Better than Eden?

In describing the future state of heaven, the prophet Isaiah teaches in Isaiah 25:8 that "he [God] will swallow up death forever." This prophecy suggests a situation superior to that of Adam and Eve in the Garden of Eden. In their original state, the possibility of sin existed. God provided a forbidden tree. However, the book of Revelation only mentions a tree of life (Rev. 2:7; 22:2, 14, 19). Since death will be swallowed up forever, there will no longer be a path to destruction.

Why did God choose to offer an option to sin in the original Creation, and why does He not do the same in heaven? I think the difference is grounded in love. God loves man, and He wants man to love him. The Bible teaches that we love God by our obedience: "If you love me, you will obey what I command." (John 14:15) In the original creation, God needed to give man a choice that that man could love God. Without a choice, man could not love God because obedience would not be possible. Sadly, man chose himself over God. However, this was part of God's bigger plan to love man in spite of man's rejection of God. Although man rejected God, God responded by giving up His Son. This is the ultimate act of love: "Greater love has no one than this, that he lay down his life for his friends." (John 15:13)

In the new heavens and earth, the only people that will live with Christ for eternity will be those who have made the choice, by God's grace, to obey Him. Having already chosen to love God, they do not need to be offered yet another choice. Rather, their love will be complete. Death will be swallowed up forever. There will be no more tears.

The Sacrifice of Service

The following is an article from our family's annual Christmas newsletter. If you would like to read more articles like this and are not a current subscriber, post a comment or send an email with your request, and we'll send you one!

The Hickman family has been making a real effort to give time in service to others. Sometimes, they end up giving more than they planned. This past summer, Sarah, Dan, Luke, and Leah all worked in their church’s 3-year-old Sunday school class. One Sunday, three of them failed in body fluid management. During story time, one of the children sat on Dan’s lap for assistance and guidance in paying attention and sitting still. This student still wore Pull-Ups as a precaution, although Dan quickly realized that this safety net was being used as more than a precaution. This child had pushed his superabsorbent polymer to beyond its saturation point. The result? A soggy patch on Dan’s pants, just above his right knee. Later, Sarah was comforting a weeping little girl, holding her as she cried on her shoulder. Later, in the church service, Dan noticed that the tears on Sarah’s solid navy blouse had dried, depositing a dried film of snot. That same morning, Luke was proud to show off his medal of honor: smears of blood on his khaki shorts. Undaunted by their mutual contamination, Sarah continued in her role into the fall. She was the storytelling teacher, occasionally misunderstood by the wide-eyed toddlers. For example, a teacher in the second hour recently informed Sarah that, following Sarah’s lesson on John the Baptist, complete with visual aids that included desert flora, the children continued during the playtime to recount the adventures of the prophet in the wilderness known as “John the Cactus.” Note to be outdone, but absent from the body fluid super-Sunday because she was on a summer youth trip, Leah took her turn later that week. As a helper at the American Red Cross Safety Town for pre-kindergartners, Leah missed the announcement of the recent unplanned release and subsequent clean-up. Apparently, a child had sprung a wee-wee leak, which was cleaned and followed with a puddle of sanitizing fluid. Later, Leah entered the area and sat squarely in the puddle of sanitizer.