How many Fundamentalist Protestants, JW's, and other advocates of a redeemed material creation understand that in classical, historical chrstianity Adam's time in the garden was not meant to be his permanent state but a mere period of testing, after which he would have been translated (without death) to a spiritual heaven? I certainly never realized this for most of my life. To many of us the idea that Adam brought death into the world meant that had Adam not sinned he would have lived on earth forever, not that he would have passed out of material existence by some other means. To me and many others the only reason a "spiritual heaven" existed as all was to hold the "saved" souls who otherwise would have been cutting the mustard forever on a paradise earth.
The predominant chrstian position (the classical one upheld by the ancient liturgical churches and, I assume, by classical Reformation Protestants) is that the Garden of Eden has already been "restored" by being replaced by the chrstian church. Just as Adam would have spent a brief period on earth and then passed over without death to "heaven," redeemed man now passes through the church instead and eventually goes to heaven by dying. Thus there will be no restored Eden in the future because the chrstian church with its sacraments and ceremonial has literally taken its place. The church is the kingdom of G-d, the the millenium, and the "redeemed world." All the terminology in both scripture and in liturgy of a wonderful redeemed world without sin and without death already exists in the church, which is the ultimate fulfillment of all prophecies. Hence the unrelenting hostility to what is termed a "political messiah" by classical chrstianity.
In fact, many of these "platonists" blame Communism itself on belief in a paradise earth at the end of time and regard the rejection of such a thing in favor of a spiritual heaven after death (or after the physical world has been absolutely destroyed) as the only antidote to Communism! If you don't believe me, a simple web search will show that "chiliasm" and "messianism" is a rejection of "G-d's plan" in favor of a "naturalistic revolution." Many chrstian anti-Semites like the late Fr. Denis Fahey critiqued the "Jewish revolutionary spirit" and defined the conflict of our age as "Jewish naturalism" vs. "chrstian supernaturalism." What must be understood here is that by using the terms "naturalism" and "supernaturalism" Fahey was not referring to orthodox religion vs. materialistic reductionism but quite literally to the "spiritual heaven" vs. the redeemed physical earth. (This example was not given to start a fight with Catholic FReepers. Fr. Fahey simply believed along these lines and so did many conservative Catholics of an earlier era, as well as radical Catholic traditionalists of today. He was chosen as an example of this mindset and nothing more.)
I myself grew up believing that Communism was caused by religion abandoning the earth for heaven. If religion promises nothing but heaven after death, then this world is ours to do with as we please. The only comfort in this world would lie, not with a future Divine intervention, but on human activity, and in fact some religious people would try to earn their way to their spiritual reward by creating a temporal (and very disappointing) "paradise" on earth. Of course, the ultra-quietistic dependence on Divine intervention alone (without the human responsibility to obey G-d's commandments) is an error I now recognize.
The notion of whether "heaven" is a super spiritual world that awaited Adam or the natural state in which he was created affects other areas of theology as well. For example, because Adam was not created in what was meant to be his permanent position on a paradise earth, because "heaven" awaited even him, then human merit has a role to play. In fact, one reason for the Catholic belief in purgatory and Orthodox belief in a mediate state (though not called purgatory) is that "heaven" requires a purity not even the newly-created Adam had. Adam himself, even in Eden, had to "merit" heaven; therefore, even chrstians in sanctifying (or deifying) grace are apt to spend much time after death before entering heaven. For Fundamentalist Protestants and other advocates of paradise earth as the end in creation (rather than a temporary home in which man is to merit heaven), the notion that anything other than "being saved" is necessary to enter "heaven" is ridiculous. What did Adam do to merit being created in the Garden? Nothing, of course. Similarly, nothing more is required to enter "heaven" at death than to have been "saved." Man can no more be expected to have undergone any sanctification process to enter heaven than Adam could have undergone to be created in Eden. It's a shame more people don't see this point of contention.
This is a genuinely interesting and important topic. I did not post this to antagonize or attack anyone, but simply because I have had to deal with this own issue in my own life and I know it's much more important than the way people treat it.
MadDawg, thank you for your respectful and thoughtful response to the original poster. That was very kind of you.
Please continue!
And most people recognize it as political utopia, something more along the lines of turning earth into heaven, or better yet, making a heaven of hell.
I will have to ask. I've never heard this.
Gen. 2:15 Then the LORD GOD took the man and put him in the garden of Eden to tend and keep it.
I read that passage as God intending for Adam to stay in the garden.
The church is the kingdom of G-d, the the millenium, and the "redeemed world." All the terminology in both scripture and in liturgy of a wonderful redeemed world without sin and without death already exists in the church, which is the ultimate fulfillment of all prophecies. Hence the unrelenting hostility to what is termed a "political messiah" by classical chrstianity.
This may in part reflect an amillenialist view, but from the beginning there have also been premillenialists who disagreed.
For Fundamentalist Protestants and other advocates of paradise earth as the end in creation (rather than a temporary home in which man is to merit heaven), the notion that anything other than "being saved" is necessary to enter "heaven" is ridiculous. What did Adam do to merit being created in the Garden? Nothing, of course. Similarly, nothing more is required to enter "heaven" at death than to have been "saved." Man can no more be expected to have undergone any sanctification process to enter heaven than Adam could have undergone to be created in Eden. It's a shame more people don't see this point of contention.
It's an interesting point, but it's sin that entered and changed everything. Once sin entered the picture something had to be done to ransom those that are affected by it.
I think your analysis is very good except incomplete. The purpose of heaven and hell is inconsequential in my mind. The real issue is whether there is a God and what God is like if He has revealed Himself.
If I understand your analysis correctly, based upon your understanding of God, then God expects us to do certain things for Him in order for us to receive His favor. This view is certainly different from the Protestant view that believes God is present to help us and He neither seeks nor wants our help. He only wants us to acknowledge Him.
You are quite correct that this is the classical historical Christian position. I believe what the original article is pointing out is precisely that this position is based primarily on imported Greek philosophy rather than on the Bible.
If you disagree, could you point out where in the Bible it states that the Garden or Earth was to be only a temporary period of testing? I know of no such statements.
The Bible itself does not, AFAIK, give us any reason to believe Adam or Eve would have died had they not sinned, or that they would have "promoted" to Heaven.