11/12/2021 – “To speak of ‘imagining heaven’ does not imply or entail that heaven is a fictional notion, constructed by deliberately disregarding the harsher realities of the everyday world. It is to affirm the critical role of the God-given human capacity to construct and enter the mental pictures of divine reality, which are meditated through Scripture and the subsequent tradition of reflection and development. We are able to inhabit the mental images we create, and thence anticipate the delight of finally entering the greater reality to which they correspond.” Alistair McGrath
Just as in the previous post – from the book “Heaven” by Randy Alcorn
It is not about the messenger, but if it strikes you that this quote requires reflection and thought, here is a short bio for Alistair McGrath if you don’t know him:
“Alister McGrath is the Andreas Idreos Professor of Science and Religion at the University of Oxford, who is one of the world’s best-known and most influential living theologians. After studying chemistry as an undergraduate at Oxford, specializing in quantum theory, I undertook doctoral research under the supervision of Professor Sir George Radda in the Oxford University Department of Biochemistry, before switching to study theology at Oxford. In addition to my Oxford doctorate in molecular biophysics, I have two further earned Oxford doctorates in theology and intellectual history. My research includes extended engagements with the ideas of the Oxford writers C. S. Lewis and Richard Dawkins,as well as the relation of science and faith, and Christian theology and apologetics. All of these themes are explored in my publications and this website.” (taken from his website: alistairmcgrath.net)
OK brothers, another book that I encourage you to order and reference from time to time; “Pocket Handbook of Christian Apologetics” by Peter Kreeft and Ronald K. Tacelli”. By way of a “teaser”, I am going to share some excerpts on the “Heaven and Hell” chapter that tie to Alistair McGrath’s quote. “Apologetics” – it is important to be able to both share and defend your Christian faith with future Christians , in the context even of their current faith.
Ok, I will leave tracks to give you somewhat of an idea of my jumping around the chapter. I can’t possibly cover all the good stuff per se; there is a point where one’s excerpt(s) sharing becomes copyright infrigement. haha Here we go:
Introductory Section before a scant covering of Objections # 1 through #17 to heaven that follow:
“Next to the idea of God, the idea of heaven is the greatest idea that has entered the human mind. If it is denied and attacked more today than in the past, then the apologist had better explain and defend it better today than in the past and certainly not water it down or ignore it.
Even more difficult to defend than the idea of heaven is the idea of hell. Indeed, hell is probably the most difficult Christian doctrine to defend, the most burdensome to believe and the first to be abandoned. The critic’s case against it seems very strong, and the believer’s duty to believe it seems unbearable.
The focus of this chapter is to answer the objections of unbelievers against heaven and hell.
Heaven
We have outlined below seventeen objections to the idea of heaven. Our intent is not to provide a theology of heaven, nor is it to provide a picture of heaven intended for inspiration or personal edification. Much, much more remains to be said after the objections have been answered.
….
Objection 2: There is no scientific evidence for heaven.
Reply A: Not for many other ideas that everyone admits are valid, even the scientist. When the scientist closes his laboratory and goes home and kisses his wife, he does not believe there is nothing there but hormones and neurons and molecules.
Reply B: There is no scientific evidence for the notion that nothing exists except what is proved by the scientific evidence. The objector assumes that whatever there is no scientific evidence for does not exist (e.g. there is no scientific evidence for heaven therefore heaven does not exist). But there is not scientific evidence for that assumption; it cannot be proved by the scientific method. It is simply an assumption; in fact, it is an arbitrary decision of will to narrow the bounds of reality to the bounds of the scientific method.
Objection 3: Heaven is obviously wishful thinking. If there is no heaven, we would have to invent it. It is a ‘necessary dream.’
…
Reply B: Even if there is a correspondence between our innate wishes and the idea of heaven, that correspondence could be explained equally well by God’s having designed us for heaven rather than by our having designed heaven for ourselves. The glove could have been made for the hand, or the hand could have been made for glove.
Objection 4: The very form, or structure, of the idea of heaven is mythic or legendary. The golden streets are just another version of the ‘happy hunting grounds’ or the Elysian Fields.
Reply A: Distinguish the imagery from the substance. To disbelieve in the substance because you mistook the imagery for the literal description is as foolish as disbelieving in the moon because you mistook the ‘man in the moon’for a literal man.
Objection 5: Believing in heaven is escapist
Reply A: The most pointed answer to the charge of escapism is C.S. Lewis’s simple question: ‘Who talks the most against escapism’? Jailers.’ Think about it.
….
Reply C: Heaven is not escapist, because it is real. The idea is ‘escapist’ only if it is a lie. To call the idea of heaven escapist is to presuppose atheism, but not to have the clarity or courage to say so. If heaven is real, it is escapist not to think about it. It is realistic to do so.
The first question about any idea cannot be whether it is escapist but whether it is true. The label ‘escapist’ is itself escapist; those who use it are trying to escape their primary obligation to prove the idea false.
….
Objection 7: Heaven is a bribe. It makes religion selfish. You work for your heavenly reward, not for pure lvoe. It’s mercenary.
Reply: Is it mercenary for Romeo to want to marry Juliet? For a team that has worked hard to want victory? For a student of a foreign language to want to read and speak it fluently? Some rewards are not mercenary but natural and right. They are not artifically tacked on to the activity they reward, like a grade in a course, but are that activity itself in the perfected state. Such is heaven. It is not some reward externally added to the love of God and neighbor, but that love itself perfected.
Objection 8: Heaven is too egotistical. What arrogance to think you are destined to be spiritually married to God!
Reply: God said it, not us. It is indeed amazing. God is amazing.
Objection 9: Heaven will be boring. Nothing to do but worship — an unending church service.
….
Reply C: Heaven is not boring because it is perfect love and work. Even Freud knew that the two things everyone needs to make life worth living are love and work.
Soli Deo Gloria indeed!
Blessings. Always connected by His grace and through prayer!
Your brother in Christ,
Jimmy