h2g2 The Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy: Earth Edition

In response to ------ in January AD 2007">F15075?thread=2378563 this entry
A18426918 was written by shagbark 170775
------ in January AD 2007

I think it is perfectly possible to write an objective article on Christian beliefs about Heaven and I think you have had a good go at doing so. However, it is rather Protestant and in the cause of fairness and balance ought to include something on Catholic and Orthodox views.

You could enlarge your section on Who Gets In? to cover the topics of grace, the sacraments, faith versus works and predestination

The majority of mainstream Christians believe that baptism is a prerequisit for admission to Heaven - remember the Catholic doctrine of Limbo was developed to avoid the suggestion that God would condemn unbaptised infants to eternal damnation in Hell simply on the grounds that they hadn't been cleansed from the effects of Original Sin.

I like your use of Biblical references. Perhaps you could include or refer to the description of the new Heaven and the new Earth, including the New Jerusalem - the place with the streets of gold etc - that you mention in passing. You could also discuss Jesus' teachings about Heaven such as the parable of the sheep and the goats, the narrow door, the wedding feast etc.

On another point you are perfectly entitled to refer to the author of Revelation as John but I'd avoid the Apostle tag unless you indicate that it is unlikely that it really was that John and probably just some other John, John!

I hope I haven't been too negative. I'm in the process of having my Introduction to Christianity reviewed and I know what it feels like. BUT its great to have so many people out there who really want to help us get it right. I would like to include a link to your article once its finished.

Good Luck.

I have made the case in post 38 that the World Heritage Federation recognises that the same John wrote the Gospel and the Apocylypse and that both were written from Patmos which is mentioned in verse 9 of Revelation 1.
I do have material from the Catholic Encyclopedia in the article and a hyperlink to it in the footnotes.
Perhaps you are right about needing more on the New Jerusalem.

Oh, and is there some link to Greek Orthodox thought that should nbe included?

I have three external links on Orthodoxy that would be of use:
www.orthodoxinfo.com
www.thyateira.org.uk
www.goarch.org

I can't find a general entry on Orthodoxy in h2g2.

If you have heard enough on the subject of the authorship of Revelation I will not be in any way offended if you stop reading now.

Whislt it may be true that St John the Apostle has been traditionally identified as the author of all of the books in the Bibe that bear his name most modern biblical scholars, and some ancient ones, are of the opinion that the author of Revelation cannot be the author of the Gospel of John. As long ago as the 3rd century Dionysius of Alexandria pointed out that Rev. could not have been written by the same auther as the Gospel as the Greek in Rev. is rather poor whereas the language of the Gospel, whilst simple, is grammatically correct. Secondly Rev. lacks some of the key themes that are common to both the Gospel and the Epistles.

And just to lob another spanner into the works there is the whole debate about the authorship of the Gospel of John. Again many modern scholars doubt that it was written by John the Beloved Disciple.

Trouble is Johns were two-a-penny in NT times.

The authorship of the quotes used is rather beside the point. Whichever authority you believe the ones I cited in post 38 or the ones you list( or don't list )I have gone out of my way not to use the word apostle.
I have also added material to include the orthodox point of view.
As to the matter of who gets in I think I will stick with the protestant view as that is what I am
Gnomen knows me well enough to know that the further you push me the less resiliant I become.

That's all very well, Shagbark, but if the Entry isn't presenting what it claims to be presenting, it is less likely to be picked.

True enough Gnomen, and so I suppose I should feature the things the various branches of christianity agree on rather than the things on which they differ. If Catholics and Baptists differ on who gets in maybe I shoulod eliminate both sides of the issue.

as I said in the challenge thread 'fools rush in etc.'
I know that I am treading on thin ice with this topic and I try not to offend. I am happy with the way Gnomen has suggested that the article be layed out and I am happy with the info that I have put in each section. Hopefully soon we can reach the stage where all we concentrate on is spelling and grammar.

Hi Shagbark!

I'm happy enough with the content except for two places:

1.

"A woman1 once said that if all the good deeds of this life were rewarded here and all the evil punished here there would be no need of a heaven or hell. But we know that such is not the case."

No. You believe that it not the case. I, on the other hand, believe that it is the case. Please reword it to be more factual.

2.

The "Deeper Study" section needs to be rewritten to flow better -- it seems to say the same thing twice. It's a short enough section that you should be able to rewrite it easily enough to explain the progression from "heaven" meanin the sky in the old view and meaning an alternate dimension (or something) in the modern view.

Once those are sorted out, it will be time to start on the grammar and spelling.

I will rework Deeper study as you suggest
As to the other matter a world leader once said
'We have nothing to fear but fear itself'
If were to use that quote in an article would I change the pronoun since I do not agree with him
I think Mrs. Hubbell had a profound statement there and rather than change what she said I will just delete the entire quote.

Well, now Gnomen, are you satisfied as to content now?

Was it the famous woman who said "we know that that is not the case"? If so, you should certainly leave in the quote. But reword it in such a way that it is clear she said it and not you.

Does she have a name?

Totally inappropriate to the entry, but I feel the urge to crack a heaven joke. Just trying to choose which one.

So this guy gets up to heaven. He gets a harp and a halo and a white toga and he sits with God and they chat and play music together. For lunch, God serves tuna sandwhichs. The guy peeks down through the clouds to the location below and sees a buffet lunch with dozens of pasta dishes and salads and fish. But he says nothing, because he figures the grand reward will come by dinner. Well, dinner is cold meat on rye. Down below they are gorging on tongue and veal and roast duck with exotic rices and stuff he doesn't even recognize. Well, he figures it'll worth it by breakfast.
So he sleeps on a fluffy cloud and the next morning he's served cereal and milk. Down below they're getting waffles, pancakes, drizzled with maple syrup and topped with ice cream or vegetable omlettes or french toast...
He looks at his weetabix and turns to God and asks - why do they eat so well in Hell and I'm stuck with sandwcihes?
God sighs and says, "Well, it just doesn't pay to cook for just two people."

spelling lesson for Leo: sandwich.

Can I make another suggestion in terms of content - just a small one?

The Communion of Saints - the community of the faithfull, both living and dead - can be divided into three categories:
1. The Church Militant - as in the BCP phrase 'militant here on earth' - being the living members of the Church
2. The Church Expectant - those who have died and await judgement day and their full and final entry into Heaven
3. The Church Resplendent - those, such as the saints who are already in Heaven by virtue of their virtue, if you get my drift.

Perhaps this is a little too Catholic if you are writing about the Protestant understanding of Heaven? It certainly conforms to Anglican teaching though.

Also - not that I'm stuck on this point - I think you should refer to the author of Revelation as John as regardless of which John John was he was definately known as John.

I will try to work the division of the Church body in, although it may cause more problems. As to the writer of Revelation I am leaving it just the way you see it.

Just for the record I had originaslly started this article
A Famous atheistMadalyn Murray O'Hair(1919-1995) once said that Heaven did not exist. That once one died the consciousness was erased like Random access Memory on a computer.
another Not so famous woman said 'If all the good deeds of this life were rewarded here and all the evil punished here we would have no need of heaven or hell; but we know such is not the case'Lora Hubbell(1911-1986)
in all the rewrites the footnotes and the quotation marks seem to have gotten lost. And yes it was Mrs. Hubbell who used the pronoun we not the writer of the article.

I wonder if maybe we should have a seperate thread under the article just for heaven Jokes. Lets see we have my politician joke,
Leo's cooking for two Joke
The obligatory Jehovahs witness joke(see thread already attached)
and then there is this
St Peter was giving a tour of heaven and the tour group came up
to a huge tortise shell which was closed perfectly tight enclosing a small congregation. When asked who they were Peter replied
Oh, those are the hard-shell baptists, this is there day to practice Closed Communion.

When it hits the FP we'll bombard it with jokes. I'll start collecting.