The other day, me and my friends were discussing about End times pertaining to Mat 24, and came across this verse

"My words are always true and always here with you. Heaven and earth will pass away, but My words will never pass away"
Mat 24:35

Which says, the earth will be destroyed and a new earth and heaven will be formed according to Rev 21:1. And how Isiah predicts the calamities can be read from this answer.

But I was thinking, maybe if this earth will have such problems, what they can be avoided by migrating to other planets?

Hence the question, do those verses mean only our Earth or the whole land in both Mat 24:35 and Gen 1???

I think there is no mention of other planets of this universe in the Bible.

So, when God was referring to "Earth" in Gen 1, could it be considered as all the land in this universe that God is referring to as Earth? or Should it be considered as he's being specific about only our planet "Earth"?

So, my question is in general How is "earth" interpreted. Could the word be applied to the land of the whole universe?

I request you to focus on the title "Is all the land in the universe called Earth?"

  • You're not wrong, and this isn't a bad question :-) but I'm not sure we can get any particular evidence one way or another. Don't forget, ancient people in general had a very different view of the universe than we do (they had a different understanding of what planets and stars were, for example). May 12 '15 at 15:06
  • Oh, and if you're thinking about the actual phrase "Created Earth", as you refer to, you probably want to edit your question to specify (and preferably include) the actual verse you're thinking about. That would improve the question. May 12 '15 at 15:08
  • 1
    If this question is good, then a couple of credits to Mr. Matt, if it is bad, the it's my bad. May 12 '15 at 17:08

The only good answer to this is "We don't know". And we don't know because the people writing the book had no concept of 'land outside of our planet'. For them there were only three parts to creation: Heavens, Earth and the Underworld, floating on a cosmic ocean. It is completely impossible to definitively state whether their words were intended to include parts of creation they had no idea existed.

People have attempted to deduce more about the writer's intentions, but the deductions are all subject to interpretation. You can choose somebody's interpretation if you wish.

  • But don't you think Gen 1 was directly from the "the Father"? So, God might know it pretty well about other planets too. ryt? What do you think? May 12 '15 at 16:53
  • Christians do not believe that God dictated the Bible. But that's another question. And in the language in which Genesis was written, there was no word for 'land on other planets'. May 12 '15 at 16:54
  • 1
    @servantofWiser I have to say I agree with this answer. God intended Scriptures to help people, not confuse them; that's why he told them to people in a way they could understand. They didn't understand the idea of other planets, and that wasn't part of his point; so in my opinion he wouldn't have mentioned them. He talked to people about what was important to them. May 12 '15 at 17:17
  • this reason if included or made as an answer would be great @MattGutting May 12 '15 at 17:27

This question stems from a lack of understanding of what the ancients believed "heavens and earth" mean, or what they believed the whole of creation looked like.

The Ancients weren't aware of other planets. Just earth, hence they are referring to the Earth when they say "earth". It was not out of neglect that they don't also say "and other planets", but out of ignorance that such things even exist.

"Heavens" is everything else that exists outside of earth. Simply, there's the sky; where all the stars, moon, and sun reside; and then there's the "waters above" which is the realm of God. Most modern conceptions have an idea that Heaven is like another dimension, but the Ancients did not really have any such concept. To them, Heaven and Earth existed in the same 'ether'.

This is an image of a what they thought the universe looked like:

Ancient Earth depiction

You can clearly see that the Earth exists inside a kind of bubble along with all the other celestial bodies inside a kind of sea, which is the realm of God. The ignorance of what really exists beyond our atmosphere is apparent.

With this in mind, the Ancients likely believed that there was only one earth and when they said "earth" they meant all the land under the firmament. If they suddenly learned there were other planets it would blow their minds, so we can't really know how they would respond.

  • you cleared up a lot to me with that simple pic. Nice! May 13 '15 at 12:27
  • Please comment if you downvote. That will help me make the post better.
    – fгedsbend
    May 15 '15 at 15:21

If the human race evolves to such a state that we can colonize other planets. In my opinion no land will be necessary. As the humans can create living space anywhere in space. We could create our own artificial planets (mother-ships) that would hold millions of people and actual 'Earth'(planet) will not be required.

I would suggest that all living space might be called Earth.

So if they say:

the earth would get destroyed and a new earth and heaven will be formed

the heaven means everything in the universe.

  • "the heaven means everything in the universe." I doubt that. Anyways, answer Seems good! May 12 '15 at 19:28
  • @servantofWiser, so what did they mean by heaven?
    – Grasper
    May 12 '15 at 19:33
  • that's a different question, you're asking, if they could've called "Sun" a part of heaven? Well maybe yes, maybe no. But thats a different question. Leave it May 12 '15 at 19:38
  • 2
    The question wasn't whether "all living space might be called Earth"; as I read the question at least, it was asking whether "earth" in Genesis 1 or Matt. 24 meant "all living space". May 12 '15 at 20:53

You must log in to answer this question.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged .