Christian faith makes many biblical and theological references to the place or dimension of Heaven, traditionally understood as the place of God’s abiding and activity towards the world, from whence the Word and Spirit enter into the world for creation and salvation.
In older cosmologies Heaven was just "up there’ above the sky. But how we are to understand what Heaven is in relation to our modern knowledge of the vast and ancient cosmos? A second universe different to this one and parallel to it?
Any helpful modern theology to consider? Any helpful authors to read/consider?
There have been theologians of note, recently, (I’m thinking of N.T. Wright - but I know he’s far from alone) who’ve started pushing back on (what they would identify as) the Platonic notion of an etherial Heaven we’re all supposed to float off to after death, and they point us instead toward more solidly biblical narrative of God coming to dwell with God’s people here. As in the kingdom of God is already here now among us, even if it isn’t fully realized yet, obviously (already / not yet language). So when Jesus returns, and his faithful meet him in the air, it’s as a greeting and welcome home delegation, not a “we’re being taken away now” rapture. All this is not to say that there can’t be an other dimension somewhere somehow where spiritual beings abide; it’s rather just a reminder that it’s probably more than a little gnostic influence that has continued to show itself with people thinking that flesh = evil while spiritual = good. Some of these theologians are pushing back hard on all that and (they would say - compellingly, I think) that we should get back to see what scriptures actually teach about all this.
All that is a pretty convenient dodge to your question, I realize. So maybe you still want to know, so where is God? My own answer to that is that God is everywhere - and I think incarnate; first and foremost in Jesus. And I think Christ is (asks to be) incarnate in all of us and already is in His creation also. As to what else can be found in our vast cosmos, that’s an entirely open and exciting question. I personally don’t find much room for dogmatism in that since we know so little of it, but I will say (with an inclination toward some dogmatism) that I would be disappointed if such a vast cosmos turned out to be sterile of all life except for us. That just wouldn’t feel right to me that God would create only one tiny planet with gloriously flourishing vitality. I’m thinking it would be more in God’s character to create a flourishing-with-life universe. …But so big that we’re all have our own protected enclaves where we can learn to live together first.
The Bible just is not very clear on the afterlife and that’s probably because mankind can’t experience death on this side of it and so they don’t have any real language for it. We don’t see a single concept (as in a unified one ) in the Bible. Some places mentions the grave as a place of self awareness. Some places in the Bible mentions it as a state of being asleep and unaware. Sadducees and Pharisees have different beliefs and Jesus did not side with either one.
Many flip to the verses in the New Testament about heaven being a place of eternal life, no death or suffering. But that contradicts the description of it in Isaiah 65:17-25 where it mentions death and birth occurring there. Some verses imply a physical resurrection while others seem to imply a spiritual one.
Then outside of these faiths we have Buddhists and Hindus talking about reincarnation or escaping the wheel.
Some of the other faiths are similar to ours such as in Greek the lost going to hades (land of the dead)
Some have mentioned NTWrights book. The Bible Project podcast has like 8-10+ episodes on heaven and earth.
I look at it like this. Regardless if you are Christian, pagan, or atheist, you should strive to live a good life. Does not really matter about what’s next, we should be more focused on the now and how to be a light in its darkness.
You have lost me with your statement regarding this passage of scripture.
God says he will create a new heavens and a new earth where people will live as long as the life of a tree. It ends by saying the the wolf and the sheep will lay beside each other, that the lion will no longer prey on other animals…it will eat straw.
The book of Revelation EXPANDS on Isaiahs statement…its not different to it as you appear to claim!
This is a significant problem here…individuals think the Old and New testament present different doctrinal belief. Thatisnt true, they present the same doctrinal belief its just that the New Testament gospel expands upon the Old Testament and further explains its principles. Its not about throwing out the O/T or its laws. Christ faithfully kept and taught its laws (incl in the synagogue) for more than 30 years.
When He uses this word “heaven,” it is about the Kingdom of Heaven coming to us and not about us going some place else.
It is true He speaks of going to paradise after death once when speaking to one of the thieves crucified with Him. But the meaning of this is not entirely clear.
But at least we can say Jesus does speaks of life after death and at other times as well, but mostly what he speaks of is obtaining “eternal life” and never “going to some place called heaven.” But what is eternal life? Is He speaking of extending our life on earth forever? I don’t think so. And I would not be interested. Is it some state of unending bliss? Eewe. Druggie highs have never interested me. Atheism and non-existence sounds better than either of these. What does eternal life mean then? Well first of all, I consider growth and learning to be essential to anything I would call life. So I don’t think it is merely about an unending existence but rather having that which would make such an existence worthwhile. Where could we find something like that? Well it does seem to me that an infinite being could offer this. Thus I believe “eternal life” means a relationship with an infinite God, where there is no end to what God has to give to us and no end to what we can receive from Him.
Believe me. I know I lost you. But I don’t write anything to you really. After this I’m going to go ahead and block you because you waste to much of my time. Even ignoring 95% of your post, still wasted so much of my time to move my thumb once to scroll past it.
So this will be my last response to you ever.
Isaiah 65:20-23
New Revised Standard Version Updated Edition
20 No more shall there be in it
an infant who lives but a few days
or an old person who does not live out a lifetime,
for one who dies at a hundred years will be considered a youth,
and one who falls short of a hundred will be considered accursed.
21 They shall build houses and inhabit them;
they shall plant vineyards and eat their fruit.
22 They shall not build and another inhabit;
they shall not plant and another eat,
for like the days of a tree shall the days of my people be,
and my chosen shall long enjoy the work of their hands.
23 They shall not labor in vain
or bear children for calamity,
for they shall be offspring blessed by the Lord—
and their descendants as well.
This is from the chapter I mentioned.
Mentions living out their days.
Mentions those dying young are accursed.
Trees are not important dude.
Mentions them having offspring and descendants.
Feel free to respond. I’m not even going to read it. I won’t even be able to see it.
No it doesn’t. I think you will find in Revelation Heaven and Earth are always separate. Things (Angles etc) come and go between the two but they are not the same.
Isaiah’s “New heaven and new Earth” are completely different
Im not sure whether you think im saying heaven and earth a one place or, if you are saying Isaiah and Revelation are talking about different events.
So to clarify, below is exactly what i believe (the bible explains itself quite clearly i think)
I quoted a bible text that says God will “create a new heavens and a new earth” and i didnt make any claim saying they were or were not the same.
What is important in such criticisms as the one you have just made here… is that one always cross checks the bible concordance links between scriptures (because they are directly linked by all bible concordances and i didnt write those concordance links).
When i compare the references i immediately see the concordance links to “Isaiah 65” underneath the title)
1Then I saw a new heaven and a new earth,a for the first heaven and earth had passed away, and the sea was no more. 2I saw the holy city, the new Jerusalem, coming down out of heaven from God, prepared as a bride adorned for her husband.
new heavens and a new earth.f
The former things will not be remembered, nor will they come to mind.
Finally, there is another cross reference link for the creation of a new heavens and a new earth in Isaiah 66!
22“For just as the new heavens and the new earth,dwhich I will make, will endure before Me,” declares the LORD,
And wouldnt you know it, the side colum bible concordance cross references Isaiah 66 with the writings of the apostle Peter. Have a guess what the apostle Peter says about the scripture in Isaiah 66? Well here tis below:
2 Peter 3:13
But in keeping with God’s promise, we are looking forward to a new heaven and a new earth, where righteousness dwells.
Its pretty obvious what all of the passages are refering to and that the apostle John is talking about the same thing as Isaiah and the apostle Peter.
So if im reading your post incorrectly, you can correct me. However, the above is exactly what i believe regarding the statements i made earlier. If you feel its something different?
Such maturity. The most intelligent response available is “im blocking you”. Well at least i can now rebuff anything you post and you wont even know your responses have been refuted. So my belief is presented unchallenged. No complaints from me there
Revelation is not talking about the new Heaven and Earth but precedes it. The judgements and condemnations of the letters to the churches are a reflection of the Old order and the way it has not worked. Revelation leads up to but does not include the change The whole point of Isaiah is that Heaven descends to Earth. The “New Jerusalem”
You are not explaining you position there with any references, nor did you address my bible concordance statements that directly show these texts are referring to the same event!
Can you provide support for your answer?
Whats this “old order” stuff? The new covenant was presented by Jeremiah 400 years before Christ. So it wasnt new. Christ was repeating Jeremiahs statement. The new testament clearly tells us, even Abraham was saved by faith…not sacrfices of sheep and goats.
Also, in criticism of your answer, you ignore type/antitype biblical theology…why? The Old and New Testaments are examples of it. The earthly and heavenly sanctuaries another.
Some christians confuse the old with the mosaic sanctuary service, saying that is a failed system, thats christs gospel is different. It isnt.
The old order, the former things…this all talks of the world corrupted by sin that happened when Adam and Eve disobeyed. The plan of salvation encompasses the entirety of earths exstence from that point to the end of time in the future.
The cross references i showed you tell us very clearly, Isaiah, 2peter, and Revelation all talk of the exact same event. Because you do not follow type/antitype biblical statements, that is i think where the chasm appears between us.
In any case, my point is proven by concordance cross referencing…i didnt write those cross references…but they are there in plain sight in id say most (if not all) major study bibles nevertheless! You say they are wrong without any evidence supporting your claim.
Part of the problem lies in the wishy washy interpretations i get on these forums. Its hard to follow statements like yours above because of the internal inconsistencies in beliefs being presented. So you are going to have to reference your point so one can make sense of what you are claiming.
Oh i almost forgot to address something else you questioned, read Jeremiah 31.33. Then Hebrews 10.16.
Historically, it is claimed Jeremiah lived up to Babylonian captivity…he was a contemporary of both Daniel and Ezekiel…although an old man at this point. Btw, I correct my timeline. Nebuchadnezzar first attacked the region near enough to 600 b.c. so 600 years before christ not 400. It doesnt change my point…the new testament is simply restating Jermiahs writings about the writing of the law on their hearts and in their minds. So the old covenant isnt thrown out by the new…its altered in that God makes the promise instead of the people putting laws on hearts and minds instead of tablets of stone…but thats it. This prophecy slso proves Christ did mot throw out the law at the cross…Hebrews (which cross references the new covenant prophecy in Jeremiah) was written decades after the cross
Seeing as I disagree with that we are on a loser from the start. You are claiming Original Sin and it is a false doctrine.
You bounce around references like the Bible is a lexicon, or a bunch of quotations. it is nether. If you are going to argue with Scripture be precise. i am not chasing you round the Bible.
I wonder which study Bibles you use. SDA by any chance?
And that is the whole point. I do not do what you do with the Bible!
Hebrews is claiming that Christ’s death supersedes the old covenant, so that there is no need to atone for individual sins anymore. But that is still the “old order” in terms of Revelation. Revelation is Apocalyptic. The end of this world as we know it. Not just a new order, a new reality. The New Heaven and the New Earth follow it.
It doesn’t matter when Hebrews was written as long as it as after Christ. it was written to the Hebrews. That should give you some clue as to who it is talking about. The Hebrews still exist. Paul is adamant that there will be a second restoration (Romans 11) Why are you taking the book of Hebrews as being for the gentiles? (us)
Um, err, what else could Hebrews mean?
And?
You are confusing Judaism with Christianity. You appear to be confusing the salvation of Christ with the apocalypse.
Your theology is so entangled and convoluted it is difficult t make head nor tails of it.
There is nothing complicated here. Revelation is about the Apocalypes, nothing else. Isaiah is looking beyond the apocalypse. Daniel has nothing to do with either the apocalypse or the new order it is The changes of overseers from Babylon through Assyria, Greece and Rome and was probably written retrospectively around the time of the Maccabbees.
[I have edited this post to tone down the response a little]
First, I am an SDA pk (pastors kid), and i wasnt even aware of the existence of any kind opf SDA bible translation until very recently. Given im also educated in both SDA schools and university, that should be evidence enough to highlight how many SDAs use or even know of its existence (in Australia at least)…very few!
Secondly, the funny thing is, have you ever tried google searching “SDA Bible”? Id be interested in you posting your find when you do that (which i doubt you will tbh).
Im just going to ensure im reading you right…you have written academic essays right? So you know that quoting external sources to support ones statements is doing exactly what you demand above? Cross referencing various bible writers in order to determine the authencity and accuracy of doctrine, that is the norm is it not?
If the above is wrong, then i imagine youre making the claim that unless the bible plainly makes statements like “God killed all life on earth with a flood”, Adam Edgar is being imprecise. Here’s the thing, it does!
If this was about the trinity doctrine, being precise is far more difficult. That doctrine is developed from imprecise statements that simply allude to the dual nature of Christ (ie the God/man). However, we are not discussing that here.
When we talk about heaven, the texts i posted in the previous comment about the direct links regarding heaven…i will say this again because i think you are intentionally playing ignorant…I DID NOT WRITE ANY OF THESE BIBLE CONCORDANCES. These cross references linking the two are found in any study bible.
The whole idea of using bible texts in the manner i do should be entirely familiar to any Christian. I guess i have misunderstood what world view you align with and that you dont ever study the bible either correctly or adequitely.
Oh I doubt it.
A doctrine survives on merit not referencing. You could quote the Pope or the Queen of Sheba it would make no difference. Doctrine s not the same as an esasy. I went to College and have written more than my share of essays , thank you.
Means if you are going to cite, cite precisely which book and verse. I am not chasing you round a bible.
I DO NOT CARE WHO WROTE YOUR BIBLE CONCORDNACES.
Human accademia and study means virtually nothing without the Holy Spirit.
Oh it’s familiar, and wrong!
Wrong again. You have no idea how or how much I have studied the Bible.
All you know is that I dispute your understanding and usage… Shame on me!
Defining God as a separate universe makes mathematical sense of a fair amount of theology, though the math isn’t exactly straightforward or something very many people would follow (I don’t rally follow it myself, I just trust that my mathematician older brother knew what he was talking about).
Of course that doesn’t actually say that God is a separate universe, just that it is not unreasonable to believe the related theology.
Dao which is the Way of Heaven.
"There is a thing confusedly formed,
Born before heaven and earth,
Silent and Void,
It stands alone and does not change,
Goes round and does not weary,
It is capable to be the mother of the world,
I know not its name,
So I style it the Way.
Laotse-The Dao Te Ching
If one wants to be happy we need to embrace nature with our soul and flow with the truth of nature that’s before our eyes in all living things as well as the inanimate things. When we cease the killing of all sentient beings than we can embrace heaven. As long as humans continue to kill heaven on earth will not be found. Ghandi said that “The most violent weapon on earth is the table fork” All these arguments about heaven and what it’s about well no one truly knows. But we can know peace and within that peace we can experience heaven.
QUOTE: The Taoists believe that there had once been a golden age, when humans had live in harmony with nature and the other animals. It was a time when they had been happy. But their EGOS had developed, causing a separation between human and the rest of nature. This caused them to work against the Tao and everything became a struggle, resulting in in misery and the loss of their equanimity. To try to regain their lost happiness, humans trying to possess and accumulate material things. But this created stress. The pleasure they gained from the material things they had accumulated was temporary and this made them dissatisfied. The more humans lost touch with the Way, the less they understood it. They stopped co-operating with nature and started to manipulate and control it for their own ends. But humans could not control nature. Plants died and the land became deforested and turned into desert. Crops failed, so humans began to kill and eat animals, which had once been their companions. When humans had plundered nature and the other animals, they turned o themselves, waging wars. Humans enslaved tortured and murdered each other. The Taoists believe that humans’ only solution to their unhappy predicament is to return to the way and live in harmony with nature."
To me and please folks all this rambling about what heaven IS will eventually be found out; Maybe it won’t be what we are all debating about. Who knows what paradise is like but the thief on the cross.
I’m a follower of Christ to best of my ability but I "fall short of the glory of God. However, I embrace many faiths, and I see truth in all.
Randy Alcorn wrote a book about heaven and also a book “Eternal perspectives.” It’s a “collection of quotations on Heaven, the new eart, and life after death.”
I admit I know little of the hereafter maybe like Solomon said in Ecclesiastes? Who knows for sure. But I certainly would not want to give up hope about spending eternity with Jesus and others who I miss and admire like Saint Francis. I’m not as articulate as the commenters here but I believe we should concentrate on building a bit of heaven here on earth and listen to and try to apply the etchings of the Sermon on the Mount and also embrace interfaith teachings as well. I believe in Ahimsa and in that we can find peace and a atmosphere of heave by not doing any harm to anyone-anything and spread love wherever we go to “All creatures great and small.” Peace
My first post in this thread focused on what Jesus actually said. But I suppose you could say that I didn’t really answer the question, or at least, not all of it.
No. Heaven as a second universe is not quite right.
Frankly I think each and every one of us becomes another universe.
Now what do I mean by that?
Physical things exist by the mathematical space time relationships they have to the whole universe. And I think spiritual things are different – I think they exist by their own nature alone, like the physical universe itself, frankly. IOW the spiritual is the greater existence of all things which exist by their own nature which includes the physical universe as just one of those things.
During our physical life, we are basically forced into a relationship with things around us by the laws of nature which care nothing for what we want or believe. When we leave it, these forced connections will be gone, and the only connections we will have to other things and people are those which we have made a part of ourselves – a part of our own nature. I sometimes describe this as running out onto a lake of frictionless ice, where we will continue moving in the same direction we had before when friction allowed us to change our direction.
From my first post above, it should be clear that the most important connection we can make is one with the infinite God who gives us eternal life. But perhaps even more important is that a relationship with God can also provide us with a new source of “friction” – a new way of changing our direction from our self-destructive habits to the the habits of life (growth and learning).
So when I say that everyone of us becomes our own universe. I mean that is the default. That is what we get when we fail to make connections with others. And I certainly don’t mean we are all as big as the universe – each is as big as we have made ourselves. I often say that hell is our heart’s desire (if you think that sounds great, then I think you lack considerable understanding), while heaven is God’s desire for us. To be our own universe alone is frankly to be in the hell of our own creation, where our own self-destructive habits are free to devour us – following our own self-destructive nature.
So you might say heaven is a multiverse, where many different universes can connect with each other and help one another.
