This essay is adapted from my article, "Redemption Accomplished and Applied: Kingdom Inauguration and New Creation in Isaiah 65–66." The complete version contains the full footnote material not included here.
Introduction
In biblical studies, particularly when exploring eschatological themes like the “new heavens and new earth” promised in Isaiah 65:17–25, the Greek term stoicheia (often translated as “elements”) plays a pivotal role in New Testament passages. This phrase from Isaiah has historically been debated: Does it foretell a literal cosmic re-creation, or does it symbolize covenantal renewal through divine judgment and restoration? Building on a redemptive-historical reading—often aligned with partial preterism—this interpretation views Isaiah’s vision as the inauguration of God’s kingdom, fulfilled in Christ’s first advent and progressively applied through the Spirit’s work in the covenant community.
This perspective extends to the New Testament, where authors like Peter and Paul echo Isaiah’s themes. In 2 Peter 3:10–13, Peter’s apocalyptic imagery of heavens passing away and elements dissolving has often been read as predicting global destruction. However, a closer examination of stoicheia—informed by its usage in Paul—reveals it as referring to foundational religious, legal, and covenantal structures, not physical matter. This reading recovers a coherent, canonically grounded view of “new creation” as God’s unfolding redemptive purposes in history, rather than material annihilation. Below, we delve into this key term, drawing on scholarly debates and scriptural context to clarify its meaning.
The Debate Over Stoicheia in 2 Peter 3
In 2 Peter 3:10, Peter writes, “But the day of the Lord will come like a thief; on that day the heavens will pass away with a loud noise, the elements [stoicheia] will burn and be dissolved, and the earth and the works on it will be disclosed [heurethēsetai].” This follows his earlier reassurance that the “judgment and destruction of the ungodly” (v. 7) will indeed occur. His reference to “the present heavens and earth” stored up for fire situates the prophecy squarely within his own historical moment. As established in broader prophetic tradition, the “last days” (v. 3) pertain to the apostolic generation—a theme echoed in related texts such as Luke 21:20–24 and 1 Thessalonians 2:14–16. Peter’s warnings about false teachers (cf. Mt 24:24) further align with Jesus’ own eschatological discourse. The judgment that befell the ungodly in Noah’s and Sodom’s days (2Pe 2:5–6) serves as precedent: divine judgment occurs within human history, not beyond it. The reference to those who “feast with you” (2:13) underscores Peter’s pastoral concern—this judgment is not a distant abstraction but an imminent reality facing his audience. The contextual emphasis on near-term accountability supports the reading that Peter expected the day of the Lord to arrive within the experience of his hearers (3:10–12).
Two Greek terms in 2 Peter 3:10—stoicheia and heurethēsetai—remain central to scholarly debate over the passage’s meaning. Stoicheia, typically translated as “elements” or occasionally “heavenly bodies,” is said to “burn and be dissolved” and to “melt with heat.” The term heurethēsetai was traditionally rendered “shall be burned up” (e.g., KJV, ASV, RSV, NASB), yet BDAG defines it more neutrally: “to come upon something, through purposeful search or accidentally.” Most modern translations (e.g., NIV, ESV, CSB, NLT) now favor “it will be disclosed” or “found,” suggesting the burning and dissolving of stoicheia serves to expose or reveal something. BDAG also defines stoicheia broadly as “basic components of something,” contextually ranging from physical elements (earth, air, fire, water) and celestial bodies to principles of instruction or foundational structures of existence. While heurethēsetai is mostly debated in theological controversies, the real interpretive dispute centers on stoicheia. What, precisely, does Peter mean by this term?
Debates over the meaning of stoicheia have generated three main interpretive positions. Most scholars favor heavenly or celestial bodies (sun, moon, and stars) to be consumed in a global conflagration. Others favor a reading that Peter is speaking of the basic elements of life, earth, air, fire, and water, which they attribute to the influence of stoic cosmology, drawing especially on the idea of ekpyrōsis, whereby the cosmos undergo a series of fiery disintegrations. Thomas Schreiner adopts this view, arguing that stoicheia refers to the physical substance of the universe, “the stuff of which the physical things in the world are made.” Richard Bauckham, similarly aligns with Schreiner, but strengthens the case of an “eschatological conflagration” by appealing to 2 Clement 16:3 as a direct source of 2 Peter 3:10: “But you know that the day of judgment is already coming as a blazing furnace, and some of the heavens will dissolve, and the whole earth will be like lead melting in a fire, and then everyone’s works, the secret and the public, will be revealed.” Gene Green likewise asserts that “The heavens and the earth . . . will be destroyed by [God].”
While these interpretations have garnered substantial scholarly support, their physicalist assumptions risk overlooking the intertextual and covenantal context that frames Peter’s apocalyptic language. Bauckham’s appeal to 2 Clement and other Jewish apocalyptic writings, for instance, places interpretive weight on non-canonical sources that are rich in symbolism and hyperbole. As John J. Collins notes, Jewish apocalyptic literature is “not descriptive, referential, news-paper language but the expressive language of poetry, which uses symbols and imagery to articulate a sense or feeling about the world.” To prioritize these sources over the inspired prophetic tradition—such as Isaiah 13 or 34—risks displacing Peter’s biblical backdrop with speculative cosmology. In the prophets, cosmic upheaval language often serves as metaphor for covenantal judgment. Reading Peter’s imagery through that lens offers stronger continuity with canonical precedent and better explains the theological function of apocalyptic rhetoric.
Schreiner’s literalist approach deserves credit for taking the text seriously, but his reading diminishes the symbolic richness of the apocalyptic genre Peter is drawing from. As Reynolds and Stuckenbruck note, “Eschatological salvation does not require an end-of-the-world scenario” and is often misread when ‘eschatological’ is equated with physical destruction, as we find in apocalyptic literature; rather, its symbolic imagery serves to evoke theological hope, ethical urgency, and covenantal transformation through rhetorical intensity rather than scientific description. Schreiner, Bauckham, and Green all appeal to Isaiah 34:4 as evidence for cosmic dissolution, yet Isaiah 34 uses celestial collapse language metaphorically to depict the downfall of Edom, not literal astronomical destruction. A physicalist reading misses this prophetic pattern and fails to account for the NT authors’ consistent use of such language to describe covenantal transition inaugurated by Christ. This symbolic and covenantal reading of Isaiah’s language finds consistent affirmation across the New Testament.
As the evidence suggests, the New Testament authors—Luke, Paul, the writer of Hebrews, and Peter—each echo Isaiah’s vision in distinct yet complementary ways. Luke portrays the Isaianic new exodus as fulfilled in Christ’s ministry and the Spirit’s formation of the Church (Lk 4:18–21; Acts 13:47). Paul employs “new creation” language to describe the believer’s transformation through the Spirit (2 Co 5:17; Ga 6:15), while the author of Hebrews envisions the “shaking of heaven and earth” (He 12:26–28) as the removal of the old covenant order rather than cosmic collapse. Likewise, Peter’s reference to the dissolution of the stoicheia (2 Pe 3:10–13) aligns with this covenantal transition. Their collective witness points to the “new heavens and new earth” as a redemptive-historical transformation rather than a prediction of material conflagaration.
This essay therefore adopts the third interpretive option: that stoicheia refers to the foundational structures of religious, legal, and covenantal life—not to the material building blocks of the cosmos. This reading best fits the context of Peter’s letter and aligns with New Testament usage elsewhere. Though Peter is talking about a burning judgment that will expose the evil works of the ungodly, it is a cleansing that is taking place not the destruction of the earth, which is consistent with Paul’s understanding of these things (2Pe 3:15–16; cf. Ro 8:20–21). Paul’s teaching in 1 Corinthians 3:8–17 strengthens the reading of 2 Peter 3:10–12 as a covenantal judgment targeting the works of the old order. In 1 Corinthians, Paul presents eschatological fire not as annihilation of the material world, but as a refining judgment that tests the quality of human works—some enduring, others being consumed. This imagery parallels Peter’s statement that “the earth and the works done on it will be found [heurethēsetai]” (2Pe 3:10), which most plausibly refers to the uncovering and exposure of evil deeds. This is further corroborated by Peter’s earlier warning when he says, “Dear friends, don’t be surprised when the fiery ordeal comes among you to test you” (1Pe 4:12, emphasis added), in which he is speaking of a definitive testing that is to come (The AD 70 destruction of Jerusalem, as foretold in Mt 24:1–3, marks the covenantal transition—the fiery ordeal—Peter envisions where the old order structures are judged and exposed). Furthermore, this statement, buttressed with his declaration that “judgment begins with the household of God” (1Pe 4:17), seems to be an allusion to the metallurgical background in Malachi 3’s temple-purging fire. Having established the covenantal context of judgment imagery, we can move to the NT writers, specifically Paul, to see how he utilizes stoicheia within his eschatological context.
Paul’s Use of Stoicheia and Its Covenant Implications
Within Paul’s framework (Ga 4:3, 9; Col 2:8, 20), stoicheia are best understood—not as cosmic elements or celestial bodies—but as the foundational religious structures of both Judaism and Gentile experience. Drawing on a comprehensive survey of early Jewish, Christian, and philosophical sources, Neil Martin argues that stoicheia in the Pauline corpus more coherently refers to “the fundamental components of pre-Christian living, as it contrasts to the fullness of life in Christ.” As Martin emphasizes, the term’s meaning must be discerned contextually, not assumed lexically. Peter Leithart, undertaking a similar investigation of stoicheion, further supports this reading.
Leithart demonstrates that in Paul’s thought, stoicheia are not atomistic building blocks but interwoven systems of law, tradition, and cultural practice that shaped Jewish and Gentile identity. Paul socializes and historicizes the concepts of physis and stoicheia, showing that law and nature were intertwined under divine governance, and that a change in covenantal law entails a transformation of the world’s structure.
In broader Greek and Jewish thought, stoicheia referred not merely to the material elements of earth, air, fire, and water, but to the foundational orders that sustained the cosmos through ritual, liturgy, and covenantal practice. Philosophers like Plato and Aristotle, as well as Jewish writers like Philo, emphasized that cosmic and social harmony depended on these systems. Against this background, Paul’s and Peter’s critique of the stoicheia targets the collapse of the old religious and covenantal world, not the destruction of the physical universe.
With this broader conceptual framework in place, we can see how Paul’s own use of stoicheia in Galatians and Colossians further clarifies its covenantal significance. Paul makes this point explicit in Galatians 3:23–25 and 4:3–4, where he uses parallel language to describe life under the law before Christ: “held captive under the law” (3:23) is mirrored by “enslaved to the [stoicheia] of the world” (4:3). Here, stoicheia refers not to cosmic substances but to the law’s constraining role—specifically its temporary types, shadows, and symbols of the old covenant. In Galatians 4:8–10, Paul warns Gentile believers not to return to the “weak and worthless stoicheia”—the religious and philosophical systems that once defined their lives. His reference to observing “days, months, seasons, and years” (v. 10) confirms that stoicheia denotes ritual and covenantal practices, not cosmic forces or spiritual beings. This same covenantal reading appears in Colossians 2, where Paul links stoicheia to “philosophy and empty deceit” (v. 8) and to man-made regulations such as “don’t handle, don’t taste, don’t touch” (v. 20). Thus, in both letters, stoicheia are the foundational structures of the old religious order—systems now rendered obsolete by the coming of Christ. To go back to those things “constitutes a fall back into stoicheic life, a return to ‘Egypt’.”
This consistent Pauline usage lends support to viewing 2 Peter 3 through a similar covenantal lens, where stoicheia are most fittingly interpreted as the religious frameworks—false teaching, legalism, tradition, and covenantal apostasy—that stand in opposition to the gospel. Peter’s statement that the stoicheia will be dissolved with fire (vv. 10, 12) is more coherently interpreted as covenantal judgment and exposure rather than cosmic annihilation. In this reading, what is “burned up” are the enslaving systems Paul elsewhere calls “weak and worthless.” This covenantal understanding of stoicheia invites a return to Peter’s vision in 2 Peter 3, where similar theological structures appear to undergird his imagery of fire, dissolution, and renewal. Peter’s imagery is best read as depicting a covenantal purging rather than a cosmic annihilation—one that “brings in” the new heavens and new earth they await (2Pe 3:12), “where righteousness dwells” (2Pe 3:13). This vision aligns with Isaiah’s prophecy (Is 65:17; 66:22), where new creation signifies the renewal of God’s covenant people rather than the replacement of the physical universe. Like Isaiah and Paul, Peter depicts the old world passing away—not the cosmos itself, but the types, shadows, symbols, and systems of false righteousness—giving way to the transformed order inaugurated through Christ. The scoffers will be put to shame, and those who trusted in Christ will be vindicated.
Conclusion: Stoicheia and the Hope of Covenant Renewal
Reinterpreting stoicheia as covenantal and religious structures rather than physical elements transforms our understanding of New Testament eschatology. It aligns Peter’s fiery imagery with Isaiah’s promise of renewal through judgment, emphasizing spiritual transformation over cosmic destruction. This view invites believers to see the “new heavens and new earth” as an inaugurated reality—accomplished in Christ’s redemptive work and applied through the Spirit’s ongoing ministry. Far from a distant apocalypse, it calls us to live in the light of God’s covenant faithfulness today.
Comments