Books, Faith, World & More

Speaking of Heaven

A Review of Heaven: The Logic of Eternal Joy

Daniel Hertzler

Heaven: The Logic of Eternal Joy, by Jerry L. Walls. Oxford University Press, 2002.

How can one write about heaven never having been there? As a one-time reporter, my concern was to recall and report what I saw and heard. To operate without such data calls for some different tactics.

Heaven: The Logic of Eternal Joy is an exercise in speculative philosophy. It does not draw heavily from the Bible. Part of the trouble may be that while the Bible has repeated references to heaven, these often mean the sky. Otherwise they tend toward the visionary such as Isaiah 6 or apocalyptic as in Revelation 21, where it is unclear whether the reference is to future bliss or present reality.

One exception is Psalm 33:13, where “The Lord looks down from heaven / he sees all humankind.” Is this in back of the popular folk theology which has the deceased up above looking down at those left behind? I’m amazed at how often I hear this.

The 1950s four-volume Mennonite Encyclopedia (Mennonite Publishing House) has no article on heaven, but the newer volume 5 (Herald Press, 1990) has a brief article by Stanley C. Shenk. It observes that “Because of symbolic language and interpretation problems, the biblical doctrine of heaven is somewhat elusive.” However, “Many concepts and images appear in the Bible in regards to the final destiny of God’s people.” 

The entry concludes with a quotation from Paul Erb in his book The Alpha and the Omega (Herald Press, 1955): “The Christian has something beyond. He has Someone there, Someone he knows. He has a Lord and Saviour in heaven, who has given him life and hope” (153 in Erb, 368 in vol. 5).

To produce 200 pages on heaven, Walls has gone well beyond the Bible. He begins by observing that some persons have discarded the concept of heaven. Among these are radical theologians Gordon Kaufman and Rosemary Radford Ruether. The former considers symbols such as last judgment, heaven, and hell no longer relevant; the latter “wonders whether the whole notion of life after death is even a concern for women” (4).

Although Walls observes that “there are abundant signs that Kaufman was dead wrong when he pronounced that there is no future for heaven and hell” (12) he does not appear to engage Kaufman and Ruether in dialogue. He concerns himself with naturalistic philosophers more than with theologians.

Walls indicates that he will be “engaging a cluster of questions that range across theology, metaphysics, epistemology, and moral philosophy. I will operate primarily as a philosopher of religion in addressing these issues, but at points I will be concerned with scriptural exegesis and historical theology” (13).

This approach appears to fit with his position as Professor of Philosophy of Religion at Asbury Theological Seminary. He takes his stand on the traditional doctrines of the church and indicates that his belief in heaven is integral to “those doctrines that are most distinctly Christian, namely the doctrines of the Trinity, incarnation, atonement, resurrection, and the second coming of Christ.” 

Among these he finds the doctrine of resurrection foundational. “Because Jesus was raised from the dead, we hope to be also, in a body like his resurrected body. If the resurrection is undercut, the basis of this hope is undercut” (32).

Having thus made his stand early, we will have a general idea where Walls will go, but an occasional proposal strikes me as novel. Not surprising is his critique of David Hume in chapter 1. Hume’s Dialogues Concerning Natural Religion did not deny the existence of God but did deny God’s goodness in light of “the fact of evil in our world” (17). Walls argues that “Hume should either have denied God’s existence or accepted his goodness. His alternative proposal that the Creator of our universe is amoral is deeply incoherent” (29).

Of major concern to Walls are the questions of salvation and sanctification. If we are saved by faith, how are we to be sanctified and worthy of heaven? After a wide-ranging discussion of atonement and sanctification, he comes out in favor of Purgatory, that there will be an opportunity after death to deal with issues not faced in this life. “Purgatory means coming to terms fully with reality” (60). Well.

Next is the question of who will get to heaven, “the relationship between Christianity and other religions” (63). He identifies three positions: particularism, pluralism, and inclusivism. “Particularism poses an insurmountable moral problem for the doctrine of heaven because it depicts God as less than perfectly loving” (75). As for pluralism, Walls discusses the position of Hick, who finds all of the world’s religions similar in their basis of salvation, with none being superior to the other. He finds this position “altogether unacceptable for anyone who takes seriously anything like a traditional view of heaven” (79).

Instead Walls favors inclusivism which, he says, “is prepared to acknowledge a measure of common ground between Christianity and other religions” (80). After jousting with Hick on the issue, he concludes that “there is no reason why God could not give all persons an equal opportunity for salvation” (85).

At the end of the chapter is a brief discussion of the positive fate of children who have not had an opportunity to articulate their faith and even a comment on the status of the animals. “Since all things find their telos [purpose] in God, it is not unreasonable to include animals in our hopes and to believe they will be included to the degree they are capable, in the fellowship of the redeemed” (91).

Next is a question of personal identity, and he affirms that “we will know each other truly and completely for the first time” (112). As for the problem of evil, he concludes that “Heaven holds out the promise that persons who have suffered in terrible ways and died premature deaths . . . have not been consigned to oblivion” (130).

Chapter 6 is an extensive discussion of near-death experiences (NDEs). The question, of course, is whether these people have been in touch with a celestial reality or whether these experiences can be explained from a naturalistic standpoint. Wells concludes that “unless and until the naturalistic account of NDEs is proven to be true, they deserve serious consideration as positive evidence for the Christian doctrine of heaven” (160).

The final chapter is entitled “Heaven, Morality and the Meaning of Life” where Walls holds that “naturalistic views of reality undermine both morality and meaning. . . .“By contrast with naturalism, I shall show how orthodox Christian faith, particularly in its doctrine of heaven, both underwrites morality and charges our lives with depth of meaning” (162). Among those reviewed critically with help from one George Mavrodes is Bertrand Russell, for whom “The truly deep things in a Russellian world are things such as matter, energy, natural law, even change or chaos.” Walls responds, “It is hard to see how morality can make overriding demands on us if it is superficial in this sense.” 

Another view is that of Kant, who sought to call for morality without belief in God. Again with Mavrodes, Walls concludes that “we must postulate God and immortality to insure this ultimate correspondence” (165).

Walls finds that in some cases naturalistic philosophers have developed what he terms a secular substitute for the meaning of life. Five different options are described, the fifth of which is “the continuing influence and impact of a life well lived.” As an example of this, he mentions Carl Sagan, a famous scientist who died while denying the possibility of life after death, but whose life nevertheless influenced many persons (183). 

Walls concludes that “The fact that naturalists offer secular alternatives to heaven . . . shows that it is an irreplaceable resource in our efforts to give our lives the meaning we crave” (185). So he describes how the Christian doctrine of heaven answers questions the naturalists cannot answer.

He observes that “In Christian thought, resurrection and immortality are not afterthoughts, nor are they postulates to salvage morality from irrationality. They are integral to the grand claim that ultimate reality is reciprocal love” (191). Further, “Perhaps at the end of the day, the issues come down to whether we can believe in God, for the Christian view of God is that he is a being whose very nature is to be ecstatically happy” (197).

After this survey, I find myself yet inclined toward the more cautious Mennonite perspective on heaven. We do believe in God, although the idea of God as “ecstatically happy” is a new thought to me. I am reminded also that in Matthew 28:17 it is reported that when the 11 disciples saw Jesus after his resurrection, “some doubted.”

Questions about things celestial are not new. However, we do have martyrs in the Mennonite tradition, and martyrs had a perspective on life after death. The article “Martyrs” in Mennonite Encyclopedia (vol. 3, p. 524), reports that “The martyrs had the unshakable certainty of being on the right road, which God had unequivocally showed them in the Scriptures. . . . During their persecution they had learned that this life cannot be the final fulfillment. Hence they saw even in a martyr’s death the transition to a fuller and richer life.”

The 1995 Confession of Faith in a Mennonite Perspective indulges in little speculation, generally sticking close to the Bible. “We look forward to the coming of a new earth and a new Jerusalem” it states in Article 24, “The Reign of God” and continues, “where the people of God will no longer hunger, thirst or cry” (90). 

Article 24 includes the commentary that “The New Testament says much about the resurrection. It speaks much less frequently about the state of persons between the time of their death and the resurrection. Yet we who are in Christ are assured that not even death can separate us from the love of God (Rom. 8:38-39)” (91).

Mennonites will tend to agree with Walls that “the issue comes down to whether we can believe in God,” but beyond this will hesitate to make emphatic statements. Yet with the prevalence of the popular piety where the dead are perceived as looking down, perhaps we should have a perspective on death and resurrection. In The Christian Century, July 14, 2009, Michael Jinkins published “Legacy of Faith,” written as a letter to his daughter who was struggling with the question “Is there a God?” Jinkins states, “You have asked me on a couple of occasions if I believe in the resurrection. I have answered you by placing myself in the hands of the oldest creed in Christendom, the Nicene Creed: ‘ I look for the resurrection.’” (35). 

It occurs to me that “look for” suggests a proper attitude. The mystery is acknowledged, the questions are not answered, but a position is taken. In the meantime, we wait to see what will happen.
—Daniel Hertzler, Scottdale, Pennsylvania, is an editor, writer, and chair of the elders, Scottdale Mennonite Church.