Heaven’s OK, but It’s Not the End of the World

It’s Eastertide, and it’s been happening for so many years that I just assumed it would happen again:  Time magazine would feature a cover article that offered some “new take” on why Jesus didn’t really rise from the dead, or some such thing.  Imagine my surprise (and pleasure) then, when I read the April 16, 2012 article by Jon Meacham, “Heaven Can’t Wait: Why Rethinking the hereafter could make the world a better place.”  To be sure, there are at least two confusing and/or misleading things about the article’s title, but I’ll save that for a minute.  First, let me recommend the article to you for careful reading.

Meacham sets out two Christian views of hope.  (Note:  this is my way of saying it in naming “Christian views of hope”—one of the flaws of the article is that it uses the noun “heaven” in confusing and inconsistent ways.  More on that in a second).  The first view of hope is introduced by referring to the book Heaven is For Real, among other sources.  I offered a review of that book here on Concordia Theology, and having read it I know that Meacham’s description is accurate.  The hope of Christians, according to Heaven is For Real, is simply and purely the hope of “dying and going to heaven.”  Nothing else matters—no other hope is mentioned in the book.  Meacham notes that many American Christians hold this view.  When, therefore, they think about the future and what the promises of God in Christ ultimately entail, they think only of this:  dying and going to heaven, leaving this corrupt creation behind, leaving their bodies behind, and going to be with Christ.  This is “view of hope #1,” and it contains an element of truth while being dreadfully non-creedal and terribly anthropocentric.  The element of truth, of course, is the promise of the interim state of the soul (as Francis Pieper terms it).  That is, if we die (and Christ might return in glory before we do), then even though death literally rips our human nature apart, nevertheless our souls do experience a blessed rest and awareness of Christ “in paradise,” as Jesus said to the thief on the cross.  This is true.  It is what many people normally refer when they use the noun “heaven,” as in “dying and going to heaven.”  Let me say it again: this is true.  But if this is one’s basic and entire view of “Christian hope,” then it stands in stark contrast to the “other, more radical” view that Meacham describes.

The second view of hope is centered in the promise that Jesus the Lord will return in glory to this creation, and that he will set the creation free from its bondage to decay to enjoy the glorious liberty of the children of God (Romans 8).  This is the view promoted by many Christian writers and thinkers today, and over the last dozen years or so I have offered my own small efforts in reflecting and teaching this hope (see my articles in the Concordia Journal: “Regaining Biblical Hope” [2001] and “Five Things Not to Say at Funerals” [2003]).  In describing this view, Meacham rightly highlights the work of N. T. Wright, one of the most interesting and prolific NT scholars of our time.  In his books both large and small, for scholars and laity, Wright has emphasized this second view of hope, centered in the return of Christ, the resurrection of the body, and—well, you know the Creed—the life of the world to come.  What remains a genuinely remarkable reality is that, just as Meacham writes, this second view is “radically different” from the common Christian understanding.  It is the view of the Lord Jesus in teaching after teaching, parable after parable.  It is the view of the Apostle Paul, and LCMS scholar James Ware has written clearly about it (Concordia Journal 2009).  This is the hope of the ecumenical Creeds, and of the Small Catechism, that proclaims that “Christ will raise up me and all the dead, and give unto me and all believers eternal life; this is most certainly true.”

So, this Eastertime, I recommend this Time magazine article for your reading.  At the same time, I would like to point out two confusions in the article, and they are present in the title.  First, the noun “heaven” is used with a sort of “sliding reference,” and I found it confusing.  I have come to think, in fact, that we should speak more often of “eternal life” than “heaven.”  In so doing, it would become clear that our hope for eternal life has already begun—it’s already ours, through baptismally-grounded faith in Christ.  We have, in the words of John 5, already passed from death and into life.  At the same time, to speak of the hope of eternal life would make it easier to think clearly about that life that will fully be ours, as the Small Catechism says, when “Christ will raise up me and all the dead.”  It is most certainly not true to say that “eternal life begins when we die.”  No.  A blessed rest from labor and toil and sin begins when we die.  And a time of waiting (no, not purgatory!) ensues, just as the souls of the martyrs under the altar in the Apocalypse reveal:  “How long, O Lord?”  If we are to use the word “heaven,” I don’t think that Tom Wright’s attempt to change its meaning, as Meacham describes it, is a helpful change.  Let “heaven” refer to the interim state of the soul between physical death and physical resurrection.  That’s OK.  I’m not against heaven.  But it is not the End of the World.  It’s not the hope of the Church.

The second confusion to point out is the implication that a more eschatological (and biblical) view of Christian hope would lead to the view that it’s our job to “make the world a better place.”  To be sure, there is a profound element of truth in this.  If this world actually matters, and if this fallen creation is still the work of God that He intends ultimately to cleanse and purge and redeem, then this world does matter and what we do in this world does matter.  One thinks of 1 Corinthians 3, where the beautiful work that we Christians build on the Christ-foundation will remain until and after the Judgment Day.  Or, one marvels and rejoices at the promise that comes as the resounding therefore at the end of the greatest passage on hope in the entire Bible:  “Therefore, be steadfast, immovable, always abounding in the work of the Lord because you know that your labor in the Lord—in this life, with your bodies, in this creation—your labor in the Lord is not in vain!” (1 Cor 15:58).  If this world matters, then Christians are called to care for one another and world in its needs and suffering, and to invite others to become Christians who belong to the Creator God, body and soul and all things.  (BTW, a new video-based Bible study on 1 Corinthians 15 is available from Concordia Seminary)

However—it is not our job to “make the world a better place.”  N. T. Wright himself offers an important distinction in talking about “the kingdom of God.”  To be sure, there are times when it almost seems that Wright loses track of his own distinction.  He does carefully distinguish, however, between “bringing” or “building the kingdom” on the one hand, and “working for the kingdom” on the other.  The first, only God in Christ can and will do.  The second, in the Spirit, the Church is called to do in many and various acts of witness, mercy, and life together.  The world is not able to be redeemed by us.  But that does not mean that we are not sent into the world to care for the creation and the people in it, by faith in what Christ has already done and because of a powerful hope in what Christ will one day do for us—and for the entire cosmos.

It’s Easter.  Jesus is risen, the first fruits of those who sleep.  Jesus is risen, the beginning of the new creation.  Read the Time article, and find good stuff there.  Ponder the Creeds, and believe everthing that is there.  Yes, heaven is OK.  But it’s not our great hope—it’s not the End of the World.

Note: If you don’t yet have log-in access to the ATLAS database and the Concordia Journal articles linked above, follow these instructions.

Related posts

Lutheran Theology: Kill Your Passions

Lutheran Theology: Kill Your Passions

Lutheran Theology: Kill Your Passions

This is part four in a series of posts by Dr. David Maxwell. The first was "What Should You Do With Anger and Desire?" The second was "Gregory of Nyssa: Direct the Passions." The third was "Cyril of Alexandria: Lull Your Passions to Sleep." My sense is that Lutheran spirituality leans more in...

Cyril of Alexandria: Lull Your Passions to Sleep

Cyril of Alexandria: Lull Your Passions to Sleep

Cyril of Alexandria: Lull Your Passions to Sleep

This is part three in a series of posts by Dr. David Maxwell. The first was "What Should You Do With Anger and Desire?"The second was "Gregory of Nyssa: Direct the Passions." Cyril of Alexandria is a good example of a Christian appropriation of the Stoic view of the passions. The goal is not...

Gregory of Nyssa: Direct the Passions

Gregory of Nyssa: Direct the Passions

Gregory of Nyssa: Direct the Passions

This is part two of a series of posts from Dr. David Maxwell. The first post was "What Should You Do With Anger and Desire?"  Gregory of Nyssa’s On the Soul and the Resurrection is a treatise that demonstrates what a Platonic spirituality of the passions looks like when Christians adopt it...


  1. Stephen Mueller April 8, 2012

    Thank you, Dr. Gibbs. I will be sure to read this article this afternoon!

  2. beth lynch April 8, 2012

    Really enjoyed this article and energy it projected. Thank God someone wants to share the reality of heaven that I have seen through the eyes of many crossed. For 16 years I have been helping many families heal the loss of loved ones as well as teach people to understand the relationship they have with God and the one with themselves. i have been told in sessions and I quote “You have evolved as a species technically but not spiritually. You are now in consequence of that,it is not a punishment. Share this with many”. And that is what I do every day. A message from one of the most beloved prayers is a message from the otherside often “On earth as it is in heaven”. So thanks again for bring this message to those who may have not found it any other way. Peace. Beth L.

  3. David Oberdieck April 10, 2012

    In regard to “5 Things Not to Say at Funerals” – how easy it can be too loose sight of the *physical* resurrection! I appreciated your thoughts in that article.

    It seems to me that out future hope has become all too disembodied. The resurrection *of* the body and the resurrection *with* the body (the church, body of Christ) is supplanted by a a non-corporeal hope (spirit & individual).

    Question: What is with the EBSCO host when you click on an article? Is that something I can sign up for though not at the sem?

    • Jeff gibbs April 10, 2012

      Thanks for writing. Christ is risen–physically, corporeally, indeed! And we too shall rise. There’s a lot of things that are connected to your good comment, not least being our view of the creation, and our doctrine of what it means to be human men and women–embodied.

      I don’t know anything about the EBSCO–maybe one of our tech guys can answer; I’ll pass your question on to them.

    • Jeff Kloha April 12, 2012

      David — see the link at the bottom of the post for instructions on accessing ATLAS via EBSCO.

  4. Jared Nies April 10, 2012

    Thank you, Dr. Gibbs, for another wonderful article.

  5. Deneane April 10, 2012

    Thanks for the review. The time of awaiting the final judgement and the physical resurrection to the New Jerusalem is one of the topics we Christians don’t touch. However, as we read the Biblical description of Christ’s visible, physical ascension, it raises the question; is the interim residence of the souls awaiting the final judgement really so ephemeral? If Christ ascended in His physical body, we should expect that he would still have a physical presence somewhere. Is he alone in His physical being? I’ve never seen any theologian touch this. None of this is faith building or shattering, but it is curious.

    • Jeff gibbs April 11, 2012

      Dear Deneane,

      You ask thoughtful questions. My own sense is that the Scriptures actually give us very little information/teaching on what it means to be dead, if I can say it a little bit oddly. Since we are meant to be embodied human creatures of God, when death smites us, what happens then? What little we know assures us that nothing separates us from the love of God in Christ. It does show the perspectives and frameworks of our modern thinking that many people (not referring to you, now) are so extremely interesting in questions about “the soul,” etc., when the biblical writers give such little attention to it.

      With regard to Christ’s own physicality, although our bodies will be like his (1 John 3; Phil 3), presumably his identity as the Son of God will mean there are some differences as well? As you said, it is curious.

  6. Michael Nielsen April 10, 2012

    Thank you Dr. Gibbs for this. Reminds me of our time in Biblical Theology.

    • Jeff gibbs April 11, 2012


      Thanks for writing–Christ is risen, indeed!

  7. Tiago Albrecht April 11, 2012

    Thanks for bringing this Easter refreshment, Dr. Gibbs. May all the Earth know about how great are the fruits of Christ cross and ressurection.

    Best regardings to you and Reneè!

    • Jeff gibbs April 11, 2012


      Yes, may all the Earth soon rejoice and be glad!

  8. Richard Mittwede April 11, 2012

    Great article.

    But, is there a typo in para 4?

    At the same time, to speak of the hope of eternal life would make it easier to think clearly about that life that will fully be ours, as the Small Catechism says, when “Christ will raise up me and all the dead.” It is most certainly not true to say that “eternal life begins when we did.”

    Is that last word supposed to be die?

    • Jeff gibbs April 11, 2012


      Yes, although I’m happy to say that death does not get the last word (rim shot).

    • Jeff Kloha April 12, 2012

      Fixed the typo.

      And Dr. Gibbs needs to upload a photo. He’s a lot less mean-looking in real life.

  9. Damian Snyder April 12, 2012

    One Easter a few years ago, I went through the tri-partite Easter witness (He is risen…He is risen indeed times 3) and then immediately after the last asked…”So what?” This then lead into the sermon.

    • Jeff gibbs April 12, 2012


      It’s an important question, both for life in Christ now, and for our future. Baptized into the new life, we still look for it and long for it.

      So–summarize the sermon!

  10. Damian Snyder April 16, 2012

    Well, its been a while so I cannot recall all of the details, however, what I hope I said was something like:
    1) Death is here because of sin.
    2) Sin has broken creation and made us enemies of God.
    3) Immediately after sin entered creation God promised to make all things new again.
    4) Jesus’ incarnation, passion, and resurrection are God breaking into history and fulfilling that promise.
    5) Jesus is the first born of the new creation.
    6) While we wait on Earth for His return, we still suffer the effects of sin and a broken creation, but this is not forever.
    7) Heaven is not your home! The new, recreated Heavens and Earth are your home in which you will live with your new, resurrected, glorified bodies since we were joined to Christ’s death in baptism we will also receive a resurrection like His.
    8) Until that day live in God’s love, forgiveness, and promise of physical life with Him forever.

    Of course, I learned a lot of this from some guy named Jeff and his commentary on Matthew.

    • Jeff gibbs April 16, 2012

      What? Dr. Kloha has a commentary on Matthew?!?

  11. Damian Snyder April 16, 2012

    Yes, but copies are very hard to come by!

Leave a comment