Replies

Well, I have read the Bible pretty thoroughly and I can vouch that every one of those doctrines is literally supported in the text.

Let’s see: #1 sounds like Purgatory to me and there is the text in Luke: “Truly I say to you, today you will be with me in Paradise” “Ameen soi lego, seemeron met emou esee en to paradeiso” The word ‘paradeiso’ in Greek is borrowed from the Persian, the original of which meant ‘enclosure’ or ‘Eden’ if you will. When our Lord meant ‘heaven’, He said ‘ouranous’. So even on the point of death He made a clear distinction. I think we ought to make one too, yes?

I have to ask whether you really want to argue with #2 given I Cor 15:35-49 and I Thess 4:16-17 as particular citations along with Luke 20:27-40 and 22:28-30, and also citing Rev 20:12-15. Given the Scripture testimony, there is no arguing we will be resurrected in physical bodies

As to #3, our Lord Himself said, ‘In my Father’s house are many rooms. If it were not so I would have told you...’ John 14:2 “en tee oikia tou patros mou monai pollai eisin. ei de mee, eipon an umin oit poreouomai etoimasai topon umin?” That sounds like a multiplicity of ‘heavens’ if you will without violating the unity of God or the universality of Heaven. How is it not possible to have varieties of places in such a case?

#4 is also a commonplace. Rev 21:1 says “Then I saw a new heaven and a new earth, for the first heaven and the first earth had passed away, and the sea was no more.” “Kai eidon ouranon (not paradeiso, yes?) kainon kai geen kaineen. ho gar protos ouranos kai hee protee gee apeelthan, kai hee thalassa ouk estin eti.” So Dr. Wright seems on pretty firm ground on this opinion also.

And again in Revelations: 20:4 we find the prime text supporting #5: ‘Then I saw thrones, and seated on them were those to whom the authority to judge was committed.’ “Kai eidon thronous, kai ekathisan ep autous, kai krima edothee autois” Further on, the text reads (v 6): ‘Blessed and holy is the one who shares in the first resurrection! Over such the second death has no power, but they will be priests of God and of Christ, and they will reign with him for a thousand years.’ “makarios kai agois ho echon meros en to anastasei tee protee. Epi touton ho deuteros thanatos ouk echei exousian, all’ esountai iereis tou theou kai tou Christou, kai basileusousin met autou [ta] chilia etee.”

Now, I grant that this takes place before the old heaven and earth are wiped away, but there will be a time when the faithful rule under the direct dominion of God.

The clearest Gospel testimony to #5 is at Matt 20:20-23: ‘Then the mother of Zebedee’s sons came with her sons to make a request of him and bowed low; and he said to her, ‘What is it you want?’ She said to him, ‘Promise that these two sons of mine may sit one at your right hand and the other at your left in your kingdom.’ Jesus answered [and said] ‘You do not know what you are asking. Can you drink the cup that I am going to drink? [that is, can they endure death by martyrdom?] They replied, ‘We can.’ He said to them, ‘Very well’ you shall drink my cup, but as for seats at my right hand and my left, these are not mine to grant; they belong to those to whom they have been allotted by my Father.’

It looks to me like humans will be granted places of authority at some point in the future, though who will have which is not yet known.

Now, I only see that LDS cosmology does not falsify any of them. It has many other elements, most notably the pre-existence of souls (i.e., souls which were all created at the beginning of time and which are then sent into bodies as the children are conceived). If you see that element in Dr. Wright’s thought, then maybe you have something. Otherwise, you do not have a point here.

BTW, I happen to have read all three of Dr. Wright’s excellent books on the Son of God, beginning with the ‘New Testament and the People of God’, ‘Jesus and the Victory of God’ and the ‘Resurrection of the Son of God’. It is so very orthodox and Catholic that I am frankly surprised he even has a benefice in England, much less a senior bishopric. The man is thorough and he backs up his analysis with hard data. He does not cringe from the miraculous but recognizes that it is what mere humans experience when the Divine breaks in to work His will. I should not wish to think to vouch for anyone, but I will stand to defend a holy and faithful man working in extremely adverse circumstances when his work is not intelligently engaged.