One of the most offensive claims that Christians make is that their narrative governs after-life destinations. Numerous groups find these claims offensive. For many others they simply seem to have insufficient grip to change behavior.

Moral Performance or Religious Fidelity?

The most common post-death narrative imagined or asserted is that “good people” after they die go to a nice place as some sort of reward, and something else happens to “bad people” after they die as some sort of punishment. The particulars that differentiate “good people” from “bad people” are conveniently vague. Most simply assume that their standards of morality are the right ones, and that these standards will determine the outcomes.

Many who seem to easily stomach this post-life assignation by moral value take offense at religious systems like Christianity that assert a privilege. These religious systems assert that in fact those who were faithful to their religious tradition will receive good post-death accommodations while those who had the bad judgment or unfortunate circumstance of not  being born into or choosing the correct religious tradition go to a bad place, or dissolve, or simply get less in the after-life than those who climbed the pecking order of the correct religious group.

For a culture deeply impacted by post-modern suspicion of manipulative and abusive narratives these religious traditions are given especially harsh criticism. One might ask, however, if that criticism itself is fair given obvious self-serving nature of the more common moral value system which out of niceness seldom receives much criticism at all.

Secular Assumptions

Many atheists and some agnostics assert that there is nothing after we die. Once our brains are no longer capable of hosting the experience we call “life”, the experience simply stops. This tends to be most easily embraced if one steers clear of grieving loved ones who are deeply determined to imagine their beloved in a better place or looking down on them from above.

I find the relationship between secular atheism and euthanasia to be reasonable. Recently a pair of twins in their forties in Belgium were granted their request to be euthanized.  In this piece in the Huffington Post the author implies that since we know that death is simply the end of life then suicide is simply a reasonable remedy for suffering.

What if We Are Relationally Everlasting? 

Our perspectives on afterlife questions seem to betray our cultural bias towards consumerist materialism. “Heaven” is a place with nice homes, good food, nice things. “Hell” is a bad place that has torture and pain.

What if, in fact, death is not the end of us, but who and what we are at a deeper level, our stories, our selves, persists apart from the gray matter host we assume today? What if we are, in fact, relationally everlasting?

We experience each other as significantly relationally persistent after death. The influence and decisions of significant figures in history clearly outlive their death. The same is true in families and in friendships.

If there is a God who knows us, is in relationship with us, and for whom we are important and meaningful then it stands to reason that death doesn’t severe that relationship. Jesus as much says so in Matthew 22:32.

‘I am the God of Abraham, the God of Isaac, and the God of Jacob’? He is not the God of the dead but of the living!”

What Kind of God do we Imagine?

Not only do we have a bias about comsumerism and materialism, we also have a bias in our imagination about how we might perceive God.

We easily imagine that God is nice, friendly, easily accessible, like a kind neighbor or a good friend. Those aren’t bad ideas, they’re just too small.

If we look at the universe we know, both the insanely large and the insanely small, we see that the creator of all of this must be a being of enormous power, enormous intelligence, enormous beauty, and enormous imagination. It is not uncommon to be tongue-tied or anxious when coming into the presence of a person of enormous power, beauty, fame or intelligence but any experience we have of this amid other human beings must be dwarfed when we talk about the kind of God that could make this universe. Any reasonable person would be completely terrified to come into the presence of such a being. Everything we care about in existence is sustained, and therefore potentially threatened by this being.

If you read the Bible, this is exactly the impression the Bible gives us of people who see this being. In the book of Exodus when he shows himself on the mountain, all the people want is for it to stop. Whenever even a angel, one of his messengers shows up in glory, the response is the same.

God’s Visible Absence is For Our Own Comfort

There are two points to make in this.

First, that witness to God’s glory, God’s weightiness, is evident in the creation we see around us. We are never divorced from the works of his presence. His grace and generosity infuse the fabric of the world we see.

Second, that we live practically in a space where God has separated himself from us for our wellbeing. Why? Because his presence full blow would crush us emotionally, driving us to despair, self-loathing and torture. This idea is found in Revelation 6:12-17 where God comes to the world in his glory and the people of the earth hide from him and wish the mountains to fall on them.

How Did This Happen?

What we see in all of this is that the story of heaven and hell, life and death revolve around where we are relationally with God. The story of Genesis 3 begins with the man and the woman living in the creator God’s garden in comfort and peace. God’s presence did not bother them. By the end of the story the man and the woman are exiled from the garden following their hiding from their maker. Something happened.

Why Were People Exiled and Not Plants or Animals?

I don’t think I’ve ever heard anyone ask this question before but the answer to it is key to understanding what is happening relationally. Plants and animals are naked and unashamed. Why? They can’t see their selves. God’s beauty, power, purity, knowledge is no threat to them because their self-ness is independent of seeing their selves. This is why God’s presence is crushing to us. When we see our selves in the light of God’s presence we don’t like what we see. The truth about our selves, in comparison to the obvious truth about God’s self is crushing for us.

A Tree, A Serpent, A Man and a Woman

The Genesis 3 story is of course the place where this all begins. The man and the woman start the story in innocence. In a sense they are in a way still like the animals. Then the serpent makes a suggestion to the woman. There is reason to believe in the dialogue between the woman and the serpent that there are already suspicions in the woman’s mind about the character of her maker. Her answers to the serpents questions put God in a subtly less generous light than the text previously asserted.

Part of what is subtle about the text is that the desire of the man and the woman that they hope the fruit will fulfill is itself space between themselves and God. They want to know, and to a degree define, good and evil. They want to have more independence from God and therefore in their minds be more like God. The suspicion in their hearts is that this God cannot fully be trusted, and that deep in their hearts they would rather trust themselves than trust God.

These all seem like good ideas until the real God shows up. Suddenly the presence of the God they have known is hostile, threatening, and unwelcome. They realize that they are naked, they have seen their own selves for the first time. They hide.

Limit Their Power, Limit Their Presence

In the story God takes action based on the action of the man and the woman.

The first thing God does is limit the power of the couple. In the story the man’s power is seen by his capacity to work the ground. That power is not taken away, but limited by painful frustration. The woman’s power is seen in her capacity to produce children. That power also is not taken away, but limited by painful frustration.

Relational strife will also be the norm.

God also is concerned that they man and the woman will live forever in this frustration, and so they are exiled from the garden, where they might eat from the tree of life. They will be limited in time, limited in power, and limited in access to the creator God. They will be able to pursue life without having to physically run from God, but their lives will be greatly diminished.

 East of Eden, Between Heaven and Hell

Where this narrative finally locates us is between heaven and hell. We are separated from God, but not finally, fundamentally divorced from the works of his presence. We live in this space of frustrated, diminished power, yet in relative freedom from the crush of his glory.

The Dilemma of Death

If the atheists are right, and death is simply the secession of life, then it is the ultimate anesthesia. Our stories stop, they only live on until the memory of our persons, or the consequences of our actions no longer impact creatures that can recognize them.

If, however, our stories, our relational selves persist, what can be done with us after death?  Soren Kierkegaard pondered this in his essay “Sickness Unto Death”. If death is not the end, what is to happen to us? What if we are to face our maker? What if we are to know ourselves, and know our maker? What if there is no escape?

Relational Conflict

The math of relational conflict is really very simple.

Option A: Resolve the conflict.

Option B: Maintain the conflict.

Options C: Eliminate the adversary

Our problem is that the Garden of Eden puts us in a place where we can’t resolve the conflict without annihilation of our selves. The conflict is managed through a mixture of options B and C. The conflict is maintained by exile, a limited form of elimination.

How Does Jesus Resolve the Conflict?

Jesus submits rather than rebels.

Jesus is the presence of God in a way that doesn’t destroy.

Jesus pays the penalty for sin.

Belief in Jesus satisfies the need of the self. He is a safe harbor for entering the presence of God.

Note: most of these thoughts are unfinished, but I’ll post it anyway. It’s just easier to find if I post it.