The following is what John Owen and John Lightfoot were looking at when they interpreted “heaven and earth” in NT eschatological contexts as the passing of the old covenant system and the arrival of the new in AD 70. They were using not only a “grammatical hermeneutic” but a “historical” hermeneutic which many today neglect. We must use language the way the authors did in their day (exegesis), not in the way we do in our day (leads to eisegesis) or trying to shoehorn these passages into a hyper-creedal “end of world history” philosophy and tradition.
John Owen’s eschatology provides a foundational example of this historical-covenantal approach. Owen, a leading Puritan theologian, interpreted prophetic “heavens and earth” language symbolically, representing the civil and religious state of men rather than literal cosmic events. In his commentary on Hebrews and sermons on eschatological passages, Owen viewed the destruction of Jerusalem and the temple in AD 70 as the fulfillment of de-creation imagery, such as in Matthew 24 and 2 Peter 3. He emphasized that when Scripture describes the end of a state or government, it uses apocalyptic language akin to the end of the world—e.g., Isaiah 34:4-5 on Edom’s destruction or Jesus’ Olivet Discourse predicting Jerusalem’s fall. For Owen, the “passing away” of heaven and earth signified the spiritual end of the Old Covenant age in AD 70, a covenantal shift where Christ came spiritually to judge and redeem, establishing the eternal New Covenant kingdom.
Full Preterism has simply built upon what Owen and Lightfoot began. This imminence of Matthew 24 and covenantal heavens and earths tied events like the rapture (1 Thess. 4:15-17) and resurrection in Revelation 20-22 to AD 70 as Paul and John are also using apocalyptic language and spiritual transformations—drawing from Old Covenant antitypes like Exodus 19-20 and Hebrews 12:18-22—without physical removal or a future cosmic dissolution. I simply use a synthesis of classic Amillennialism (one parousia at the end of the age) and Partial Preterism (AD 70 fulfillment at the end of the old covenant age) to organically teach all NT eschatological prophecies—Second Coming, judgment, resurrection, new creation (Rev. 21)—were spiritually fulfilled in AD 70, ending the Old Covenant in “that generation” with signs (e.g., falling stars as judgment on Israel) rather than being a description of the end of world history.
This historical-covenantal hermeneutic did not arise in a vacuum. Isaiah repeatedly employs creation language (“heavens and earth,” “create,” “plant,” “foundations”) as redemptive-historical metaphor for covenant formation, covenant dissolution, and covenant renewal. This prophetic idiom forms the background for how Jesus, Paul, Peter, and John speak of “the end,” “passing away,” “new creation,” “restoration,” and divine “repayment.” When the New Testament employs this language in eschatological contexts, it is drawing from Isaiah’s covenantal use of creation imagery rather than offering a scientific prediction about the material universe.
The Jewish Targums are therefore of immense value. Though written down in the second century, they preserve earlier interpretive traditions and exegetical moves that were already circulating in the Second Temple world. When the Targums consistently interpret Isaiah’s creation language covenantally rather than cosmologically, they confirm that such readings were not novel or reactionary, but firmly rooted in Jewish modes of interpretation proximate to the time of Christ and the New Testament authors.
The interpretive move of Targum Jonathan becomes immediately clear when one compares the Hebrew text of Isaiah 51:16 with the Targum’s rendering.
The Jewish Targums of “Heaven and Earth” in Isaiah 51:15–16
Hebrew Text (MT)
“I have put my words in your mouth and covered you in the shadow of my hand, to plant the heavens and to lay the foundations of the earth, and to say to Zion, ‘You are my people.’”
The MT presents cosmic-creation terminology—“plant the heavens,” “lay the foundations of the earth”—in connection with the covenantal declaration “You are my people.”
Targum Jonathan
Standard scholarly editions translate the Targum as follows:
“I have put my words in your mouth, and in the shadow of my might I have protected you, to raise up the people and to build the land, and to say to Zion, ‘You are my people.’”[1]
The Targumist removes the cosmological imagery entirely and replaces it with the explicitly covenantal and political language:
- “to raise up the people”
- “to build/renew the land”
This is the interpretive “signal” that the Targum understands the “heavens and earth” of Isaiah 51:16 not literally but symbolically as the creation or reconstitution of Israel’s covenantal world-order.
Why the Targum Interprets It This Way
- The Targum’s Substitution Indicates a Covenant Interpretation
As Bruce Chilton notes in his introduction to The Isaiah Targum:
“The Targum interprets cosmic language in terms of Israel’s historical and covenantal experience.”[2]
Chilton explains that this is a consistent hermeneutical strategy: whenever Isaiah uses creation terminology, the Targum typically historicizes or covenantalizes it—transforming cosmic language into references to Israel’s reconstitution or restoration. Chilton further acknowledges (in his discussion of the Targum’s provenance and development) that although the Isaiah Targum is extant in later written form, its interpretive traditions develop in stages and preserve earlier Second Temple interpretive patterns that are relevant for New Testament study and the interpretive world of the first century.[3]
Thus, the Targum’s removal of “plant the heavens” and “lay the foundations of the earth” is itself the interpretive suggestion that “heaven and earth” = Israel’s covenant “world.”
- The Covenant Declaration “You Are My People” Already Frames v. 16 as Sinai-Reconstitution
Shalom Paul, commenting on Isaiah 51:16, explains:
“The terminology … alludes to God’s establishing Israel at Sinai and now to His restoring her.”[4]
Thus, even prior to the Targum’s interpretive move, the Hebrew text already associates the “planting of heavens and earth” with covenant formation (cf. Exod. 19:5–6; Deut. 32).
The Targum simply makes this implicit covenant imagery explicit by replacing cosmology with covenant-restoration vocabulary.
Therefore, historic Reformed exegesis recognized that Isaiah’s language of “planting the heavens” and “laying the foundations of the earth” (Isa. 51:15–16) is covenantal, not cosmological. Even The New Treasury of Scripture Knowledge explicitly explains that,
“The heavens. ‘Heaven’ and ‘earth’ are here put by symbolic language for a political universe. That is, that I might make those who were but scattered persons and slaves in Egypt before, a kingdom and polity, to be governed by their own laws and magistrates.”[5]
John Owen elaborates:
“The time when the work here mentioned—of planting the heavens, and laying the foundation of the earth—was performed by God, was when he ‘divided the sea’ (Isa. 51:15), and gave the law (Isa. 51:16), and said to Zion, ‘Thou art my people.’ This is when He took the children of Israel out of Egypt, and formed them in the wilderness into a church and state. Then He planted the heavens, and laid the foundation of the earth:—made the new world; that is, brought forth order, and government, and beauty, from the confusion wherein before they were.”[6]
John Lightfoot stands within this same historical-covenantal hermeneutic, interpreting prophetic “heaven and earth” language as describing the formation and dissolution of Israel’s covenantal system rather than the physical cosmos. These interpretations demonstrate that first-rate Reformed theologians understood Isaiah 51 as describing the creation of Israel as a covenantal heavens and earth, providing the hermeneutical foundation for the New Testament’s use of the same language to describe the passing of the old covenant order and the establishment of the new in Christ.
- Targum Jonathan Routinely Treats ‘New Heavens and New Earth’ as Covenant-Renewal
Isaiah 65:17 — New Heavens and New Earth
The Masoretic Text:
“For behold, I create new heavens and a new earth…”
Targum Jonathan renders:
“Behold, I am making new the people and renewing Jerusalem.”[7]
This shows that the Targum consistently equates “heavens and earth” with:
- God’s people
- their land
- their covenantal order
- the political/spiritual structure of Israel’s world
John Owen points out this is how Peter is also using Isaiah 65:17:
“Peter tells them, that, after the destruction and judgment that he speaks of, verse 13, ‘We, according to his promise, look for new heavens and a new earth,’ etc. They had this expectation. But what is that promise? where may we find it? Why, we have it in the very words and letter, Isa. Ixv. 17. Now, when shall this be that God will create these ‘new heavens and new earth, wherein dwelleth righteousness?’ Saith Peter, ‘It shall be after the coming of the Lord, after that judgment and destruction of ungodly men, who obey not the gospel, that I foretell.’ But now it is evident, from this place of Isaiah, with chap. lxvi., 21, 22, that this is a prophecy of gospel times ONLY; and that the planting of these new heavens is NOTHING BUT the creation of gospel ordinances, to endure forever. The same thing is so expressed, Heb. xii. 26-28.”[8]
Lightfoot likewise concludes the following on Isaiah 65:17 and Peter’s usage of it:
“2 Pet. iii. 13: ‘We, according to his promise, look for new heavens and a new earth.’ The heavens and the earth of the Jewish church and commonwealth must be all on fire, and the Mosaic elements burnt up… and you will not doubt that St. Peter speaks ONLY of the conflagration of Jerusalem, the destruction of the nation, and the abolishing the dispensation of Moses.”[9]
Immediately prior to this, Lightfoot had applied the same hermeneutic to Isaiah 65:17 itself:
“With the same reference it is, that the times and state of things immediately following the destruction of Jerusalem are called ‘a new creation,’ ‘new heavens,’ and ‘a new earth,’ Isa. lxv. 17… When should that be? Read the whole chapter; and you will find the Jews rejected and cut off; and from that time is that new creation of the evangelical world among the Gentiles.”[10]
Owen and Lightfoot emphasize that Isaiah 65 refers only to the passing of old covenant elements in AD 70—not the physical creation. Lightfoot, in his commentary, asserts that the de-creation and renewal in Isaiah 65 describe solely the conflagration of Jerusalem, the destruction of the nation, and the abolishing of the Mosaic dispensation, without any reference to a cosmic overhaul.¹¹ Owen echoes this in his eschatological writings, limiting the “new heavens and new earth” to the spiritual establishment of the gospel age post-AD 70, a covenantal transition where the old religious and civil order dissolves like a garment, but the material world endures.¹²
Let’s bring some clarity to the rest of Isaiah 65 since there is some confusion as to its meaning by commentators. Some amillennialists think this is poetic language describing the afterlife in the new creation. Some Premillennialists think this is a fictional type life in a literal 1,000 years future millennium. Postmillennial Partial Preterists are closer to the truth when they apply this language to today in the new covenant age, but men like Ken Gentry are inconsistent when it comes to applying it to 2 Peter 3 as we will address later in this article.
An Exegesis of Isaiah 65 (vv. 1–25)
(vss. 1–7): Here the old covenant “nation” of Israel would break Torah and be rebellious filling up her sin and as a result God would come in vengeance to “repay” her. This is what we see in Matthew 16:27–28 and chapters 23–24. This is also the fulfillment of the Jews sin of persecution and Christs coming in wrath to give them trouble in 1 Thessalonians 2:14–16 [Acts 17] and 2 Thessalonians 1–2 along with the “little while” coming vindication of the martyrs and imminent AD 70 “wrath” coming in Revelation 6 while also being connected to covenantal de-creation.
Isaiah opens with Yahweh stretching out His hands “all day long” to a rebellious people (v. 2). The description of Israel’s provocations (vss. 3–5) is not merely “personal sin,” but covenantal rebellion and defilement—an old covenant nation provoking God continually while claiming covenant privilege. The language of “filling up” sin coheres with Jesus’ indictment of Jerusalem’s leaders: “Fill up, then, the measure of your fathers” (Matt. 23:32). The judicial resolution is “repayment” (vss. 6–7), and this “repayment” is covenantal vengeance—God repaying the old covenant nation for covenant breach and covenant bloodguilt.
This is precisely the theme running through Jesus’ imminent-coming texts. In Matthew 16:27–28, the Son of Man was “about to come” in glory to “repay each person according to what he has done,” and He explicitly anchors that coming within the lifetime of the first-century audience (“some standing here”). In Matthew 23–24, this repayment is specified as the judgment falling upon Jerusalem “in this generation,” culminating in the temple’s desolation and the old covenant world’s collapse. Paul’s statements in 1 Thessalonians 2:14–16 speak of wrath coming upon the persecuting Judean leadership “to the uttermost,” and the persecution scenes in Acts 17 illustrate the same hostile, covenantal opposition to the gospel that Paul addresses. In 2 Thessalonians 1–2, Christ comes in judicial vengeance to repay Jewish persecutors and grant relief to afflicted saints. John likewise presents the martyrs’ vindication in Revelation 6 as imminent: they are told to rest “a little while,” until the measure of covenantal persecution is complete, and then the wrath comes. Isaiah 65:1–7 therefore functions as a prophetic foundation for the New Testament’s imminent covenantal vengeance themes culminating in AD 70.
(vss. 8–16): Although the old covenant nation would be “destined to the sword” of the Romans for persecuting remnant or Church, this would also be the time of salvation for the Church. While old covenant Israel would be starving during the war (AD 66–70) the Church would be feasting upon the Christ the Living Bread and Bread of Life.
Isaiah then introduces the remnant principle: a cluster may be judged, yet within it is “new wine” (v. 8). God will preserve “My servants” while the covenant-breakers are judged. This is the familiar prophetic pattern of simultaneous judgment and salvation—judgment upon the apostate corporate nation and salvation for the faithful remnant.
The contrast of vss. 13–14 is striking: “My servants shall eat… but you shall be hungry; My servants shall drink… but you shall be thirsty; My servants shall rejoice… but you shall be put to shame.” This is not simply a promise of general prosperity; it is covenantal reversal language. Old covenant Israel, under the covenant curses (Deut. 28), would experience hunger, thirst, and shame in the time of judgment. Historically, the Jewish War (AD 66–70) brought horrific famine and suffering to Jerusalem. Yet the faithful remnant—those who heeded Jesus’ warnings—fled and were preserved, and the Church fed upon Christ, the Living Bread and Bread of Life (John 6). The outward historical contrast serves as a signpost to the deeper covenantal contrast: under the old covenant “ministration of death,” the nation remains under curse; under the new covenant, the Church possesses the blessings of forgiveness, life, and communion with Christ.
(vss. 17–19): This is once again discussing covenant renewal under the new covenant in AD 70 not the end of world history or the burning of the planet. This is the creation and mature state of the new covenant New Jerusalem and her receiving her salvation. There were tears caused by persecutions and birth pain tribulation that temporarily ceased after the war of AD 66–70 and relief when the Christians fled to Pella. But on a deeper level under the old covenant “administration of death” there were tears because that covenantal “heaven and earth” could not take away sin whereas in the new there was forgiveness and therefore rejoicing.
Isaiah 65:17 is the interpretive hinge: “I create new heavens and a new earth.” As established above, this is covenantal renewal language, not cosmological annihilation language. The Targum explicitly equates it with the renewal of the people and Jerusalem, and Lightfoot reads it as the new church-state under Messiah. The new creation is the new covenant world—New Jerusalem in her mature, publicly vindicated state following the collapse of the old covenant world in AD 70.
The promise “the former things shall not be remembered” (v. 17) and “I will rejoice in Jerusalem and be glad in my people” (v. 19) speaks to covenantal transition. There were literal tears and cries during persecution and “birth pain” tribulation in the generation leading up to the war (Matt. 24:8–21), and there was relief as the faithful fled (Luke 21:20–22). But Isaiah’s language reaches deeper: under the old covenant administration, sin was not finally removed; the temple and sacrifices could not perfect the conscience, and sorrow remained. Under the new covenant, forgiveness is complete, the veil is removed, and rejoicing replaces covenantal mourning. The “exodus” creation language of Isaiah 51 and the “new creation” language of Isaiah 65 cohere: covenant formation and covenant renewal are framed in creation terms.
(v. 20) “There shall no more be an infant that dies untimely, or an old man who shall not complete his time; for the youth shall be a hundred years old, and the sinner who dies at a hundred years shall be accursed.”
Under the old covenant, breaking the covenant brought the curses of Deut. 28, including wars, famine, and plagues that caused premature deaths for infants and the elderly alike (Deut. 28:20–22, 49–52; Lev. 26:16, 25; Lam. 2:21). These symbolized spiritual death and covenant judgment. In the new covenant “new heavens and new earth,” fulfilled in AD 70 with the destruction of Jerusalem and the temple (the end of the old covenant cosmos, or the old covenant “present age” Matt. 24:35; Heb. 8:13; Heb. 9:8-10), believers live blessed, full spiritual lives—they “never hunger,” “never thirst,” and “never die” (John 6:35; 11:26), having passed from death to life (John 5:24; 1 John 3:14). Physical death continues in the church age (v. 20 assumes death persists, implying physical death preceded the fall and continues post-AD 70), but there are no more “untimely” deaths from covenant curses; the “curse” is removed by Christ (Gal. 3:13). Spiritually, death is swallowed up in victory (Isa. 25:8; 1 Cor. 15:54–57, the resurrection fulfilled in AD 70). This is metaphorically depicting long, fruitful lives in the new covenant age where sinners outside the covenant die under judgment, but believers enjoy eternal life now and when we die.
(v. 21) “They shall build houses and themselves inhabit them, and they shall plant vineyards and themselves eat their fruit.”
Under the old covenant, covenant breakers suffered invaders seizing their homes and vineyards (Deut. 28:30; Amos 5:11; Mic. 6:15), symbolizing loss of covenant blessings and spiritual inheritance. Jesus taught that in the new covenant, “everyone who has left houses or brothers or sisters… or fields for My name’s sake, will receive many times as much, and will inherit eternal life” (Matt. 19:29; Mark 10:29–30). Post-AD 70, in the new covenant age or NHNE, believers enjoy these temporal blessings spiritually—peace, provision, and gospel fruitfulness—while inheriting “eternal life” in the kingdom. This is fulfilled in the church’s growth after Jerusalem’s fall, where the covenant people (the church) build and inhabit spiritual “houses” (1 Pet. 2:5; Eph. 2:19–22) without fear of old covenant judgments, enjoying eternal inheritance in the new creation.
(v. 22 LXX) “They shall not build, and others inhabit; they shall not plant, and others eat; for according to the days of the tree of life shall be the days of my people, they shall long enjoy the work of their hands.”
This reverses old covenant curses (Deut. 28:30). The “days of the tree of life” allude to paradise (Gen. 2:9; 3:22), symbolizing eternal life.
John Gill comments:
“The Targum, Septuagint, and Arabic versions, render it, ‘as the days of the tree of life’; … The allusion may be to the tree of life in paradise, and may be expressive of the long life of good men in this state; and as the tree of life was typical of Christ, who is a tree of life to them that lay hold upon him, it may denote that eternal life his people have by him” (see free online software).
Matthew Poole adds:
“As the days of an oak … as the days of the tree of life; so the LXX. Christ is to them the tree of life, and in him believers enjoy all those spiritual comforts which are typified by the abundance of temporal blessings here promised” (see free online software).
In the new covenant NHNE post-AD 70, access to the Tree of Life (Christ) grants believers eternal spiritual life—they “never die” (John 11:26)—and they enjoy the fruit of their labor in the gospel (John 4:36; Rev. 22:2, 14, with healing leaves for the nations). This is the church’s enduring fruitfulness after the old covenant’s end, where temporal blessings typify eternal comforts in Christ, and believers “long enjoy” their works because they follow them into the afterlife (Rev. 14:13).
(v. 23) “They shall not toil in vain, nor bear children for a curse; for they are a seed blessed by God, and their offspring with them.”
Old covenant labor often ended in vain due to curses (Deut. 28:33, 41; Isa. 49:4). In the new covenant, believers produce lasting fruit—“some a hundredfold, some sixty, some thirty” (Matt. 13:23; John 15:8). We “bear children” spiritually through the gospel, even eunuchs become fruitful (Isa. 56:3–5). The New Jerusalem “from above” has come to earth at Christ’s “soon” Parousia in AD 70 and is the “mother of us all,” continually producing offspring entering her gates (Gal. 4:26; Rev. 22:2, 17). Gentiles with Abraham’s faith are his “seed” (Gal. 3:29), inheriting the “heavenly land,” “city,” and “world of righteousness” (Heb. 11:10–16; Rom. 4:13; 2 Pet. 3:13). This is the church’s post-AD 70 multiplication, free from old covenant curses, blessed as Abraham’s seed in the new creation.
(v. 24) “Before they call, I will answer; and while they are yet speaking, I will say, ‘What is it?’”
Under the old covenant, priests and sacrifices mediated approach to God. In the new covenant, Christ is the one mediator, friend, and brother (1 Tim. 2:5; John 15:15). God knows our needs before we ask (Matt. 6:8). Post-AD 70, believers are “clean” and “blameless,” with direct “face to face” intimacy (1 Cor. 13:12; Rev. 22:4–7 “soon”). This fulfills the new covenant promise of immediate access to God (Heb. 4:16; Jer. 31:34). This is the church’s priestly privilege in the NHNE, no more veil or mediator system after the temple’s destruction in AD 70.
(v. 25) “The wolf and the lamb shall feed together, and the lion shall eat straw like the ox, and dust shall be the serpent’s food. They shall not hurt nor destroy in all my holy mountain, says the LORD.”
This is metaphorical for peace in the new covenant church: “wolf and lamb” = Gentiles and Jews reconciled (Eph. 2:14–16; cf. Isa. 11:6–9). The “lion eating straw” symbolizes transformation by the gospel—fierce enemies become gentle. We conquer not by physical sword but by the Sword of the Spirit (Eph. 6:17). No hurt on “my holy mountain” = Mount Zion, the church (Heb. 12:22), where peace reigns (John 14:27, peace the world cannot give). The banquet on the mountain swallows death forever (Isa. 25:6–9; 1 Cor. 15:54). This is post-AD 70 gospel peace, where old covenant construction and strife ends, and the church enjoys harmonious fellowship without destruction—the curse of Adam’s spiritual death and separation is swallowed up, but physical death continues as a transition into God’s presence apart from our physical body awaits.
Thus Isaiah 65:17–25 is the covenantal portrait of life in the post-AD 70 new covenant age—the same “new heavens and new earth” promised in v. 17.
Interacting with Gentry on Isaiah 65:17–25
Kenneth Gentry critiques amillennialism’s identification of Isaiah 65:17–25 with the “perfect eternal state,” arguing there is no “substantial evidence” for this. He writes:
“Contrary to amillennialism, there is no ‘substantial evidence…for identifying [Isa. 65:17ff.] with the perfect eternal state.’ … Jay Adams defends the millennial interpretation of these elements with a rhetorical question: ‘How else can perfection be described in words which have imperfect objects and concepts as referents?’ The answer is: ‘Easy!’ Surely it is not impossible to think of post-resurrection perfection in the same sentence. Could Isaiah not say that in the eternal, consummate new heavens ‘no infants will be born, no one will age, no sin will exist, and the curse forever ceases’? … The new heavens and new earth here (and many places elsewhere) refer to the new covenant era.”[11]
Gentry is correct that Isaiah 65:17–25 is poetic language for the new covenant era today, not the literal eternal state—birth, aging, sin, and death persist and are described in hyperbolic terms. Yet his postmillennialism leads to inconsistency: he applies Isaiah 65 to Revelation 21:1 as the old covenant passing in AD 70 but insists on a future literal fulfillment of Isaiah 65 for 2 Peter 3, despite both 2 Peter 3 and Revelation 21–22 fulfilling Isaiah 65:17–25. This ignores the shared covenantal de-creation language and AD 70 imminence in all texts. A consistent reading sees Isaiah 65:17–25 fulfilled spiritually in AD 70’s covenant transition, without a future physical phase. Peter writes in 2 Peter 3 that this letter is a “reminder” of what he wrote in 1 Peter. That said, the “salvation” and “inheritance” that was “ready” to be revelated to them written in the OT prophets in 1 Peter 1:4-12 is the NHNE and “world of righteousness” of 2 Peter 3! Peter said this was the “salvation of the soul” and Paul likewise connects the NHNE or Isaiah 65:17 with the conversion of the soul in 2 Corinthians 5:17 and not a planetary end or renovation at the end of world history. Peter goes on to say “the appointed time” for “the judgment of the living and the dead” was “near” in AD 70 (1 Pet. 4:5-7, 17) and everyone knows this judgment precedes the arrival of the new creation mentioned in 2 Peter 3 and Revelation 21-22. Gentry’s view collapses under sound exegesis.
The “Restoration of All Things” (Acts 3:21) and “The End of All Things Was at Hand” (1 Peter 4:7) – Fulfilled in AD 70
Peter’s audience in Acts 3 was the “men of Israel” (Acts 3:12), the “sons of the prophets” (Acts 3:25), to whom the OT promises belonged. The “all things” God spoke by the mouth of His holy prophets to be restored (Acts 3:21, 24) were the covenant promises made to Israel—restoration from exile, new covenant blessings, and the coming of Messiah to make all things new. Jesus was the promised Prophet like Moses (Deut. 18:15–18; Acts 3:22–23), and His “presence” (Greek prosōpon – “face,” cf. 1 Cor. 13:10–12; 2 Cor. 4:6; Rev. 22:4–7) from heaven would bring this restoration when He returned to judge unbelieving Israel and reward His saints (Acts 3:19–23).
As we have just seen, Peter later writes to the same Jewish-Christian audience that “the end of all things” was “at hand” (1 Pet. 4:7)—the same “all things” of Acts 3. This “end” was the end or goal of the old covenant age, not the end of world history or the physical cosmos. The Greek for “restoration” in Acts 3:21 (apokatastasis) and the synonymous term in Hebrews 9:10 (diorthōsis, “reformation”) describe the same covenantal transition. As the JFB commentary points out—the author is using typology in chapter 9 equating the first old covenant with the Holy Place and the “then present [old covenant] age” with the second new covenant or Most Holy Place. When the “first” was removed in AD 70 then only the second would remain. This is why in Revelation the new Jerusalem is a perfect cube [God’s new covenant Most Holy Place dwelling] that comes with dimensions covering the Roman Empire at Christ’s “soon” second coming (Rev. 21:16; 22:6–7, 10, 20). There is no holy place [first section or first covenant] only the second Most Holy Place or new covenant remains just as Heb. 9 teaches. This would be the “TIME OF REFORMATION” and it came in AD 70.
Unbelieving Jews who rejected the Prophet like Moses would be “cut off from the people” [who are now covenantal faithful Christians following Messiah] (Acts 3:23)—fulfilled when OC Israel was judged and cut off in AD 70, while believing Jews and Gentiles were “all Israel” that were “saved” when Christ returned in a “near” time frame to forgave their sins (Rom. 11:25-27; 13:11-12).
Thus the “restoration of all things” was not a future physical renewal of the planet but the covenantal transformation from old covenant to new—completed when Christ came “from heaven” (His presence/face) in AD 70, ending the old covenant world and establishing the eternal new covenant kingdom.
2 Peter 3: The Three Covenantal Worlds and Their Harmonization in Full Preterism
Peter’s eschatology in 2 Peter 3 seamlessly integrates with the covenantal framework of Isaiah 51, 65, and the broader NT, describing three successive “worlds” (Greek kosmoi) as covenantal orders rather than physical planets. This harmonizes perfectly with our view of AD 70 as the singular consummation of redemptive history (the salvation of the soul and access to God’s presence not the ending of history).
The first world (v. 5-6) is the antediluvian order, formed out of water and destroyed by water—the Noachian covenant era, symbolizing judgment on pre-Mosaic humanity. The second, the “present heavens and earth” (v. 7), reserved for fire, represents the Mosaic covenant world, upheld by God’s word but destined for dissolution at Christ’s Parousia. The third, the “new heavens and new earth” (v. 13), is the eternal Messianic covenant, where righteousness dwells—a spiritual reality inaugurated at Pentecost and fully matured in AD 70.
This triadic structure mirrors Isaiah’s covenantal creation language: the “planting” of Sinai’s heavens and earth (Isa. 51:16) as the second world, its fiery de-creation (Isa. 65:17; 66:15-16), and renewal as the third. Peter’s “fire” (v. 7, 10-12) echoes the judicial conflagration on Jerusalem (cf. Isa. 66:15-16; Matt. 3:7-12; Rev. 6:12-17), not planetary incineration—fulfilled when the temple burned in AD 70, ending the old order “like a thief” (v. 10; cf. 1 Thess. 5:2-3). The “elements” (stoicheia, v. 10, 12) are the foundational Torah elements (Gal. 4:3, 9; Col. 2:8, 20; Heb. 8:13), melted in covenantal judgment.
Full Preterism harmonizes this with imminence (“at hand,” 1 Pet. 4:7; “shortly,” Rev. 1:1) and audience relevance: Peter’s Jewish-Christian recipients awaited the end of their world (the Mosaic age) in their generation (2 Pet. 3:3-4, 8; Acts 2:20-40). The new creation (v. 13) is the “world of righteousness” (per Owen and Lightfoot), where sin’s curse ends spiritually (Rev. 21:4; 22:3), but physical death persists only as a transition while the church enjoys eternal life now. This resolves partial preterist splits: if Isaiah 65 and Rev. 21 are AD 70 (as conceded), 2 Peter 3 must be too, unifying de-creation across texts without hyper-creedal partial preterist biased eisegesis getting in the way.
Hebrews 1:10–12, 12:26–28, and Psalm 102: The Old Covenant Heavens and Earth Rolled Up and Shaken
The author of Hebrews extends this covenantal pattern, applying “heavens and earth” language to the obsolescence and removal of the Mosaic order. In Hebrews 1:10–12, quoting Psalm 102:25–27, we read:
“You, Lord, laid the foundation of the earth in the beginning, and the heavens are the work of Your hands. They will perish, but You remain; they will all wear out like a garment, like a robe You will roll them up, like a garment they will be changed. But You are the same, and Your years will have no end.”
Here, the “heavens and earth” that “wear out” (Greek palaiothesontai, “grow old”) and are “rolled up like a garment” are not the physical cosmos but the old covenant system, which began to fade at Christ’s ascension and fully vanished by His Parousia in AD 70 (Heb. 1:1–2, 10–12; 8:13).
Psalm 102 provides the full context: the psalmist prays for Zion’s restoration at God’s “appointed time” (v. 13), when He “appears in his glory” (v. 16) to build up the new Zion (the Church) from the nations (vv. 18, 21–22). This de-creation motif echoes Isaiah 65–66, fulfilled in the judgment of old Jerusalem and the gathering of the new covenant people in AD 70.
The Psalmist anticipates the appointed time for God to come in his glory to save Zion:
“You will arise and have pity on Zion; it is the time to favor her; the appointed time has come. …For the Lord builds up Zion; he appears in his glory;…” (Psalm 102:13–16)
Psalm 102:13 signals that the Psalmist looks forward to an “appointed time” (the Hebrew mowed) when God will save or have pity on Zion. This Hebrew word mowed is the Hebrew equivalent to the Greek word kairos. Kairos also means “a fixed or appointed time” at which something must be completed. Accordingly, the author of Hebrews also has his sights on the salvation of Zion—that is, the new covenant Heavenly Jerusalem or the City of the Living God (i.e., the Church). Heb. 13:14 tells us, however, when Zion or the “City” will be saved by using the Greek word mello in the next chapter to refer to her “about to come.” It is also important to note that Christ will appear a second time “in a very, very, little while and will not delay” throughout Hebrews 9-10 in order to save Zion.
According to John Gill, both Daniel 9:24–27 and Revelation 11:1–2 give a reasonable indication of when this passage and the “appointed time” will be fulfilled:
For the time to favour her, yea, the set time, is come; not the seventy years of the captivity made known to the prophet Jeremiah; rather the seventy weeks of Daniel fixed for the Messiah’s coming; or the fullness of time agreed upon, between Christ and his Father, for him to come and redeem his people; but it may best of all design the end of the forty two months, or the 1260 days, or years, fixed for the treading under foot the holy city, for the witnesses prophesying in sackcloth, and for the reign of antichrist; which when come will usher in glorious times in favour of Zion, the church of God, Revelation 11:2.[12]
Daniel 9:24–27 and Revelation 11:1–2, 18 point to “the appointed time” when the old covenant Jerusalem and her temple were judged and ultimately destroyed in AD 70—coinciding with God’s establishment and salvation of Zion, the new covenant Jerusalem. The two passages use the term kairos (the appointed time) and refer to the “three-and–a-half-years” between AD 67 and 70 (Dan. 9:26–27 LXX; Dan. 12:4-7 LXX; Rev. 11:1–18).
While Daniel 9:24–27 describes the judgment and desolation of the old covenant temple, it also affirms that at this appointed time God “…will anoint a most holy place” (Daniel 9:24). In Greek, naos refers not necessarily to the entire temple but specifically to the inner, most holy place—a term that finds its fulfillment in Revelation 11:1. Revelation further depicts the New Jerusalem (Zion) as a perfectly proportioned most holy place where God dwells (Rev. 21:16). In the first century, Christ’s coming in glory (cf. Matt. 16:27–28; Matt. 24:30–34; Rev. 1:7–17; Rev. 22:3, 7, 20) was understood as the moment when His Church—the true Zion—would be filled with His presence. As Paul writes, “Christ in you, the hope of glory” (Col. 1:27), a glory that both Paul and Peter anticipated would soon or “about to be” fully revealed in the Church (cf. Rom. 8:18, YLT; 2 Thess. 1:10, 12, ESV; 1 Pet. 5:1, YLT).
There is no doubt that the Psalmist was aware of the prophecy found in Deuteronomy 32:35–43 LXX that an “appointed time” would be “near” and arrive when God would save and vindicate His people—rescuing them from persecution and shame into a state of security and glory in Him.
A Generation Recorded for the Future (v. 18)
Let this be recorded for a generation to come, so that a people/nation yet to be created may praise the Lord (Ps. 102:18, YLT).
Throughout Deuteronomy 32:20–22, Moses links a specific last day’s “generation” with the “people” and “nation” that are to be created when old covenant Israel undergoes a de-creation event. In Psalm 102 and the epistle to the Hebrews, these elements converge. The Psalmist, who had long memorized and sung the Song of Moses, also grasped its eschatological significance and thus composed the Psalm with the future in mind.
According to Adam Clarke, the creation of this “people/nation” occurred at the time of the coming of the New Heaven and New Earth described in Isaiah 65:17–18:
“The people which shall be created — “The Gentiles, who shall be brought to the knowledge of salvation by Christ,” as the Syriac states in its inscription to this Psalm: how often the conversion of the soul to God is represented as a new creation, no reader of the New Testament need be told. See Ephesians 2:10; 4:24; 2 Corinthians 5:17; Galatians 6:15. Even the publication of the Gospel, and its influence among men, is represented under the notion of “creating a new heaven and a new earth,” Isaiah 65:17–18.”[13]
The Gathering in Zion
That they may declare in Zion the name of the Lord, and in Jerusalem his praise, when peoples gather together, and kingdoms, to worship the Lord (Ps. 102:21–22).
Many interpreters see this verse as a recapitulation of the creation of the people/nation mentioned in verse 18. I join those commentators who connect this gathering with the arrival of the New Jerusalem—or, more precisely, the new heavens and new earth described in Isaiah 60:3 and Isaiah 65–66. As we have seen Orthodox partial preterism, for example, concedes that this is not the coming of a renewed physical planet but the passing away of the old covenant heavens and earth, as realized in AD 70. Furthermore, if Isaiah 60:3 indeed fulfills Psalm 102:18–28 (a view with which I concur), then its fulfillment occurs during the “appointed time”—and “shortly” or “without delay” when it came in AD 70 (cf. Isa. 60:22 LXX). The prophetic “appointed time” mentioned in Psalm 102:13 (YLT) echoes the “appointed time” in Deuteronomy 32:35LXX, when the de-creation of Israel and the emergence of the new covenant nation were to take place.
This eschatological “gathering” is further linked to the resurrection at Christ’s coming in AD 70, when the Gentiles gathered from East to West to dine with Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob in the matured new covenant kingdom (Matthew 8:10–12; Matthew 24:30–31). John claims that the destruction of Jerusalem for “three-and-a-half years” [AD 66–70] was the “appointed time” for the judgment of the dead when “the kingdoms of this world became the kingdom of our Lord” (Rev. 11:1–18).
The urgency of this future hope is underscored in Hebrews when the author writes, for example, that the salvation of this “nation,” whether understood as Zion or Jerusalem, was “about to come” (cf. Heb. 13:14 Weymouth New Testament; or Worrell New Testament).
The Perishability of the Old Creation (vv. 25–26)
In Psalm 102 the Psalmist also reminds us:
“In the beginning you laid the foundations of the earth, and the heavens are the work of your hands. They will perish, but you will remain; they will all wear out like a garment. You will change them like a robe, and they will pass away (Ps. 102:25–26).
It is interesting—and perhaps ironic—that many commentators draw linguistic parallels between Psalm 102:25–26 and Isaiah 65–66 (and by extension 2 Pet. 3), noting that the Psalmist discusses the same prophetic de-creation event. Yet Partial Preterists (John Owen, John Lightfoot, R.C. Sproul, Peter Leithart, Doug Wilson, Joel Webbon, among others) maintain that the de-creation of Isaiah 65–66 and 2 Peter 3 is referring to nothing other than the old covenant heavens and earth that passed away in AD 70!
The book of Hebrews and Psalm 102 teach that at the de-creation event of Israel’s old covenant heavens and earth a new People / Zion / Nation is created. This is in perfect harmony with Deuteronomy 32:20-22 and Isaiah 65-66! The new covenant nation and people are created and matured in AD 70 or born when the old covenant creation ends. It is a rather bizzare interpretation that would see a people being created or born only to come to an immediate end at the so-called “end of world history.”
Reformed partial preterist pastors Andrew Isker and Joel Webbon concur with me that Hebrews 1:10–12’s “heaven” and “earth” refer to the old covenant system, “rolled up” and “growing old” from Christ’s ascension, but “ready to vanish” by His AD 70 coming. Isker comments, with Webbon agreeing:
“…but in these last days, not to the end of the world [planet] but the end of that world, the old covenant… this is a contrast between the old and new covenant… that is what is happening [in] the transition between the old creation and new creation [of Heb. 1:10-12 & 12:26-28].”[14]
Pastors Andrew Isker and Joel Webbon explicitly read Hebrews 1:10–12 as portraying God’s rolling up and ending of the Old Covenant heaven and earth, not the physical universe, and likewise understand Hebrews 12:26–28 as the shaking and removal of that covenant scheme to make way for the unshakable kingdom—with an AD 70 fulfillment horizon.
This connects seamlessly to Hebrews 12:26–28:
“…Yet once more I will shake not only the earth but also the heavens. This phrase, ‘Yet once more,’ indicates the removal of things that are shaken—that is, things that have been made—in order that the things that cannot be shaken may remain; therefore, let us be grateful for receiving a kingdom that cannot be shaken…”
The “shaking” alludes to Sinai (Exod. 19) and Haggai 2:6–9, 21–23, fulfilled “in a little while” by the overthrow of Israel’s enemies and the establishment of new covenant worship. Unlike the old covenant’s shakable “heavens and earth,” Hebrews teaches an unshakable kingdom within the Church (Dan. 2:34; Luke 17:20–37; 21:27–32). This aligns with reformed commentators viewing Hebrews 1:10–12, 12:26–27, Psalm 102, and Isaiah 65–66 as a single AD 70 event, contrasting the new covenant’s enduring superiority with the old order’s imminent demise.
Hebrews 1:10–12 further clarifies that the “earth” and “heavens” that were “made” refer to the old covenant “earth” and “heavens” that were visible and subject to being “shaken” throughout Israel’s history, but which would be rolled up and removed in AD 70 to reveal the eternal, unshakable kingdom.
Revelation 21:1 – Leading Partial Preterists Admit the First Heaven and Earth Is the Old Covenant
Douglas Wilson offers a clear interpretation of this transition, connecting Isaiah 65–66, 2 Peter 3, and Revelation 21–22:
“We are seeing here the transition between the first heaven (the Judaic aeon) and new earth (the Christian aeon). … I do not take the new heaven and new earth as referring to the post-Second Coming eternal state.” … “So, I take the first heavens and earth as the Judaic aeon and the new heavens and earth as the Christian aeon, and these two aeons overlapped—the latter beginning at Pentecost, and the former ending with the destruction of the Temple in 70 A.D.”[15]
Wilson interprets Christ’s “coming in glory” of Matthew 24:30-31 as spiritually fulfilled in AD 70, directly linking it to the establishment of the New Jerusalem and New Heavens and Earth in Revelation 21:1-22:5. He concedes the Old Covenant heavens and earth passed away in AD 70, as described in 2 Peter 3 and Revelation 21. However, Wilson inconsistently distinguishes this from a future physical dissolution, isolating Revelation 20:11 as an exception for the end of the physical universe—despite the recapitulatory structure and imminent time texts in Revelation which demands a unified AD 70 fulfillment.²²
Kenneth Gentry offers further insight on “the sea was no more”:
“The absence of the sea (21:1) speaks of the harmony and peace within. In Scripture the sea often symbolizes discord and sin (13:1–2; cf. Isa. 8:7–8; 23:10; 57:20; Jer. 6:23; 46:7; Ezek. 9:10). Christianity offers the opposite: peace with God and among humankind (Luke 2:14; Rom. 5:1; Eph. 2:12–18; Phil. 4:7, 9).”[16]
For Gentry ‘no more sea’ signifies that at Christ’s ‘soon’ coming in AD 70, He established the new creation, and God positionally removed our sin in His eyes. If ‘no more sea’ equates to ‘no more sin,’ positionally, this interpretation sounds like full preterism! Gentry, along with Keith Mathison, argues that the New Jerusalem and New Heavens and Earth of Revelation 21:1-22:5 were established in AD 70. He concedes the New Creation is the new covenant new heavens and earth we are currently in, with ongoing entry into the New Jerusalem where there is “no more the death” (Rev. 21:4), and that the Church was married to Christ in AD 70 when God divorced His old covenant wife (Rev. 17-21). Gentry concedes the resurrection of Daniel 12:2 was fulfilled spiritually in AD 70 as well:
“Dan. 12 is NOT dealing with bodily resurrection but national resurrection (as does Ezek. 37). Dan. 12 sees ‘resurrection’ of Israel in the birth of the Christian Church, which is the New Israel.”[17]
This ties to Revelation 21-22’s rewarding at Christ’s coming (Rev. 22:7-12), paralleling Matthew 16:27-28 as an AD 70 event. Yet, like Wilson, Gentry maintains inconsistencies, affirming AD 70 fulfillment for de-creation in Revelation 6 and 16 (e.g., linking Rev. 6:15–16 to Jews hiding during the AD 67–70 war) but reserving Revelation 20:11 for a future physical event.
These concessions from Gentry and Wilson highlight partial preterism’s internal tensions and exegetical contradictions: they admit Revelation 21:1-22:5 fulfills the new covenant’s establishment in AD 70, entailing the removal of the Adamic curse (“no more death,” Rev. 21:4) and the eschatological wedding (Rev. 19-21), yet they split parallel texts to preserve futurist creeds. A consistent exegesis unifies all de-creation imagery (including Rev. 20:11) as the AD 70 covenant transition, resolving these inconsistencies without postponing the new creation’s glory.
Partial Preterism’s One Remaining “Physical” De-Creation Text: Revelation 20:11
Partial preterism (as a system) has conceded virtually every de-creation “heaven and earth” text to the old covenant world passing away in AD 70—except one: Revelation 20:11. Yet even here, the recapitulation structure of Revelation demands the same covenantal interpretation.
| De-Creation Text | Partial Preterist Interpretation (per Gentry, Wilson, etc.) | Full Preterist Consistency |
| Matt. 24:3, 29, 35 | Old covenant world or age passing in AD 70 | Old covenant world or age passing in AD 70 |
| Heb. 1:10–12; 12:26–28 | Old covenant “heavens and earth” rolled up/shaken in AD 70 | Old covenant world passing in AD 70 |
| 2 Pet. 3:5–13 | Old covenant world dissolved by fire in AD 70 | Old covenant world passing in AD 70 |
| Rev. 6:14 | Heaven departs as a scroll rolled up (AD 70) | Old covenant world passing in AD 70 |
| Rev. 16:20 | Every mountain and island moved (AD 70) | Old covenant world passing in AD 70 |
| Rev. 21:1 | First heaven & earth = old covenant order passed in AD 70 | Old covenant world passing in AD 70 |
| Rev. 20:11 | “Earth and heaven fled away” = literal physical cosmos (future) | Same covenantal de-creation motif as all the above—AD 70 |
Revelation’s de-creation imagery is tightly recapitulated as even Amillennialists have noted:
- 6:14 – heaven departs as a scroll rolled up
- 16:20 – every mountain and island moved
- 20:11 – earth and heaven flee from the face of the One on the throne
- 21:1 – first heaven and earth passed away
All describe the same judgment event—the end of the old covenant world in AD 70. Revelation 20:11 is not a lone outlier; it is the same covenantal “fleeing” of the old order before the enthroned Judge, just as Revelation 6, 16, and 21 describe. Imminence seals the case: Revelation was fulfilled “shortly” (Rev. 1:1; 22:6–7, 10, 12, 20). There is no exegetical warrant to isolate Revelation 20:11 as a future physical event while conceding every parallel passage to AD 70. This is nothing more than a hyper-creedal attempt and bias to cling to at least ONE alleged prooftext so one does not loose their hyper-creedal career.
Conclusion
The Targums on Isaiah 51:15–16 and 65:17 are VERY revealing! While they were written in the second century scholars state clearly this teaching was present when Jesus and the NT writers lived. The Targum consistently equates “heavens and earth” with:
- God’s people
- their land
- their covenantal order
- the political/spiritual structure of Israel’s world
Major Premise: Jesus and Peter cite Isaiah’s “heaven and earth” language and Peter also invokes Genesis 1’s water-formed earth in 2 Peter 3:5–13.
Minor Premise: Isaiah’s “new heavens and new earth” and Genesis’s creation language describe the formation and transformation of covenant worlds (first the Adamic/Noahic, then the Mosaic, then the Messianic).
Conclusion: In eschatological contexts New Testament references to “heaven and earth” describe the dissolution of Old Covenant worlds and the inauguration of the New Covenant creation, not the annihilation or renewal of the planet.
This is exactly how Jesus and the NT writers used them in eschatological or covenantal contexts such as Matthew 5:17–18; 24:35; 2 Pet. 3; Heb. 1:10–12; 12:26–28; Rev. 20:11; 21:1ff.. The creeds state clearly they are subject to error and revision and therefore must be revised with the Church following a sound grammatical / historical hermeneutic on these key texts and build upon the exegetical legacy John Owen and John Lightfoot left us.
This approach not only preserves New Testament imminence and prophetic idiom; it also resolves the tension created when interpreters split identical “new creation” language into unrelated fulfillments. Isaiah’s covenant-creation framework, confirmed by the Targums and echoed by Owen and Lightfoot, provides the unified lens through which Matthew 24, 2 Peter 3, Hebrews, and Revelation cohere. The glory of the “new heavens and new earth” is not postponed to the end of world history, but is grounded in the completed redemptive work of Christ and the enduring reality of His New Covenant kingdom—publicly vindicated in the AD 70 judgment that ended the old covenant world and left the new covenant world standing.
[1] Targum Jonathan, Isaiah 51:16, in standard scholarly editions/English translations of the Isaiah Targum (wording varies slightly by edition).
[2] Bruce Chilton, The Isaiah Targum: Introduction, Translation, Apparatus and Notes (The Aramaic Bible, Vol. 11) (Wilmington, DE: Michael Glazier, 1987), Introduction.
[3] Chilton’s discussion of the Isaiah Targum’s provenance and staged development, and its relevance to Second Temple interpretive traditions in The Isaiah Targum (Introduction and related prefatory material).
[4] Shalom M. Paul, commentary on Isaiah 51:16 in his work on Isaiah 40–66.
[5] Jerome H. Smith, ed., The New Treasury of Scripture Knowledge (Nashville: Thomas Nelson, 1992), s.v. Isaiah 51:16.
[6] John Owen, The Works of John Owen, vol. 9: Exposition of the Epistle to the Hebrews, ed. William H. Goold (Edinburgh: Banner of Truth Trust, 1966), 135–36.
[7] Targum Jonathan, Isaiah 65:17, in standard scholarly editions/English translations of the Isaiah Targum (rendering “making new the people” and “renewing Jerusalem”).
[8] John Owen, The Works of John Owen, Banner of Truth pub., Vol. 9 see pp. 132-135, 138-139, MJS emphasis added
[9] John Lightfoot, A Commentary on the New Testament from the Talmud and Hebraica, Vol. 2 (Peabody, MA: Hendrickson, 2003), 318–319 (on 2 Pet. 3); Vol. 3, 452–453 (on the destruction of Jerusalem).
[10] Ibid.
[11] Kenneth L. Gentry Jr., He Shall Have Dominion, 3rd ed., pp. 367–368).⁸
[12] John Gill, An Exposition of the Old and New Testament, s.v. Psalm 102:13 (London: Mathews and Leigh, 1810).
[13] Adam Clarke, The Holy Bible with a Commentary and Critical Notes, s.v. Psalm 102:18 (London: T. Tegg and Son, 1836).
[14] Joel Webbon and Andrew Isker, Zionism, Modern Israel, & “The Divine Council,” March 7, 2025, https://rightresponseministries.com/podcasts/zionism-modern-israel-the-divine-council/
[15] Douglas Wilson, When the Man Comes Around: A Commentary on the Book of Revelation (Moscow, ID: Canon Press, 2019), 245–246.
[16] Kenneth L. Gentry, FOUR VIEWS ON THE BOOK OF REVELATION, (Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan, 1998), p. 89
[17] Kenneth L. Gentry, He Shall Have Dominion A Postmillennial Eschatology, (Apologetics Group Media, 2009), pp. 538-539
