Isaiah 65:20 - Hundred Year Old Fetuses Dying in New Jerusalem?

[Base12]

I have my own opinions about what this verse means...

Isaiah 65:20
"There shall be no more thence an infant of days, nor an old man that hath not filled his days: for the child shall die an hundred years old; but the sinner being an hundred years old shall be accursed"

I'd rather hear what you folks have to say. What do you think the above verse is teaching?

People will still die in New Jerusalem?

Will people that die of old age have to stay in that body forever?

Hundred year old sinners? In the New Heavens and New Earth?

Will Premature Babies have to be kept in incubators until they are a hundred years old and then die?

I thought Death was eliminated in the New Heavens and New Earth?

Isaiah 65:17
"For, behold, I create new heavens and a new earth: and the former shall not be remembered, nor come into mind"

What's going on here?

 

[Base12]

No takers?

Here is a commentary by "Ellicott's Commentary for English Readers"...

"The prophet sees in the restored city not so much an eternal and a deathless life as the return of the traditional longevity of the prediluvian and patriarchal age (Genesis 5, 11), Life will not be prematurely cut off, as it had been, by pestilence and war"

Isaiah 65:20 Commentaries: "No longer will there be in it an infant who lives but a few days, Or an old man who does not live out his days; For the youth will die at the age of one hundred And the one who does not reach the age of one hundred Will be thought accursed.

So Death was not swallowed up in victory? Jesus died for nothing?

Such a huge contradiction is being taught here!

 

[Base12]

Here is another commentary from "Cambridge Bible for Schools and Colleges"...

"It is evident that the idea of immortal life is unknown to the writer. He looks forward to a restriction of the power of death, but not to its entire cessation"

Isaiah 65:20 Commentaries: "No longer will there be in it an infant who lives but a few days, Or an old man who does not live out his days; For the youth will die at the age of one hundred And the one who does not reach the age of one hundred Will be thought accursed.

I thought God authored the Bible and inspired Holy Men of God to write it all down?

2 Peter 1:21
"For the prophecy came not in old time by the will of man: but holy men of God spake as they were moved by the Holy Ghost"

Why would God allow such a thing to be written?

Anyone?

 

[Joseph77]

False input , false output. Never changes.

 

[Windmillcharge]

I have my own opinions about what this verse means...

Isaiah 65:20
"There shall be no more thence an infant of days, nor an old man that hath not filled his days: for the child shall die an hundred years old; but the sinner being an hundred years old shall be accursed"

I'd rather hear what you folks have to say. What do you think the above verse is teaching?

People will still die in New Jerusalem?

Will people that die of old age have to stay in that body forever?

Hundred year old sinners? In the New Heavens and New Earth?

Will Premature Babies have to be kept in incubators until they are a hundred years old and then die?

I thought Death was eliminated in the New Heavens and New Earth?

Isaiah 65:17
"For, behold, I create new heavens and a new earth: and the former shall not be remembered, nor come into mind"

What's going on here?

It merely say that people will live to a great age.

 

[Base12]

It merely say that people will live to a great age.

In other words you believe that people in the New Heavens and New Earth will still die?

 

[Joseph77]

New Heavens, New Earth...

is after death is gone.

 

[Base12]

New Heavens, New Earth...

is after death is gone.

I believe this as well. That is why I don't agree with the so called 'Scholars' that teach otherwise.

So can anyone provide clarity on this verse?

Isaiah 65:20
"There shall be no more thence an infant of days, nor an old man that hath not filled his days: for the child shall die an hundred years old; but the sinner being an hundred years old shall be accursed"

 

[Joseph77]

Are these any help ? >
Ellicott's Commentary for English Readers
(20) There shall be no more thence . . .--The prophet sees in the restored city not so much an eternal and a deathless life as the return of the traditional longevity of the prediluvian and patriarchal age (Genesis 5, 11), Life will not be prematurely cut off, as it had been, by pestilence and war. (Comp. Zechariah 8:4.) He who dies at the age of a hundred will be thought of as dying young; even the sinner, dying before his time as the penalty of his guilt, shall live out the measure of a century. The noticeable fact is that sin is thought of as not altogether extinct--as still appearing, though under altered conditions, even in the restored Jerusalem.

Pulpit Commentary
Verse 20. - There shall be no more thence an infant of days; i.e. there shall not go from the new Jerusalem into the unseen world any infant of a few days old. On the contrary, even "the youth" shall reach a hundred; i.e. one who dies when he is a hundred shall be regarded as cut off in his youth. The general rule shall be, that old men shall "fill their days," or attain to patriarchal longevity. Even the sinner, who is under the curse of God, shall not be cut off till he is a hundred. What is most remarkable in the description is that death and sin are represented as still continuing. Death was spoken of as "swallowed up in victory" in one of the earlier descriptions of Messiah's kingdom (Isaiah 25:8).

 

[VictoryinJesus]

Isaiah 65:20
"There shall be no more thence an infant of days, nor an old man that hath not filled his days: for the child shall die an hundred years old; but the sinner being an hundred years old shall be accursed"

Consider 1 Samuel 2:30-36 Wherefore the Lord God of Israel saith, I said indeed that thy house, and the house of thy father, should walk before me for ever: but now the Lord saith, Be it far from me; for them that honour me I will honour, and they that despise me shall be lightly esteemed. [31] Behold, the days come, that I will cut off thine arm, and the arm of thy father's house, that there shall not be an old man in thine house. [32] And thou shalt see an enemy in my habitation, in all the wealth which God shall give Israel: and there shall not be an old man in thine house for ever. [33] And the man of thine, whom I shall not cut off from mine altar, shall be to consume thine eyes, and to grieve thine heart: and all the increase of thine house shall die in the flower of their age. [34] And this shall be a sign unto thee, that shall come upon thy two sons, on Hophni and Phinehas; in one day they shall die both of them. [35] And I will raise me up a faithful priest, that shall do according to that which is in mine heart and in my mind: and I will build him a sure house; and he shall walk before mine anointed for ever. [36] And it shall come to pass, that every one that is left in thine house shall come and crouch to him for a piece of silver and a morsel of bread, and shall say, Put me, I pray thee, into one of the priests' offices, that I may eat a piece of bread.

“I am the living bread which came down from heaven: if any man eat of this bread, he shall love for ever: and the bread that I will give is my flesh, which I will give for the life of the world.”

how can it be “I will cut off thine arm, and the arm of thy father's house, that there shall not be an old man in thine house.”

 

[Joseph77]

People will still die in New Jerusalem?

The source, so to speak, is the answer, simply >>

Study Guide for Isaiah 65 by David Guzik

"ii. From John's context we see that this new heavens and a new earth comes after the Great White Throne judgment (Revelation 20:11-15) and is connected not with the millennial earth, but with the eternal state.

If all we had to go by was Isaiah's statement, we would automatically connect this new heavens and a new earth with the millennial earth,

because immediately after Isaiah 65:17-19, we clearly find the millennial earth described.

But based on what we find in 2 Peter and Revelation, we must see that Isaiah is in the prophetic habit of switching quickly from one time frame to another, speaking of the eternal state in Isaiah 65:17, and of the millennial earth in Isaiah 65:20-25.

b. And the former shall not be remembered or come to mind: This is another indication that Isaiah 65:17 does not speak of the millennial earth."

 

[Windmillcharge]

In other words you believe that people in the New Heavens and New Earth will still die?

You asked what the verse you quoted out of context meant, not what do I understand by it.

 

[Base12]

This...

...the return of the traditional longevity of the prediluvian and patriarchal age.

...contradicts what you posted earlier...

New Heavens, New Earth...

is after death is gone.

It's either one or the other.

Which is correct?

 

[Joseph77]

No contradiction in my posts so far. as already noted >>
QUOTE="Joseph77, post: 724942, member: 8613"]The source, so to speak, is the answer, simply >>

Study Guide for Isaiah 65 by David Guzik

"ii. From John's context we see that this new heavens and a new earth comes after the Great White Throne judgment (Revelation 20:11-15) and is connected not with the millennial earth, but with the eternal state.

If all we had to go by was Isaiah's statement, we would automatically connect this new heavens and a new earth with the millennial earth,

because immediately after Isaiah 65:17-19, we clearly find the millennial earth described.

But based on what we find in 2 Peter and Revelation, we must see that Isaiah is in the prophetic habit of switching quickly from one time frame to another, speaking of the eternal state in Isaiah 65:17, and of the millennial earth in Isaiah 65:20-25.

b. And the former shall not be remembered or come to mind: This is another indication that Isaiah 65:17 does not speak of the millennial earth."[/QUOTE

 

[Base12]

You asked what the verse you quoted out of context meant, not what do I understand by it.

I don't understand your response. How much more context does One need?

Here is the OP again...

Isaiah 65:17
"For, behold, I create new heavens and a new earth: and the former shall not be remembered, nor come into mind"

The verse is self explanatory. The 'New Heavens and New Earth' referenced in it is the same as this...

2 Peter 3:13
"Nevertheless we, according to his promise, look for new heavens and a new earth, wherein dwelleth righteousness"

...and this...

Revelation 21:1
"And I saw a new heaven and a new earth: for the first heaven and the first earth were passed away; and there was no more sea"

Everyone agrees that Death will no longer exist at that point, correct?

1 Corinthians 15:54
"So when this corruptible shall have put on incorruption, and this mortal shall have put on immortality, then shall be brought to pass the saying that is written, Death is swallowed up in victory"

So why do we see Death mentioned right after New Heavens and New Earth are created?

Isaiah 65:20
"There shall be no more thence an infant of days, nor an old man that hath not filled his days: for the child shall die an hundred years old; but the sinner being an hundred years old shall be accursed"

 

[Joseph77]

So why do we see Death mentioned right after New Heavens and New Earth are created?

QUOTE="Joseph77, post: 725216, member: 8613"]The source, so to speak, is the answer, simply >>

Study Guide for Isaiah 65 by David Guzik

"ii. From John's context we see that this new heavens and a new earth comes after the Great White Throne judgment (Revelation 20:11-15) and is connected not with the millennial earth, but with the eternal state.

If all we had to go by was Isaiah's statement, we would automatically connect this new heavens and a new earth with the millennial earth,

because immediately after Isaiah 65:17-19, we clearly find the millennial earth described.

But based on what we find in 2 Peter and Revelation, we must see that Isaiah is in the prophetic habit of switching quickly from one time frame to another, speaking of the eternal state in Isaiah 65:17, and of the millennial earth in Isaiah 65:20-25.

b. And the former shall not be remembered or come to mind: This is another indication that Isaiah 65:17 does not speak of the millennial earth."[/QUOTE[/QUOTE

 

[Base12]

sigh...

While we wait for someone to post the *correct* answer, we can perhaps entertain ourselves by watching someone give the *incorrect* answer...

Who knows...

Maybe it will take years for an expert to show up and set things straight.

 

[Joseph77]

nah... "a little child"

 

[Dcopymope]

The source, so to speak, is the answer, simply >>

Study Guide for Isaiah 65 by David Guzik

"ii. From John's context we see that this new heavens and a new earth comes after the Great White Throne judgment (Revelation 20:11-15) and is connected not with the millennial earth, but with the eternal state.

If all we had to go by was Isaiah's statement, we would automatically connect this new heavens and a new earth with the millennial earth,

because immediately after Isaiah 65:17-19, we clearly find the millennial earth described.

But based on what we find in 2 Peter and Revelation, we must see that Isaiah is in the prophetic habit of switching quickly from one time frame to another, speaking of the eternal state in Isaiah 65:17, and of the millennial earth in Isaiah 65:20-25.

b. And the former shall not be remembered or come to mind: This is another indication that Isaiah 65:17 does not speak of the millennial earth."

This is why it is important to understand that before the book of revelation, no one, not even Jesus himself had the full, blow by blow description of exactly how the end times will occur. I said this before and got slammed for it, yet we see this is clearly the case looking at Isaiah. For the last days, revelation needs to be our primary source. All preceding books should be considered as nothing more than references at best.

 

[Base12]

Perhaps this person has it figured out?