,

No Night and Beholding the Face of God

In New Jerusalem believers will see the face of God, Jesus, who is seated upon the throne (Revelation 22:3-4), but not so the wicked. Those who were judged to be criminals were not permitted to look at the face of the king (Esther 7:8), and such a custom permeated the worldview of the ancients (cp.…

In New Jerusalem believers will see the face of God, Jesus, who is seated upon the throne (Revelation 22:3-4), but not so the wicked. Those who were judged to be criminals were not permitted to look at the face of the king (Esther 7:8), and such a custom permeated the worldview of the ancients (cp. Exodus 33:20; Judges 6:22-23; 13:22; Isaiah 6:5) Therefore, the wicked are afraid and want to hide from the Lord, who sits upon the throne (Revelation 6:16; cp Genesis 3:8). As was done at the inauguration of the Old Covenant (Exodus 20:18-19), so it was done at the inauguration of the New Covenant (Revelation 20:11). Nevertheless, the elect do see the Lord (Matthew 5:8). We behold him with our unveiled faces and are changed into his image (2Corinthians 3:18; cp. 1John 3:1-2), which, after all, has been the purpose of the Lord from the very beginning (Genesis 1:26-27).

John also says that the name of the Lord will be in our foreheads (cp. Revelation 3:12; 7:3; 14:1), but what does this mean? First of all, we need to keep in mind that those who identified with the beast received a mark (G5480 – charagma) in their foreheads. The Greek word has to do with a carving, or like a brand burned into the hide of horses.[1] In other words it has more to do with ownership, than it has to do with a literal engraving. For example, those who had the mark of the beast in their foreheads didn’t have a literal mark on their foreheads, but they did serve the beast, worship it and often slew those who refused to receive the beast’s mark (Revelation 13:15-17). So, in the context of having the name of the Lord written in the foreheads of those that are his (Revelation 22:4), they are his servants (Revelation 22:3). They identify with the Lord, not the world. They are his, not the world’s.

Jesus claimed one cannot have two masters (Luke 16:13), meaning one cannot serve God and mammon, but what is mammon? In an earlier study[2] I concluded that mammon was a man’s unrighteous life (i.e. his natural life). It is all the wealth that he possesses, and he must use it to glorify God. In other words, one cannot serve the lusts of this life and God at the same time. One must choose. So, having the mark or the name of the Lord in our foreheads means we are his, not the world’s, and we serve him, not ourselves or the world.

Notice that the text says next: “there shall be no night there” (Revelation 22:5), and that neither natural light or the light produced by man was needed. What does this mean? Does it really men that the Lord recreates the universe without a sun, moon or stars? No, of course not! The text is speaking spiritually when it says there would be no night in the New Jerusalem. Spiritual darkness already existed during Jesus’ day, and that while the physical sun was shining:

And this is the condemnation, that the Light has come into the world, and men loved darkness rather than the Light, because their deeds were evil. For everyone who does evil hates the Light, and does not come to the Light, lest his deeds should be exposed. But he who practices truth comes to the Light so that his works may be revealed, that they exist, having been worked in God. (John 3:19-21)

The problem with reading the Apocalypse is that many folks like to take things literally. Yet, which one of us would take one of Jesus’ parables literally? For example, did a literal householder plant a literal vineyard and lease it out to literal tenants, while he went away to a literal country far away (Matthew 21:33)? Of course not! But the chief priests and Pharisees knew Jesus spoke of them, and they wanted to arrest him (Matthew 21:45-46). In the same manner, neither should the Apocalypse be taken literally, but should, rather, be interpreted with Scripture elsewhere that speaks of similar things. In the context of the no night (Revelation 22:5) or no darkness (John 3:19-21), the text is speaking about a spiritual resurrection. Paul spoke of this in Ephesians. We were all once dead (there’s the darkness / night) and walked according to the course of this world (but the death isn’t physical death, so neither would the darkness or night be physical / literal – Ephesians 2:1-3). Nevertheless, it pleased God to raise us up from the dead (no night / brought into the Light), which is a spiritual resurrection (Ephesians 2:4-6), and this act points to our being part of the new creation, which means we have been saved by the blood of Christ, not our own works (Ephesians 2:7-10)

The text concludes that believers reign forever and ever. Nevertheless, as Jesus told the Apostles, this doesn’t constitute rulership of people’s lives (Matthew 20:25-26). In other words, to reign means to serve. When Jesus told the Apostles they would reign upon twelve thrones over Israel, he wasn’t speaking of their having dominion over them. Rather, he spoke of the Gospel. Israel and all the world would be judged by what the Apostles taught, which is written in the Gospel narratives. Similarly, all of us, who embrace and teach the Gospel, guide the rule of God over those who are yet in rebellion, pleading with them to embrace the Gospel. It is in this manner that we reign, because our words (i.e. the Gospel we preach) either allows folks into New Jerusalem or keeps folks out (i.e. those who disbelieve the Gospel and remain in rebellion).

__________________________________________

[1] See Thayer’s Greek Lexicon.

[2] See my studies: What Does Jesus Mean by Mammon? and Jesus’ Command to Make Friends.

2 responses to “No Night and Beholding the Face of God”

  1. Even up to this day, many church congregations insist upon the ‘literal interpretation of the Bible”, and consider anything else apostasy. Yet as I mature (read get old) and continue my studies, including your insights, clearly the scriptures cannot be interpreted literally. It isn’t a fundamental versus liberal issue, its just the way to understand the scriptures. Thanks for your help in my journey!

  2. I’m glad to be of help. Lord bless you, and thanks for your encouraging comment.