Death Is the Ultimate Form of Healing

When I was a teenager in high school I had an unofficial spiritual mentor named Al.  Although I had grown up in the church, I was a baby Christian at the time, and Al was a fount of biblical wisdom that I quickly latched on to.  Al even spent some of his time in an informal discipleship group with myself and a few other teenage boys, talking about science, God, the Bible, and anything else we wanted to talk about.  Al was a retired biology teacher at Henry Sibley High School, so the conversations of the group often turned to matters of science and faith, particularly within Al's discipline of biology.  

Once, during a discussion on biology, Al said something that has stuck with me ever since.  We were talking about the human body and its ability to heal itself and be healed by medicine, but then Al said, "Death is the ultimate form of healing."  To be honest, this statement perplexed me initially, as the notion that the physical process of death could be considered a form of healing was completely foreign to me at the time.  When I thought of healing, I thought of a person getting better, or recovering from an illness or injury through time and medicine.  And when I thought of death I thought of disease or injury so severe that it caused the body to cease its functions, and that medicine had failed.  To me, death seemed like the exact opposite of healing.  

But as I've considered Al's words over the years and have continued to study the Bible, it has become apparent to me that Al's words can only be understood and appreciated from a Christian worldview.  The Bible teaches that Jesus has defeated death, and that Christians who are trusting in Jesus will inherit eternal life at the time of their physical death.  In heaven there is no pain, no disease, no injury, and no death.  Those things exist on earth, but not in heaven.  On earth we are plagued by illness and disease, injuries and weak bodies that are susceptible to germs and bacteria.  In heaven, none of those things exist.  When a believer goes to heaven, all of those earthly afflictions that plague our bodies are instantly healed through physical death.

There are many biological and medical conditions that can plague our bodies on earth, for which there is no cure.  Speaking personally, I have a skin condition that I've been told will linger on for the duration of my natural life.  There is no cure.  But some day, when I die, I will be healed of this condition, and the means by which I will be healed will be my death.  My death will result in my ultimate healing.  Similarly, my dad has lived with the effects of polio since he was seven years old.  At his death he will be healed of his affliction.  He doesn't want to die, necessarily, but I know that he is looking forward to this healing.  

Just this last week, a 98 year old saint and member of Riverview passed on to be with God in heaven.  For years she had been struggling with the effects of living in a 90+ year old body, and she was tired and ready to go to heaven, so she had been praying for that to happen.  A couple weeks ago, however, she fell and broke her pelvis, and was put in hospice care, suffering from severe pain every day.  She continued to pray that God would heal her - by allowing her to die.  And God did.  God healed her of her pain by taking her to be with him, where there is no such thing as old age and the complications that come with it, and there is no such injury as a broken pelvis.

In Psalm 40 David describes himself as having fallen into the "pit of destruction" and a "miry bog." (Psalm 40.2)  He's not speaking literally here, but rather that the circumstances of his life are like living neck-deep in a slimy swamp.  He asks God to help him, and as he awaits God's deliverance, he considers truth about God's mercy, love, and faithfulness.  He says, "As for you, O Lord, you will not restrain your mercy from me; your steadfast love and your faithfulness will ever preserve me!" (Psalm 40.11)

When we think of our physical healing, I think it's safe to say that we don't often think of being healed through death.  We tend to think that God's unrestrained mercy and steadfast love and faithfulness will manifest itself in our lives through the restoration of our physical bodies.  We think of God using doctors and medicine to restore our bodies to their original health before we became ill, and indeed, this is often the case.  It seems evident that David expected God to deliver him from his physical circumstances and restore his body and condition to the way it was before he suffered this affliction that tossed him into the "pit of destruction."  And if and when we are restored to a healthy physical disposition, then we declare that God's mercy has indeed been unrestrained, and that his steadfast love and faithfulness have preserved us.  

The error we make in this thinking, however, is that God would be any less merciful or loving or faithful if he healed us of our afflictions through death.  In fact, as my mentor Al implied, God's mercy, love, and faithfulness are most fully realized in death, when a believer is removed from this life and is joined with Jesus in paradise.  God does indeed use the process of physical death to heal us of our afflictions, and healing through death is a good thing.  

But then, why seek physical healing?  If death is such a wondrous release, why not just speed along the process and take my own life?  Just a couple of years ago, Brittany Maynard gained widespread attention for her assertion that she would end her own life if and when the circumstances surrounding her cancer became too difficult to live with.  She fulfilled her plans, and took her own life as a means of ending the pain and suffering she was experiencing.  The act of taking one's life, however, is not a result of a Christian or biblical worldview.  We do not have power over life and death and healing. Only God does.  Only God gets to make those kinds of decisions.  Even when we suffer, we trust that God knows what is best in matters of healing, life, and death.  We have no authority to take our own lives.  Only God has the power and authority to give life, and only God has the authority to take it away.  We must not presume to be God and take life.  

This way of thinking should help us to reframe the way we think about death, especially when a Christian dies who has been suffering from an illness or unpleasant circumstances.  In the example of my 98 year-old friend who passed away this week, her death brings sadness, but also much relief and joy that she has been healed of her pain.  When we find ourselves in the "pit of destruction," we remember that God's mercy toward us will be unrestrained, and that his steadfast love and faithfulness will ever preserve us.  And we pray that God will restore our bodies to a good physical condition in the here and now.  But if he does not, we await and long for his unrestrained mercy to us at the time of our death, trusting that God will give us the exact kind of healing that we need. 

Just a couple of years after I left high school, my mentor Al was diagnosed with pancreatic cancer and passed away shortly thereafter, forever healed of the cancer that afflicted his body.  He was pulled up out of the pit of destruction once and for all.  In his death, the Lord's mercy was fully unrestrained, and his steadfast love and faithfulness was proved in its most full way.  

Those Who Mourn

I had the chance to fill the Riverview pulpit this past week and expound upon Matthew 5.4: "Blessed are those who mourn, for they shall be comforted."  You can catch the sermon audio here.

Coming up on 8 years ago - and it's strange to say that, because it doesn't seem that long ago - my wife's father ended a long battle with various illnesses and infections that had plagued his body for years.  He had been in and out of the hospital for years, and had even had several brushes with death, but he was always able to pull through.  But not this time.  An infection took his life in his mid 50's.

The Mrs. and I had only been married for about two years at the time, and we were living with her parents and helping them to manage the house, so we were especially close to them.  I'm not sure if I knew how to handle it at the time, let alone lead my young wife through the grieving process of losing her father.  But those are situations that you don't really get practice for, and there are no do-overs after they are over.  You're just thrust into those situations.  You're not prepared for it, and it's hard.

This is something like what I think Jesus is talking about when he says, "Blessed are those who mourn, for they shall be comforted."  There are all kinds of things that cause people to mourn: death, unexpected and early death, disease, terminal illnesses, accidents, and so on and so forth.  All of these things cause us to grieve.

But Jesus says that in our grief is blessedness.  That's somewhat of a paradox.  We would prefer to have the blessedness without the mourning, but that's not what Jesus says.  When we mourn, our mourning can lead to comfort, and in this process we experience blessing.

Jesus would know.  He experienced all kinds of suffering in his life that caused  him to mourn.  In fact, Isaiah 53 describes him as a man of sorrows, acquainted with grief.  When Jesus arrived at the graveside of his friend Lazarus, the Bible says that "Jesus wept."  Ecclesiastes 3 says that there is "a time to mourn."  Life is hard.  Things happen, people die, accidents happen, terminal illnesses are diagnosed; relationships are severed, children rebel, kids have terrible debilitating diseases, etc.  All of this is suffering, which causes us grief.

But one thing that we need to remember when we think about suffering and grief is that the Bible links all of the things listed above to the existence of sin in the world.  Adam and Eve sinned, thereby transmitting their sin nature to all subsequent generations of human beings.  The world is a broken place full of broken people doing sinful things.  It's a recipe for someone to get hurt, and people do.  Ever since then, all suffering and disease has been either the direct or indirect consequence of sin.  People die because of sin, indirectly, because sin brought about death.  And some people die as a direct consequence of sin.  We sin, and the consequence of the sin is damaging, sometimes even to the point of death.

People die because of sin; accidents happen because of sin; we become discouraged and lonely because of sin; we experience illness and disease because of sin; relationships are severed because of sin; there is unrighteousness in the world that causes suffering and grief because of sin.  Sin exists, and the effects of sin are real.  Sin is why we mourn.

But Christians do not mourn as the world mourns.  No, we do not grieve as those who have no hope because we believe that Jesus Christ died and rose again.  This is the comfort that Jesus promises in Matthew 5.4.  If sin is the root cause of our suffering and our grief, then the comfort that we must receive must deal with sin.  There is a gospel of hope that tempers our mourning, and in this hope is true satisfaction and joy - the blessedness that Jesus says will come to those who mourn.

Why can we have hope in the midst of grief?  Not because of a naturally cheerful disposition; not because time heals all wounds; not because someone empathized with me and said some kind words.  No, we are comforted because we have a risen Savior who has defeated death and conquered the grave, and the same power that accomplished that is at work in those who believe.

Seriously, read 1 Corinthians 15.55-57 and Romans 6.6-11 for yourself.  2 Corinthians 7.10 says "godly grief produces a repentance that leads to salvation without regret, whereas worldly grief produces death."  Why does godly grief lead one to salvation?  Because it points you to Jesus!  The one who can deal with your sin and eliminate its eternal affect on you.

When we mourn the effects of sin in the world, our grief is tempered by the knowledge that we have a Savior who has overcome the power of sin.  Sin can no longer have a permanent effect on us.  It can still hurt us in this life and give us reason to be sorrowful and weep.  But it cannot damage us eternally.  We do not escape the effects of sin in this life when we trust the Savior, but the reach of sin is limited.  There will come a day when it will all be done away with and there will be no more suffering, no more tears.  There will be no accidents; there will be no disease or terminal illnesses; no one will ever be given a window of time in which to live; people won't get hurt; there will be no pain, no suffering, and no mourning.  That knowledge alone should bring comfort to those who mourn.

A family at the church discovered several weeks ago that their youngest child had Leukemia.  Understandably, this news rocked their world, and many tears were shed.  The young boy's prognosis is good and hopeful, but he has a three year treatment plan ahead of him, much will be unpleasant.

So how does this beatitude speak to them?  It is good and right for them to mourn, and they have a hard road ahead of them.  They mourn the reality that they live in a fallen and broken world that has sickness and disease in it.  They mourn the pain that will be brought about by this disease; they mourn the pain that will be brought about by the remedy for the disease.  But they also have faith in a risen Savior who has power over all sickness and disease, because he has the power over the sin that brought the disease into the world in the first place.  And the affect that this disease has on their family can only go as far as God lets it.  Moreover, God has ordained that there will come a day where all sickness and disease will be wiped out.  It will be done away with.  There will be no more leukemia, no more cancer.  No more tears, no more diagnoses or treatments.

Do you think that knowledge brings this family a measure of hope?  Imagine going through something like this without know that Jesus has defeated death and sin, and that he is sovereign over disease.  That is hopelessness.  But we know that Jesus is who he says he is, and that he can do what he has said he can do, and so we are blessed even when we are grieving.

Bored in Heaven

Listening to Wretched Radio, Todd Friel had what I consider a marvelous point that I'd like to think about a bit more here.  The question is: what about heaven will be so great?  Friel was playing some clips from a Barbara Walters special on heaven.  In the special, she interviewed several people from a multitude of faiths about what they believed heaven to be, and what their thought was about what it was like.  Each of their explanations was pretty predictable: heaven is a wonderful place where everyone loves each other, and everyone is happy, and everyone gets and receives everything they've ever wanted.  Relationships are restored, pets come back from the dead, there's great food, and so on and so forth.  This was the typical answer, although some insisted that heaven and hell were not eternal future realities, but instead existed on earth in the form of nice people (heaven) and mean people (hell).  Lame.

Suffice it to say, all of these religious explanations of what heaven will be like were decidedly unChristian, although some claimed to be so, however nobody who claimed to be a Christian supported their view with scripture.  Their answers were full of plenty of statements that started with "I think...."

Todd Friel made a marvelous point about these descriptions: they were all full of things and experiences that people will ultimately, some day, bore of.  In other words, even if I get to restore relationships with long-lost loved ones, and even if I get to eat the best food in all the world, and even if my dog comes back to live with me for all eternity, and no matter how wonderful heaven is and how happy everyone is, someday it will all be...boring.

Think about it: what have you ever done and really enjoyed that you don't enjoy less and less as you do it or experience it more and more?  Think of your favorite food.  You really love it, right?  What if you had it every week?  Every day?  After not too long, you'll tire of it and after a while, you'll want to be done with it altogether, even if your favorite food is bacon cookies.  So if all heaven is, is enjoying the things we like most we'll eventually tire of those things.  Relationships, food, activities, whatever.  Fill in the blank.  If you do it for all eternity, your level of happiness will decrease.  And if you're not happy in heaven, is it really heaven?

The Christian view is that heaven will be ultimately satisfying and full of overwhelming happiness, but not because of stuff.  Heaven will be fully satisfying and pleasurable because it contains that which has no end, and that which can never be fully comprehended, experienced, or understood, namely God himself.  One can never completely understand or experience God.  There is always something new to learn, know, or enjoy about God.  You will get bored of baseball; you will tire of Chipotle steak burritos (maybe); your long-lost loved ones will eventually get on your nerves; but you'll never get tired of searching the depths of who God is and what he has done.  It will literally be an eternally satisfying endeavor that will never end.  This is why heaven will be good and glorious, and the reward of all those who have believed the gospel - they will get to spend eternity searching for the ends of God's magnificence, and they will never find it.  That's what I'm looking forward to.  You can keep your good and pleasant cliche thoughts about what heaven is like.

Consider Romans 11.33-35: "Oh, the depth of the riches and wisdom and knowledge of God!  How unsearchable are his judgments and how inscrutable his ways!  'For who has known the mind of the Lord, or who has been his counselor?'  'Or who has given a gift to him that he might be repaid?'"  Heaven will afford those who love God the opportunity to mine the depths of God's wisdom and knowledge without ever coming to the bottom.  They will be able to search out his judgments for all eternity, only to find them eternally unsearchable.  They will not know his mind, though they will endeavor to for eons.  Although they can give him no gift that he will ever be fully rewarded for what he has done for them, they will give him gift after gift.  It will be an all encompassing task that never ends.  Mind blowing.

In Ephesians 3, Paul prays that the Ephesian believers might know "the breadth and length and height and depth, and to know the love of Christ that surpasses knowledge..."  It's interesting that Paul is asking for them something that he knows they can't have: full knowledge of the love of Christ.  But he wants them to have more of it.  This is why heaven will be great.  We'll be looking for a full knowledge of the love of Christ, and the more we learn about it, the happier we will be.  But we will never know it fully.  What does that mean?  An ultimately satisfying and joyful pursuit of this knowledge.

Moreover, just a few verses later, Paul says that God has the ability to do "far more abundantly than all that we ask or think..."  In this sense, we'll never know what heaven is like this side of the grave, and so in some sense, to speculate is somewhat foolish.  It'll be better than we can ever imagine.

Will there be food and friends and loved ones in heaven?  To be sure.  But you'll get bored of those things.  They will be utterly insignificant to the main attraction.  You'll never get bored, even after an eternity of trying to wrap your mind around God.  That's what I'm looking forward to.

The Tolerant God

My last three posts have all been on the issue of tolerance, so I figured I might as well conclude the week with a fourth post on the same issue, except this time looking at it through a theological lens: what does the Bible say about tolerance?  It says quite a bit about it when it comes to Christians interacting with each other and with the world, but as this piece from Desiring God points out, it may be most beneficial to realize that our God is a tolerant God.

When you think about all the things God has to tolerate in his creation, you can be humbled pretty quickly.  The ultimate, infinite, perfect Being of the universe exists (albeit, transcendently) with a finite, fallen creation.  Why would he bother?  Because God is patiently waiting for his plan to come to fruition, and while he waits he has to tolerate all of the sin and corruption of the world.  He is not bound to tolerate it - he could put an end to this whole thing any time he wants.  But because he is merciful and longsuffering, he has graciously chosen to tolerate the pride and ignorance of human beings.

To get a better idea of what this must be like, try to imagine the incarnation: God becoming man.  Jesus leaves the glories of heaven where everyone is worshipping him, to come to a place where people will despise and hate him; he leaves the feasts of heaven in order to come to earth and be perpetually hungry; he leaves the splendor of heaven to come to earth where he essentially lives as a homeless man; and the list goes on and on of how Jesus sacrificed elements of his divinity in order to come as a human being.  Why would he do it?  Only one answer: love.  Why does God not just destroy the world and everyone/thing in it?  Because he's loving and kind, and because he has a sovereign purpose that he's working out.

One thing the DG article doesn't bring out though, is God's intolerance.  Yes, God is definitely tolerant, but he is also intolerant (I think it's important to acknowledge that these two characteristics can and must exist simultaneously - see below), although not in the way that we think of when we hear the word "intolerance" used in modern speech.  God is intolerant toward any and everything that goes against his nature and character, or in other words, sin.  God will not tolerate sin.  Yes, he puts up with sin, but he will not ultimately tolerate it or allow it.  In the end, he will judge and punish all sin(ners).  One need not glance at the cross for too long to see God's utter hatred and intolerance for sin.  All people will know God's intolerance toward sin by way of his wrath and judgment in one of two ways: either through the death of his Son on the cross, or by spending eternity in the lake of fire.  One way or another, God's intolerance toward sin must be acknowledged and meted out.

I once heard Paul Washer say that someday he wanted to do some studying and develop a series of messages on the hatred of God.  People balk at that idea - the hatred of God?  God can't hate - God is love!  As Paul Washer says, that's exactly right, and because God is love, therefore he must hate.  Think about it: what do you love?  If you love it purely, then you hate its opposite.  If you love your kids, then you hate the thought of losing them; I love life, therefore I hate abortion.  Love necessitates hatred.  Tolerance necessitates intolerance (this is what's missing from the general public's understanding of these concepts - we can't all be tolerant).

As we've been talking about in our intergenerational Sunday School class this summer, God invites (commands) us to be like him.  He wants us to conform to his character (with the aid of his Holy Spirit).  Christians can and should be tolerant of other Christians and even toward those who hate God.  We cannot, however, tolerate sin in our own lives.  In this sense we have to be intolerant.  God also wants us to be intolerant of those things he is intolerant of: injustice, oppression, evil, etc. - anything that goes against his nature and character (the way this intolerance manifests itself in our lives is another topic for discussion, however, beyond the scope of this post).

Praise God that, although he is well within his rights to do away with the entire universe, that he is longsuffering, tolerant, and faithful to his promises.

What Do I Need to Know About Heaven?

There have been quite a few books released lately about people taking supposed trips to heaven and back.  Each of these authors have claimed have visited heaven as a result of a near-death experience and claim that the visit was for the purpose of God giving new revelation about what heaven is like.  I have several problems with these books, and I would warn Christians to stay away from them.  They are completely unnecessary, as you will see, and are, for the most part, untrue (and I can say this with certainty).

One thing that I've made a habit of over the past few months is daily reading Tim Challies' excellent blog site.  If you're not familiar with Tim, you should be.  He's an excellent writer and he runs a great blog.  In addition to his theologically deep and sound reflections, he has a daily "a la carte" post in which he shares interesting things he has found on the internet. I highly recommend his site.

Anywho, yesterday Challies wrote a piece on all of these "I've been to heaven" books and he explains from scripture why they are, for the most part, bunk.  He's got a lot of great points, and rather than summarize them here, I'll just refer you to Tim's post.

I would like to point out what I think is the biggest problem with these books, in addition to the problems that Challies points out, although Tim does touch on this issue in his treatment.  It seems to me that all of these accounts of visiting heaven necessarily implicate the Bible as being an insufficient source of revelation.  In other words, when it comes to the subject of heaven the supposed necessity of having people visit heaven for the purpose of describing it to those of us who have never been, seems to suggest that the Bible is incomplete, at least when it comes to this issue.  That is, hasn't God told us enough (or all we need to know) about heaven?  Isn't God's word complete?  Do I really need more information about heaven?  And if I do need to know more, doesn't that imply that the word of God is at least somehow insufficient?

Challies makes a great point that at the end of the book of Revelation, John asserts that the canon of scripture is closed - nothing more can be added to it.  In fact, if anyone does add to it, he is cursed.  What does that say about these folks telling us they have the "real scoop" on heaven?

I have the same problem with the couple of books that supposedly tell the tale of people who have been to hell and back for the purpose of warning the masses of the atrocities of eternal damnation.  Wait, doesn't the Bible already do that for us?  Do we really need someone to tell us that hell is bad?  I'm pretty sure that subject is already closed.

God has told us all we need to know about heaven.  And if our information is incomplete, it is so for a reason.  What reason?  I don't know.  But God knew what he was doing when he inspired scripture and gave Paul and John visions of heaven.  That's all we need.

Love Wins

I had heard a while ago that Rob Bell was coming out with a new book, and that a lot of leaders in the evangelical world were having somewhat of a bad reaction to the content of the book. There was some evidence here and there that pointed to Rob Bell adopting universalism and rejecting the idea of hell and eternal punishment. Instead it was beginning to seem that Bell was asserting that all people would be saved and receive the promise of eternal life. Blogs were written, and some of the same leaders who had previously expressed worry about what Bell's beliefs seemed to be morphing into began writing the man off and labeling him as a false teacher.

Meanwhile, fans of Rob Bell wrote on their own blogs in defense of the pastor, arguing for his universalistic tendencies (including some who attempted to downplay Bell's tendency toward universalism), and also to decry those who would question him. One blog I read (a "friend" on Facebook posted it, who is also a fan of Bell) rips John Piper and Justin Taylor for judging Bell before the book was even released (which is ironic, because to say that someone is judging someone else is a judgment against that person). This particular blogger doesn't even seem to have read Justin Taylor's blog that originally criticized Bell's upcoming work. Taylor never claims to be making absolute judgments, but that he is simply connecting the dots of what Bell has been saying/writing/teaching/preaching lately.

One of the main criticisms leveled against conservative evangelicals is that they perhaps appeared to be unfairly criticizing Bell and his book before the book was even released, although after looking into the criticisms leveled against Bell, I don't think this was the case. No one was claiming that Bell was a universalist, but just that certain things said, written, and video recorded and put on the internet seemed to suggest that Bell was trending that way.

Well, now that Bell's book has been released and reviewed, it would appear that all concerns that Bell was trending toward universalism (and even promoting universalism) have been confirmed. Here's Kevin DeYoung's review of the book (it's rather long, but it's worth the read, if for no other reason than to learn more about universalism and to be encouraged in sound doctrine).

I have one or two of Bell's previous books, and they both have a permanent position on the "Heresy Shelf" of my library. And this was before it was known that Bell was a full-fledged universalist. It would seem that my own and others' fears about Rob Bell were not unfounded. I used to chomp at the bit to read books like this, but nowadays I just don't have the stamina needed to get through them anymore. Most false teaching is just the same recycled garbage that has been around for centuries.

I think the proper response to this guy and his teachings should be one of two things: 1) we should pray that he would repent, be restored to the truth, and cling to sound doctrine, and failing that, 2) we should pray that God silence him and/or show his teaching to be unsound and unorthodox. Rob Bell is one of the most prominent Christians in the country right now. Tens of thousands of people cling to what he teaches. Some have even said that he is the "next Billy Graham." May it never be so.

Will We Be Vegetarians In Heaven?

So, I was listening to the rebroadcast of Jan Markell's radio program today, and she was interviewing Christian apologist, Dr. Ron Rhodes. Rhodes has recently written a book about heaven, and most of Jan's questions centered around Rhodes' interpretation of scripture regarding eternity. Dr. Rhodes brought up an interesting thought that I had never considered before, and I've found myself thinking about it all day: will Christians be vegetarians in heaven?

Now, before I go any further in fleshing out this idea, let me preface my thoughts by saying that whether a person agrees or disagrees with this idea, it certainly isn't something that Christians should fight over. This isn't a vital issue, and there's really no way to determine a concrete answer to the question. We can only look at the scripture and make some educated guesses. So consider that before you start a church based on Christian Vegetarianism. That being said, I think there's good evidence to support the idea that all the inhabitants of heaven will be (and are), in fact, vegetarians.

Rhodes supports this idea by first citing Genesis 1.29 - And God said, "See, I have given you every herb that yields seed which is on the face of all the earth, and every tree whose fruit yields seed; to you it shall be for food." Rhodes (and many other good theologians) asserts that in the pre-fall earth there was no death. In other words, the Garden of Eden was the perfect place since there was no sin: there was no pain, no sadness, no death, no suffering, no disease, etc. Everything was perfect - very much like what the Bible says about heaven (note: this is not to say that the Garden of Eden was heaven in and of itself, but rather that the Garden seems to share several, if not most or all of the qualities of heaven).

Rhodes also says that the animal kingdom was included in this environment of peace and perfection. Thus the instruction to Adam and Eve to eat only fruit and herbs. Scripture seems to suggest that Adam and Eve were not killing and eating animals - just herbs, and as Rhodes sees it, if animals were being killed for food, then Eden would have ceased to be an environment of peace and perfection, because death would be included in the mix. And death has nothing to do with peace and perfection. It even seems as thoughanimals only ate the herbs and fruit, and not each other. In other words, there were no predatory or prey animals - they all got along and ate the vegetation. Genesis 1.30 - "Also, to every beast of the earth, to every bird of the air, and to everything that creeps on the earth, in which there is life, I have given every green herb for food."

In fact, the eating of animals isn't mentioned in scripture until chapter nine of Genesis. After Noah and his family are off the ark, God seems to finally allow them to eat animals. Genesis 9.3 - Every moving thing that lives shall be food for you. I have given you all things, even as the green herbs. God then goes on to give them instructions as to HOW they should eat the animals. So it would seem that this is the first time in the history of the earth that animals are killed and eaten as food.

The first physical death that is reported by scripture is the killing of an animal by God in order to make coverings for Adam and Eve, after they realized they were naked, and after the fall into sin. So once the environment of peace and perfection had been infiltrated by sin, death was a new reality.

All that to say that there was no death in the Garden of Eden - the most heaven-like environment in the history of the earth. Scripture teaches that there will be no pain, suffering, death, or even tears in heaven either. So then, it seems reasonable to conclude that there won't be any killing in heaven - not even of animals, and not even for the sake of food. Meat wasn't a necessity in the Garden of Eden. In fact, it would seem as though meat was completely contrary to the whole idea of the Garden of Eden. So then, wouldn't it likewise be contrary to what we know heaven to be like? If we did eat meat in the kingdom of heaven, that means that something would have to die in order for us to have it. That doesn't seem to jibe with the kind of environment that heaven is.

So what's the conclusion? I don't know. Rhodes' idea seems to work scripturally. But I wouldn't worry about it if you're a Christian who enjoys a good rack of ribs. Like Paul Washer says, you'll be way too busy trying to figure out God while you're in heaven to even be concerned about what's for dinner!