New Jerusalem is the Bride, who has been prepared and adorned for her Husband, Christ (Revelation 21:2). John’s vision in Revelation 21 is in contrast with his vision of the Great Whore, who “was arrayed in purple and scarlet-color, and decked with gold and precious stones and pearls” (Revelation 17:4). The Great Whore, of course, is the former Jerusalem, which represents the Lord’s former, unfaithful wife (cp. Jeremiah 3:8, 20).
Paul also makes a contrast between Mount Sinai and the Heavenly Jerusalem. Notice:
For you have not come to the mountain that might be touched and that burned with fire, nor to blackness and darkness and tempest, and the sound of a trumpet, and the voice of words (which voice they who heard begged that a word should not be spoken to them anymore, for they could not endure the thing commanded, “And if so much as a beast should touch the mountain, it shall be stoned or thrust through with a dart,” and so fearful was the sight that Moses said, I exceedingly fear and quake). But you have come to Mount Zion and to the city of the living God, the heavenly Jerusalem, and to an innumerable company of angels, (Hebrews 12:18-22 MKJV)
Paul is contrasting two covenants in this passage of Scripture. He points, first, to Mount Sinai, which he earlier claimed was an allegory for the Jerusalem of his own day. Then he mentions Mount Zion in contrast, which he says is “the city of the living God, the heavenly Jerusalem.” Paul prophesied that the Jerusalem of his day would be destroyed, in that it was not a “continuing city” (Hebrews 13:14). Rather, he looked for one to come, which in the context of Revelation 21 is the New Jerusalem coming out of heaven from God. But, was Paul anticipating the New Jerusalem to come out of heaven from God some 2000 years (and counting) later? I don’t think so.
Peter spoke of the new heavens and the new earth when the first had burned up and passed away (2Peter 3:12-13). Both Peter and Paul had been looking for the new heaven and the new earth to come in their expected lifetimes. Of course they were told they would die before the event transpired, but they believed had they lived, they would have seen Jesus’ promise fulfilled (2Peter 3:4, 13). Peter’s source for the new heavens and the new earth is Isaiah 65. There, the Lord tells Isaiah he had stretched his arms out to a rebellious people who wouldn’t listen, but he was found and heard by those who never sought him (Isaiah 65:1-2). He goes on to mention all their wickedness (Isaiah 65:3-7), saying they really sacrificed to the gods they called “Fortune” (Luck) and Fate (Isaiah 65:11), so the Lord would deliver the rebellious people to the sword (Isaiah 65:12), but he would save his servants. At that time he would bring in new heavens and a new earth, and he would make Jerusalem a rejoicing and his people a joy (Isaiah 65:17-18).
Just as Peter drew upon Isaiah to represent the annulling of the Old Covenant and the establishment of the New Covenant (2Peter 3:12-13; Isaiah 65:17), which would occur when an army would destroy the rebellious people (Isaiah 65:12), so Paul claimed Jerusalem wasn’t a “continuing city” and he looked for another to come (Hebrews 13:14). The Old Covenant (Mount Sinai – Hebrews 12:18) would end, and the New Covenant (Mount Zion – Hebrews 12:22) would be established. It seems clear, therefore, that the Apocalypse’s new heaven and new earth (Revelation 21:1) is the same as Peter’s in 2Peter 3:12-13, both of which seems to be drawn from Isaiah 65:17. Moreover, Paul’s Heavenly Jerusalem (Hebrews 12:22) must also be the same as the New Jerusalem of Revelation 21:2, to which Paul says his readers had drawn near. It is difficult to understand how these things could point to an event some 2000 years (and counting) in the future. Both Peter and Paul expected the New Jerusalem, the Heavenly Jerusalem to come in their expected lifetimes. I know of no good reason to reject their eschatology in favor of that of so many modern scholars.
Smoodock's Blog 