s temple in that it presupposes the entire city (and God’s people) as a temple (Rev. 21:3, 16, 22). In the expansive tendency of ancient Jewish and Christian end-time expectation, a greater fulfillment was never an abrogation of less exalted hopes. Rather, it was a yet better way to envision that which was beyond mere words and images to describe. As Paul reminds us, “No eye has seen, no ear has heard” (1 Cor. 2:9; cf. Isa. 64:4), though the Spirit has given us a foretaste of our experience with God (1 Cor. 2:10).

Literal or symbolic? Are the precious stones of the new Jerusalem (21:18–21) literal or symbolic, as likely in the prophetic poetry from which the image is taken (Isa. 54:11–12)? God can, of course, create such precious stones literally; but even if he did so, it would probably be to make the same point as the symbolic interpretation prefers: What is rare and precious now will be abundant then. God’s people will experience no lack, and the future glory of the city for which we endure now is greater than the greatest splendor of the world’s greatest institutions, including Rome (ch. 17), modern technology, or anything else that entrances our imagination.

In the same way, should we take the numbers 12,000 and 144 (21:16–17) literally? The use of symbols in apocalyptic literature and especially the consistent numerical patterns in Revelation (see 7:4–8) invite us to take these numbers symbolically. Here the numbers are symbolic for God’s people, reminding us who will live there (7:4–8).

To what extent is the divinely bestowed light of the end-time Jerusalem (21:23–24; 22:5) intended to be taken literally? Isaiah’s declarations of end-time light must be read alongside his statement that celestial lights will increase (Isa. 30:26; cf. also 1 En. 91:16). Some texts also speak of Zion’s “light” figuratively (2 Bar. 10:12). In any case, it is a portrait of a future without the sort of hardships imposed by darkness (cf. John 9:4; 11:10).

We should refuse to read any of the images in isolation from the others in the same context. Thus, for example, one can interpret the lack of night (21:25) as a lack of rest for the weary or (for those reading this text during a summer heat wave) the danger of sunburn from intense exposure.86 But the conjunction of positive images invites us to understand each one positively, as pieces of an entire portrait of a future paradise. Sunburn will be impossible, for there will be no sun (21:23) or heat (7:16), again reading the absence only of what these stood for negatively. According to today’s laws of physics, of course, life without the sun is impossible. A literal lack of heat reduces the temperature to absolute zero; but the point again is not a pedantic literalism, but the paradise painted by accumulated positive images.

The nations. The image of the conversion of the nations (21:24) is a problematic one if pressed on a literal level against other images in Revelation.87 One possibility is that God creates new peoples for his saints to rule, but because this is not stated, commentators have rarely proposed it. The narrative as it stands leaves a major gap. The unconverted appear to be destroyed in 19:15, 18, 21, and their survivors appear to be deceived and destroyed in 20:8–9. But here their survivors are converted, yet appear distinct from God’s people who live in the new Jerusalem (also distinct from the wicked in 21:27). The “kings of the whole world” served the powers of the Antichrist (16:14; cf. 17:2, 18; 18:3, 9; 19:19), so some argue that after they die (19:19–21; 20:15), they are raised and reconciled, implying that everyone will ultimately be saved.88

But this view “reads far too much theology into incidental references which are more easily explained in another way.”89 The narrative of Revelation simply does not allow these same kings to be reconciled when they are raised; they are instead banished to the second death (20:14–15), to suffer forever (14:11; 19:3). This rules out universalism, but leaves a continuing problem: Where in the text do we find the survivors of the final war? We probably should seek the solution on the level of interpretive principles. As we have pointed out, even Isaiah presents competing images of the end time too complex to be resolved simply by attributing some to the Millennium and others to the eternal future (the nations destroyed, converted, and subjugated). This is problematic to us, however, because most of us remain unfamiliar with the nature of prophetic and apocalyptic images, which can make a graphic point without being pressed literally in ways that contradict other images in the same book. God’s future glory resolves his purposes for all peoples without actually implying that every person will be converted.

Do these competing visions suggest divergent potentials for the future, that the nations may be either converted or destroyed, depending on the faithfulness of Christ’s church? More likely, they serve the same function as the two forms of the innumerable multitude, some worshiping Christ and some worshiping the beast. Although the peoples of the world join the world system in crushing God’s people, many representatives from these peoples will instead join God’s people. Note that even in this vision, no one enters the city without being in the Lamb’s book of life; the vision does not embrace universalism (21:27). The image of the nations bringing glory into Jerusalem also emphasizes the glory of new Jerusalem: if you persevere, you will be vindicated (e.g., Isa. 61:9; 62:2; Mal. 3:12). In the end, even those who slandered you will bow before you and acknowledge that you were right (Rev. 3:9).

Eden. Jewish teachers circulated various legends about Eden, most of which took it literally. Some traditions, for example, mentioned many trees in Eden, all of which were holy (Jub. 3:12). Many believed that the garden still existed somewhere.90 Some Jewish visionaries even claimed to have seen the water of life (1 Enoch 17:4) in mythic regions near the river of fire (1 Enoch 17:5, modeled after a Greek mythical river of fire), or the garden of Eden itself (Apoc. Abr. 21:6). Meanwhile, some Diaspora Jews allegorized Eden, for example claiming that it was a garden of heavenly virtues.91 Even Palestinian Jews occasionally adapted such language figuratively (1 Enoch 39:5); some spoke of rivers of joy and love flowing from God’s throne (2 Enoch 22B:7; for figurative uses of tree of life imagery see comment on 2:7). But even when Eden is employed figuratively, it is often by Jewish writers who accepted a literal Eden as well.

Yet if we press literally the image of the tree-bordered river down the middle of the street (22:2), we may envision today a divided highway with a straight river and vegetation down the middle. But most likely this vision should not be pressed literally: Is one tree literally on both sides of the river, extending the entire length of the thoroughfare?92 God could certainly create a tree whose roots beneath and beside the river network what appears to be fruitful vegetation along the length of the river. But to demand that he do so misses the point of the imagery.

Rivers flowing from the throne probably reflect the same image implied in John 7:37–39, where the water is the Holy Spirit.93 Jerusalem had no literal river through it (cf. Isa. 7:3); Old Testament passages that speak of such a river (Ps. 46:4; cf. Ezek. 47) may therefore be using the river as “a symbol of God’s presence.”94 John reapplies the familiar images of paradise to promise us the fulfillment of our greatest longing, for God’s own presence. If we press diverse biblical images of the future paradise too literally, they will end up contradicting one another!95

Hopes of paradise are shared among various cultures. Many traditional African religions, for example, envision as the happy life God’s presence among the people, providing all their earthly needs, though they do not often speak of a future restoration of the primeval paradise.96 But all cultures’ hopes for paradise are not the same, in contrast to one Star Trek film that naively depicted an illusory Eden that was also the yearning of Vulcans and all other civilizations. Even if we dismiss the polygamous fantasies of Mormons and Muslims, the annihilation of self in a Buddhist nirvana, or the deification of New Age aspirations, and focus instead on the closest parallels for the Christian vision in Jewish apocalyptic, the Christian paradise exhibits a distinctively Christian angle. Believers will worship God and the Lamb forever; paradise is not paradise without our Redeemer, the Lamb of God (22:3–4).

Our dependence on Christ appears even in the final era, when he remains not only our King but God’s Lamb, our Intercessor, the Source with the Father of our living water.97 Nor was one dose enough; a tree for healing suggests that God’s people will continue to depend on Christ through all eternity. The picture of the end is not meant to be comprehensive, but to comprise an invitation: Let the one who wills come and taste God’s wondrous paradise, of which this book has afforded a powerful visual sample (22:17). Anyone who chooses to miss out on this promise does so at his or her own loss (22:14–15).

Contemporary Significance

PRINCIPLES FOR TODAY. This passage provides many principles relevant for our lives today. (1) New Jerusalem is God’s creation (21:2: “from God”); all we can do is prepare our adornment with righteous acts (19:8; 21:2). Often even our Christian subculture invites competition with other Christians, denominations, ministers, and so forth. I find myself tempted at times to blend into some particular denomination’s or movement’s values to have a spiritual home; but God demands faithfulness above all, and those of us who achieve the most status in our Christian subcultures may actually have the least in the world to come (Mark 9:37; Luke 9:48). We may adorn ourselves for the new Jerusalem, but it is ours only by the grace of our heavenly Father’s love for us.

(2) The time for adorning ourselves with “righteous acts” (19:8) is now. Even though Revelation emphasizes the new Jerusalem as a future city, it is being built in the present. If the character of Babylon is evident in the world around us, the glory of God’s presence among us should be revealed at least in the way we live. In John’s theology, God’s glory is revealed in us through how we treat one another (John 13:34–35; 17:22–23; 1 John 4:12). In New Testament theology, though hope directs our attention toward the future, it also has implications for how we live in the present (Rom. 12:12; Col. 1:4–5; Titus 2:12–13; 1 John 3:3). The most faithful of John’s audience (esp. in Smyrna and Philadelphia) would have seen themselves as a persecuted minority; but Revelation also summons them to see themselves as heirs of the future. If we see ourselves according to the destiny to which God has called us, we will act accordingly.

(3) The promise that sorrows and troubles will pass is helpful in grief counseling, at funerals, but also in facing the obstacles of life; each reader and expositor probably can think of numerous specific applications for his or her own situations.

(4) God’s perfect dwelling will be with us; we will enjoy the intimacy of the Most Holy Place with him forever. If that is truly the future we yearn for, then we should enjoy the intimacy now available with him in prayer.98 That the new Jerusalem itself is a temple city promises us a continual experience of worship; as its citizens, we should begin to enjoy that worship now. Scripture indicates that we are already God’s temple and dwelling place (1 Cor. 3:16–17; 2 Cor. 6:16; Eph. 2:21–22); his presence is what sustains us in the face of our trials (Jer. 1:8; Acts 18:10; Heb. 13:5–6). In the future we will continue to be his dwelling for worship, except without the current distractions.

(5) The passage is full of contrasts between Babylon and the new Jerusalem. When I preach from here, I focus on how much greater is God’s city than what this world offers, to remind us to live for God’s promises and not for present satisfaction.

God’s incredible love. John borrows the image of the new Jerusalem as Christ’s bride from earlier sources (ultimately Israel as God’s bride in the Hebrew Bible). But he probably intends to convey the same image of God’s intimacy and love for his people implied in those earlier sources. One time in my life when I felt deeply in love, the force of this passage struck me: No matter how much I might love, my love was only a shadow of Christ’s love for us. Perhaps any symbol communicates only imperfectly the depth of Jesus’ love for us, but our best approximations of unselfish love, such as a strong marriage, can provide us some beginning sense of it. The ultimate portrait of God’s love for us is Jesus’ dying for us on the cross while we were yet his enemies (Rom. 5:6–10). Paul tells us that the Spirit comes into our hearts, pointing to that cross, and declaring, “See, I love you! I love you! I love you!” (cf. Rom. 5:5).

To the overworked pastor who feels unappreciated, to the wounded wife abandoned by her husband, to the shy child teased by peers for her weight or his pimples, to any of us in our brokenness, the greatest comfort is God’s love. We can afford to be vulnerable with him concerning our pain, because we know he shares our pain with us. When the hardships seem too great to bear—as they must have seemed to many of the first Christians who heard Revelation read to them—we must remember that his love gives us a promise of fulfillment ahead. And if the hardships tempt us to doubt his present love and our future hope, we only need look back to the cross, where God in the flesh shared our pain with us and in our stead.

True wealth. We also recognize that the standard of wealth for which people strive in this world will be a common substance by the standards of the coming world (21:18, 21). The truest wealth is the glory of the Lamb (21:11, 23–26; 22:5). For which world’s wealth will we devote our own labors (3:17–18)?99 We need no worldly wealth, no physical temple, not even created lights like sun or moon (21:22–26); God is the direct source of all. Even water flows from his throne (22:1), nourishing also the tree whose fruit brings life (22:2). To practice for the future, we should learn to depend on him now.

Following Christ or the world’s values. The vice list (21:8, 27) warns that we cannot truly follow Christ, yet deny him in how we live; fear and unbelief dare not dissuade us from martyrdom, so we need to strengthen Christian faith now before the test comes. We dare not compromise with the world’s values or betray or slander fellow Christians before the world or indulge false prophets of compromise in the church.

The lists of sins provide the severest possible warnings against such offenses (21:8, 27). This includes sexual immorality and magic arts. I came home and wept when I first encountered ministers who believed that sexual immorality was irresistible or feared to preach against it lest they offend their congregations. Given the warning here, one wonders how a shepherd can be faithful to the call and not address such matters of spiritual life and death to whatever extent necessary.100 Many cultures distinguish between “black magic” and “white magic,” but Revelation offers no such distinction because all magical activity is rooted in the demonic (9:20–21; 21:8; 22:15). Today this (and related biblical prohibitions of divination) include such sources as the “psychic hotlines”; in at least some church circles where I have ministered, more professing Christians were involved in such practices than one would have guessed.

Communicating eternal judgment and eternal bliss. America’s culture of tolerance has made talk of eternal judgment unfashionable, but we must find relevant ways to communicate that image at the appropriate time.101 “Four sections in the latter part of John’s prophecy end on the same note of stern warning (20:15; 21:8, 27; 22:15).”102 The only alternative to damnation in this passage is “overcoming” (21:7–8); chapters 2–3 reveal that each church faces different tests, but all are called to overcome.

The use of numbers 12,000 and 144 (21:16–17) emphasize, as we have noted, that the new Jerusalem is a city prepared for God’s servants (7:4–8). The magnificent dimensions also emphasize that God’s tiny remnant in this age (cf. 7:4; 11:1–2) have a glorious future, higher than the tower of Babel could have been and more splendid than Babylon in this age.

That the tree is for “the healing of the nations” (22:2) does not indicate that all people who have ever lived with be saved, a proposal that blatantly contradicts the theology of Revelation.103 Rather, it reminds us that representatives of all peoples will follow the Lamb in this age and constitute the nations in their ideal character in the world to come (21:24), bringing the gifts of all cultures to worship Jesus (see comment on 7:9). Indeed, the single tree of life in 22:2 (in contrast to Ezekiel’s trees) and single street in 21:21 and 22:2 may point to the fact that God has provided only one source of life and one “way” into the new Jerusalem (cf. John 14:6). To be sure, that street’s singleness refers to the main street and is a figure of speech (11:8), as may be the tree; but taken together with Revelation’s other Christocentric images, they emphasize the necessity of being in the Lamb’s book of life, of being the Lamb’s followers (14:4; 21:27).

Original Meaning

Materials and Dimensions of the New Jerusalem (21:9–21)

ROMAN RHETORICIANS OFTEN provided stirring descriptions of cities that utilized their best skills at encomium, or praising their subject.29 They tried to give descriptions so vivid that hearers could virtually “see” what they were describing (Theon, Progymn. 7.53–55). The Old Testament contained stirring descriptions of Jerusalem, the city of God (Ps. 48), and the end-time city (Isa. 2:2–3). Ezekiel provided a verbal design for the new Jerusalem and especially the temple mount in Ezekiel 40–48. Subsequent Jewish texts developed this picture further,30 some identifying the new Jerusalem with paradise (4 Ezra 8:52).

Yet such descriptions are often meant to stir appreciation for God’s faithfulness rather than emphasize literal details; thus, for example, one description of end-time Jerusalem (Tobit 13:9–17), including streets paved with precious stones, is part of Tobit’s praise to God (13:1–18).31 Isaiah, who predicted crystal gates and walls of precious stones (Isa. 54:11–12), also speaks of walls of salvation and gates of praise (60:18). By contrast, Zechariah predicts Jerusalem will need no walls because God himself will be a wall of fire around her (Zech. 2:4–5). However else one reads the details of this city, this new Jerusalem “shone with the glory of God” (Rev. 21:11), as the rest of the description illustrates (21:23).

The angel invites John to see the bride, Jerusalem, and carries him away “in the Spirit” (12:9–10, presumably in the visionary state)—just as in 17:1–3, where he was taken to view the prostitute Babylon. Babylon was in the desert; Jerusalem descends from heaven. That John views the descent of the heavenly Jerusalem from a mountain may recall apocalyptic traditions about visionary mountains (e.g., 1 Enoch 17:2), or it may represent an ideal location for viewing this sight (Ezek. 40:2; cf. Matt. 4:8). But the mountain itself may point to the end-time Mount Zion (Rev. 14:1; cf. Isa. 2:2–3), thus contrasting with the seven mountains on which Babylon sits (Rev. 17:9).32

John saw a glorious city in his vision. Some sources expected the end-time Zion to shine with glory (4 Ezra 10:25–27). After its destruction, Josephus (War 5.208–10) reminisced about the wealth of the first-century Jerusalem temple, whose gates were adorned with gold and silver. But God had promised earlier exiles the glory of a future temple greater than any they had seen (Hag. 2:9). The older Jewish Christians among John’s audience, who remembered the splendor of the temple, would be touched by a description of new Jerusalem’s glorious future, just as their Jewish contemporaries commented on its glorious future.33

That names were written on the gates and foundation stones (21:12–14) would not have struck ancient hearers as unusual; wealthy supporters who funded city building projects often had their names inscribed on them.34 Yet the benefactors named on the new Jerusalem were not wealthy supporters, but those whose lives provided foundations for God’s people. The presence of both the twelve tribes and the twelve apostles emphasizes the link and continuity between ancient Israel and Christ’s church.

Some Jewish traditions spoke of twelve gates of heaven (1 En. 33–36, 72–82); the gates here in Revelation represent the twelve tribes of Israel (cf. Ezek. 48:31–34).35 John’s new Jerusalem resembles some other Jews’ vision of the new temple (Qumran’s Temple Scroll commemorates the twelve tribes’ names on twelve gates of the temple), except that earlier in his book he incorporated all believers in Jesus into the heritage of these tribes (Rev. 7:4–9). Many Roman towns apparently had three gates providing entrance on one side, but new Jerusalem provides such access on all sides, implying that it welcomes people from all directions.36

In biblical tradition twelve stones pointed to the twelve tribes (Josh. 4:3–9); in the high priest’s breastplate in Exodus 28:17–21 they are specifically inscribed with the names of the tribes.37 Here, however, the foundation stones refer to the twelve apostles of the Lamb, in keeping with the Christian image of the new temple’s true foundations (Eph. 2:20; Heb. 11:10; 1 Peter 2:5).38 Although Jesus is our ultimate foundation (1 Cor. 3:11), early Christian tradition already emphasized that the church was built on the foundation of apostles and prophets who revealed Jesus’ message.

The measuring rod (21:15) is an important stage device that allows John to recognize the supernatural enormity of the city (21:16).39 It recalls the measuring of Jerusalem (Zech. 2:1–2) or the temple (Ezek. 40–41) in the Hebrew Bible and reminds John’s oppressed audience that the persecuted remnant whose measuring began in Revelation 11:1–2 is the prototype for the glorious future city. Ezekiel’s new Jerusalem was 18,000 cubits all around; John’s is nearly two thousand times larger.40 The symbolic numbers portray this city as the dwelling of God’s people: 12,000 (stadia) and 144 (cubits; 21:16–17) both recall the number of God’s servants (7:4–8). The use of a square number like 144 may also offer a vivid contrast with the triangular number 666 (13:18), like the foundation of a foursquare city versus that of a pyramid.

The square shape of the city (21:16) fits some ancient building plans.41 Walls in Syria-Palestine were generally irregular because of “the uneven topography,” in contrast to more level land in Egypt and Babylonia;42 the new Jerusalem differs in this way from the old Jerusalem. Ancient Israelite towns usually grew randomly, but Greek and Roman cities were carefully planned around the central agora with public works around it.43 Ezekiel also reports that the new Jerusalem will be laid out as a square, with three gates for three tribes of Israel on each of the four sides of the city (Ezek. 48:16, 31–35).44

But while this background plays an important part, the new Jerusalem is not merely square; it is cubic, despite the utter incongruity with all human imagination of a city 1,500 miles high! Thus, most of all the shape recalls the Most Holy Place (1 Kings 6:20); not only will God live with his people in Jerusalem (Rev. 21:3), not only will the entire city be like a temple, but it will be like the Most Holy Place. It is thus not surprising that the city does not need a temple other than the Lord himself (21:22). Believers will experience God’s presence in its full intensity, as never before! If the church is a temple already (Eph. 2:18–22), our future experience is like the holiest part of the temple, inviting continual worship and enjoyment of God’s presence.

The dimensions of the city are supernatural (21:15–16), contrasting starkly with the pretensions of the doomed “great city,” Babylon (18:10, 16, 18–21).45 Technically, a wall seventy-two yards (sixty-five meters) high or even thick (21:16)46 would prove utterly inadequate to protect a city 1,500 miles high (21:16), but the purpose of the numbers is not literal so much as to emphasize the city’s future glory and to suggest that, when history is complete, God’s remnant through the ages will not prove as small as it now appears to persecuted churches of John’s generation. The height is the most dramatic feature (perhaps even more for modern readers, who recognize that even at less than six miles above sea level, at the top of Mount Everest, it is already difficult to breathe). What humanity could not accomplish in Babel—a city to the heavens (Gen. 11:4)—God grants as an overwhelming gift.

Why does Jerusalem need a wall in the eternal era of peace? Certainly the purpose is not to keep anyone out, since no one will ever close its gates (21:25). Nor is the description of the walls perfectly literal (see comments on 144 cubits, above [21:18]). But ancient cities of substantial size always had walls, so one is needed in the description of the greatest of cities.47 Further, if there were no walls, there would be no description of the splendid gates! Gates provided cities in Asia Minor and elsewhere the best opportunities to flaunt “imperial triumphal architecture”;48 without these gates, Revelation would miss an opportunity to reapply biblical symbolism in its specifically Christocentric way.

That angelic measurements are also human (21:17) must mean normal angels, not those of extraordinary size as in 10:2.49 The human measurement here explicitly recalls Ezek. 40:5, but Bauckham argues that it simultaneously offers a vivid contrast to Revelation 13:18: the number of a human who is a beast versus the measurements of a human that are also angelic (21:17). The beast’s kingdom debases humanity to a beastly level, whereas the new Jerusalem raises it to an angelic level.50

That the walls are of jasper (21:18; cf. 21:11) means that they reflect God’s glory (4:3), perhaps the most important feature of the city (21:19, 23; cf. Zech. 2:5); Isaiah had promised walls of precious stones (Isa. 54:12). This jasper was “clear as crystal” (Rev. 21:11), like the heavenly waters (4:6; 22:1), to allow the glory of God to shine through. That the city is of gold may reflect images from the original paradise (Gen. 2:11–12) but more likely reflects the commonness of what is now regarded as wealth (cf. Rev. 3:18), a stark contrast with the mere gold decorations of “wealthy” Babylon (17:4; 18:12, 16). That the gold is like glass matches no refining known to humanity, and in antiquity even glass was rarely fully “clear”; such clarity suggests again God’s glory (4:6; 15:2; cf. Ex. 24:10; Ezek. 1:22).51

The “precious stones” of the foundations of the city (21:19–20, developing 21:14) recall God’s promise in Isaiah 54:11–12, a promise developed in later Jewish traditions (e.g., Tobit 13:16).52 Some rabbis predicted precious stones and pearls thirty by thirty cubits for Jerusalem’s gates (b. B.B. 75a). Closer to Revelation’s images, a Qumran commentary on Isaiah 54:11–12 applied its statements about precious stones figuratively to the remnant of Israel and its leaders.53 That John repeats his mention of adornment in Revelation 21:19 (NIV, “decorated”) from 21:2 (NIV, “beautifully dressed,” the same Greek word) suggests that this is a description of new Jerusalem’s bridal garments, a stark contrast with Babylon’s prostitution apparel (17:4).

John then lists the stones—derived from the priest’s breastplate (Ex. 28:17–20) and from Tyre’s wealthy decorations (Ezek. 28:16), omitting some of each to arrive at twelve but including nine stones that appear in both lists. Not only is this a priestly city (suggested by the allusion to the high priest’s breastplate, cf. Rev. 1:6), but the city of economic sufficiency and justice contrasts sharply with Tyre, an economic exploiter that provided the model for Babylon in Revelation 18. Jerusalem’s true clothing puts to shame the ostentation of Babylon (17:4).54

Isaiah had promised gates of crystal (Isa. 54:12); the gates of pearls here (Rev. 21:21) again contrast sharply with the gaudy but inferior pearl decorations of Babylon (17:4; 18:12, 16). Later Jewish tradition emphasized that angels in the sea bottom were fashioning Isaiah’s pearls during the present era (Pes. Rab Kah. 18:5; Pes. Rab. 32:3/4). An expensive pearl might be worth more than other possessions (Matt. 13:45–46).55

Revelation’s comment on the “great street” (21:21) is also significant. Those who remembered the first Jerusalem (destroyed probably over two decades earlier) might remember its major north-south and east-west streets (from ten to thirteen meters wide); but the vision of the new Jerusalem is far greater.56 After describing new Jerusalem’s adornment with precious stones, Tobit declares that its streets will be paved with beryl (Tobit 13:16; cf. Rev. 21:20) and will offer praise to God (Tobit 13:17). Although new Jerusalem has twelve gates, hence undoubtedly numerous streets, Revelation speaks of a single “street” (Rev. 21:21). Probably this simply refers to the primary thoroughfare (see 11:8; 22:2; Judg. 19:15–20; Est. 6:9–11).57