2 Corinthians 12--Third Heaven

2 Corinthians 12, starting at verse 2: I know a man in union with Christ who, 14 years ago—whether in the body or out of the body, I do not know; God knows—was caught away to the third heaven. 3 Yes, I know such a man—whether in the body or apart from the body, I do not know; God knows— 4 who was caught away into paradise and heard words that cannot be spoken and that are not lawful for a man to say. 5 I will boast about such a man, but I will not boast about myself except of my weaknesses. 6 For even if I want to boast, I will not be unreasonable, for I would say the truth. But I refrain from doing so, in order that no one should give me more credit than what he sees in me or hears from me, 7 just because of receiving such extraordinary revelations.

There is so much information here, it is definitely best to break it down into several components:

Third Heaven (Physical versus Spiritual versus Figurative): In what sense could there possibly be a “third” heaven? Twice scriptures speak of the "heavens" and the “heaven of the heavens” as not being sufficient to contain the creator of the universe, Jehovah God. Nehemiah said that Jehovah created both the heavens and the heaven of the heavens. In all these cases, what is being referred to is physical, the first "heavens" being our atmosphere, and the second (“the heaven of the heavens”) being what we today refer to as “outer space” which contain the stars (or, as older translations phrase it, “the heavenly hosts”). Once we get past those two heavens what else is left (as far as "heaven(s)" referring to a place, location or area)?

While some may want to theorize that it could be what lies beyond our galaxy, that is unlikely. This is because for the ancients, outer space included all the stellar cosmos. What makes considerably more sense is that the phrase "third heaven" is that which CAN contain Jehovah God--his very presence--the spirit realm in which the angels surround the Creator of all things. Although some may argue that Paul’s writing is the first mention of this third heaven, in actuality, the presence of God’s throne is mentioned throughout scripture. It seems very likely that Paul here refers to that as the third heaven. Indeed, he was not merely taken up into the sky (the atmosphere), nor was he somehow transported through the voids of outer space. No, he was taken (in a vision) to a heaven where there was intelligent conversation. In scripture, the only mention of intelligent life, other than here on earth, is heaven where the angels and God himself reside.)

Yet another possibility is that this third heaven is intended to be understood as being a superlative degree of an experience. In other words, Paul, in trance or vision, was “caught away” to see something that in itself was so awesome, so dumbfounding, so magnificent, that it was beyond words. But yet Paul wasn't beyond words because he mentions that what he saw was unlawful to relate. He seemed to understand what he saw and heard--BUT he felt compelled to hold back comment on it. More on this later.

Paradise: Although many religions and Bible commentators try to confuse people with this concept, in scripture it is very easy to understand. Paradise is mostly used in respects to our earth in a peaceful, productive, unpolluted (physically and spiritually) condition. There is only one scriptural reference where “the paradise of God,” in context, refers to heaven. So this begs the question, why would Paul seemingly lump “third heaven” and “paradise” as if it were one and the same place? I do not have a definitive answer, but again, considering the Bible as a whole, one logical possibility is that in this particular instance Paul was referring to the same “paradise of God” that is mentioned in Revelation.

Another possibility is that Paul actually is mentioning two different visions but appears to lump them together. In this case, he may have been given insight not only into the heavenly Kingdom but also into the coming paradise as mentioned in the scriptures linked here. I don’t know which of these two, or even if there are other possibilities, is correct. Searching other current-day commentators, it appears they also are uncertain. (One thing that confuses me about the possibility that Paul was writing about paradise on earth is that he he himself was heaven-bound and was writing to a congregation of anointed, heaven-bound Christians. Why would he be shown a vision of earth when heaven would make sense for Paul's personal future? Although paradise earth is a clear and definite promise in scriptures, in this context, it doesn't seem likely to me, but I'm no scholar.)

Not Lawful to Mention: First we need to identify which law is being referred to here. Paul himself had no trouble talking about many features related to Jesus and Christianity. Similarly, Peter likewise writes about the “new heavens” (Christ’s Kingdom rule in full sway) and “new earth” (obedient mankind preserved through Armageddon). Even John, who was imprisoned when he wrote the book of Revelation, spoke of God’s Kingdom taking over earth’s administration. So early Christians did not hold back from proclaiming God’s Kingdom because of Roman law. Even in the face of accusations of sedition, they still boldly spoke out. The second possibility is Jewish law. The apostles had twice been dragged into Jewish court (the Sanhedrin) and threateningly commanded not to speak about Jesus and the culpability of the Jewish leaders for Jesus’ death. So it is unlikely that Paul was talking about any human authority or rules. If not human rules, then it must have been a directive from God and Christ.

Yet Paul and others did indeed write, speak and teach about features of the coming Kingdom. They didn't fear Roman rule, they didn't fear Jewish leaders, and there was already an abundance in the Hebrew writings speaking of both heaven and earth. So what feature(s) of this was something not lawful? Perhaps a hint is found in Daniel 12:4. There, Daniel is told to keep at least part of his message secret. Although this may or may not be related, it does demonstrate that there was at least one other time when God told a man about a matter and then told him, ‘don’t tell anyone’ until God gave permission. So did Paul see certain features of the coming Kingdom that God and Christ want to surprise us with? Could be. Time will tell.

Third Heaven and/or Paradise and Unmentionables: So is the "third heaven" the spirit realm where God himself resides or was it superlative experience? Is the "paradise" mentioned here the coming restored earth or the "paradise of God" (again, God's heavenly presence)? Are the unlawful words a yet-to-be-revealed surprise or something else? What really is the “takeaway” here? What lesson is there to learn from this passage? 

Let’s go back to the context of 2 Corinthians 12. In verses 5 through 10, Paul says that whatever it was he experienced, the point is not that he himself is anything special, but rather that God is indeed using him and has blessed him not only with privileges related to proclaiming the Good News, but also with teaser-insights into the future. One thing is for sure, whatever this vision was invigorated Paul so much that even 14 years later when he wrote 2 Corinthians, he remained determinedly looking forward to the fulfillment of that vision. 

Like Paul, we also need humility when it comes to trying to understand difficult passages like this one at 2 Corinthians. Indeed, if Paul felt he was nothing special, me even more so. I have not been given any visions, I do not claim to have any special understanding. I am only capturing my personal meditation and research here. Also, we need endurance, determination and vigor to continue faithful and proclaim the Kingdom message. We need to see the Kingdom and the paradise as clearly in our mind's eye as Paul did in his vision!

Are you curious to know what the particulars are about those unmentionables? So am I. The best way to ensure that we find out is to prove ourselves faithful so that when the time comes, we can find out.

Supplemental:
More extensive examination of the use of the word "heaven" in the Bible.
Watchtower official examination of 2 Corinthians 12:2-4

Luke 23 vs 43

You probably already know the account--Jesus is being put to death alongside two criminals. One of the criminals mocks Jesus. The other recognizes Jesus is the foretold Messiah and humbly requests to be remembered favorably when Jesus "comes into his kingdom," (or, as certain ancient manuscripts put it, "come into your kingly power").

According to most modern translations, they render Jesus' response as:
"Truly I tell you, today you will be with me in paradise." (Luke 23:43)

Whether you know it or not, the original manuscripts did not contain the punctuation so familiar to people today. Did you notice the placement of the comma after the first "you"? Rendering the scripture that way would lead readers to believe that Jesus was telling the criminal that on that very day, the day of their death, the criminal would be with Jesus. Is that how you understand the scripture?

Now, I'm not going to get into the common confusion of paradise verses heaven. That, in itself, is another big discussion. Instead, I want you just to think about the timeline. Do you believe that Jesus and the criminal would, on that very day, be in paradise? If yes, then please try to reconcile that with the following scripture, also Jesus' own words:

Jesus said, "Do not hold on to me, for I have not yet ascended to the Father. Go instead to my brothers and tell them, 'I am ascending to my Father and your Father, to my God and your God.'" - John 20:17

Did you notice what Jesus told Mary Magdalene, three days after his being put to death, now standing in front of her as the resurrected Jesus? He indicated he hadn't ascended to his Father yet. He was dead for three days. He hadn't been anywhere but in the grave. So if Jesus was not in heaven, nor was he in paradise, why would he promise the criminal, as rendered in the NIV, "today you will be with me in paradise"?

How can this be resolved? Easy, the placement of the comma is incorrect. It is the position that Jehovah's Witnesses have taken for decades. They render that verse: "Truly I tell you today, You will be with me in Paradise." It is same as you telling someone "Look, I'm telling you right now, I will take care of the matter." You are not saying you will take care of the matter that very moment. Rather, you are making an emphatic statement that as of that moment, you are committed to handling whatever the matter is.

In the case of the criminal, he even knew it could not be that very day. That is why he said "WHEN you come into your kingdom." He recognized it would be some time in the future. When was that? In Acts 1:1-7 Jesus appears over a period of 40 days to his faithful followers. In the course of that time, they ask if he is restoring the kingdom at that time. His response is, basically, it is none of their business. They have a preaching work to concentrate on. After that time, Jesus did ascend to heaven, but where was that criminal? Approximately 20 years later, Paul wrote the Thessalonian congregation that the time was yet future. In speaking of those that would be resurrected to rule in heaven, he wrote these words at 1 Thes.4:15-18 (click link to read). So even some 20 years later, if that criminal was headed to heaven, it hadn't happened yet. He was still dead. (Again, it is yet another discussion as to where that criminal is going to be. If you'd like to read more about that, see this article.)

Index of Blog Articles

Future Rewards

Every once in a while I come across an idea that I think would be excellent to help prove or at very least support what I believe the Bible’s teaching is regarding death and resurrection.

• Unlike mainstream Christendom, I believe that we were created as living souls (aka “beings”), not that we have some non-physical component in us called a soul. (Genesis 2:7)
• KJV, DRA(Catholic Douay) “became a living soul”;
• NIV, AMP “became a living being”;
• GNT, “the man began to live”

• Sometime (not long) after Adam had the breath of life breathed into him and he “became a living soul,” he was told that, if disobedient, at death he would merely return to the ground, “for dust you are and to dust you will return.” (Genesis 3:19)

• Jesus and indeed the whole of the Greek Scriptures (“new testament,” as some call it) attest to early Jewish converts to Christianity as already having common knowledge that being resurrected was supported and taught in the Hebrew/Aramaic scriptures (“old testament”).

I felt sure that I should be able to find proof of this belief in Jewish teachings today. So I wondered: What hope of future reward or what hope for the future is there for a loyal Jew (or “Hebrew,” as some prefer)? To that end I read a few websites that cover the idea(s). Surprisingly (or maybe not), those of the Jewish faith, living as our contemporaries, do not have have one common belief.

Here are the three search phrases I used and a few choice returrns:

• what is the future reward for faithful jews
• do jews believe in an afterlife
• did ancient hebrews belief in resurrection

http://www.worldofjudaica.com/judaism/beliefs/does-judaism-believe-in-an-afterlife/
http://www.bibleandjewishstudies.net/articles/afterlife.htm
http://www.jewfaq.org/olamhaba.htm
http://wiki.answers.com/Q/Do_Jews_believe_in_an_afterlife

Essentially, it seems the Jews, down through centuries of influences from peoples worshipping “foreign” deities, have had their faith compromised by philosophies not found in the Bible. Even though Jewish scripture canon has no teaching of an immortal soul, some teach that humans do indeed have such. The result of this belief allows them to adopt and adapt the unscriptural belief of reincarnation. It also has the belief of “a nonphysical place where only the intellect remains to ‘bask in the Glow of the Divine Presence.’” This quote was taken from the first link cited above. Even the author admitted: “Nobody is quite sure what this means” But one thing I could not find was any indication just what they would be doing in this Divine Presence. The author does state that: “The logic goes that if the afterlife is only intellectual, only those who used their intellect would want to be there in the first place. Otherwise, they will simply cease to exist, ….” So intellectual ones get to bask in the Divine Presence but I guess they are too much in awe of the presence to do much else than stare in amazement. My words may sound unkind or glib but I truly do not mean them that way. It is my honest conclusion from reading the links above. (In fact, after reading the notes of the first link, I actually gained respect for the objective research that was done.)

The second link at least partially supported my hopes that Jewish belief would back up my Christian belief in the resurrection. The only “pop my bubble” concern is that it is not a unilateral belief across Jewish believers. Instead it really becomes just another point of contention between me and others. They will point to Jews who believe in reincarnation, an immortal soul and other such things as proof of their roots just as firmly as I will point to those that agree with my point. So that line of proof cannot be pursued with the expectation that it will authoritatively answer the question.

Reflecting again on the article in the first link, I was intrigued by the author’s assertion that the holy canon of Jewish writings (Hebrew/Aramaic scriptures) only supported the idea that those writings concentrated on the “present.” The reward for obedience was peace with God during the immediate lifetime of each generation. He claims there was not a dwelling on what happens after death or any expectation of future resurrection. And although to the greater degree that was true--God’s message to each generation dealt with loyalty now and the resultant blessings--just because the spattering of support for coming back as a human again are minimal, that doesn’t reduce the fact that they are there, even as the second cited link makes clear.

So here is what makes sense to me:

• God created humans to live on the earth. (Psalms 115:16 “As regards the heavens, to Jehovah the heavens belong, but the earth he has given to the sons of men.”)

• Death was not originally in God’s scheme of things. As evidence of this, the faithful angels have lived for millenniums. Adam’s death would only occur if he were disobedient. Otherwise the threat of death would have been inconsequential if Adam would die regardless.

• God would not have put all the effort that he did into preparing Earth for mankind only to abandon those plans because Adam & Eve sinned. (Isaiah 55:10,11 “For just as the pouring rain descends, and the snow, from the heavens and does not return to that place, unless it actually saturates the earth and makes it produce and sprout, and seed is actually given to the sower and bread to the eater, so my word that goes forth from my mouth will prove to be. It will not return to me without results, but it will certainly do that in which I have delighted, and it will have certain success in that for which I have sent it.”) (The “word” regarding God’s wishes for the earth was that man should live in a beautiful garden-like home forever. That “word” has never changed.)

• If God had planned for obedient mankind to eventually live in heaven, why didn’t he just put them there in the first place? He had already created angels there--why not just put us there to begin with as well? (The response that we had to be tested is illogical and unscriptural.)

• Just as a fair & good landlord evicts bad tenants but does what he can to keep his good tenants happy, God plans to evict those that are immoral and ungodly so that those that love God and neighbor can live in peace. (Psalm 37:10, 11 “And just a little while longer, and the wicked one will be no more; And you will certainly give attention to his place, and he will not be. But the meek ones themselves will possess the earth, And they will indeed find their exquisite delight in the abundance of peace.”)

• Those who have died and will yet die before the fulfilment of the above point are not cheated. They will come back to life as humans on earth to enjoy the life promised in Psalms 37. (Matthew 5:5 “Happy are the mild-tempered ones, since they will inherit the earth.” See also Matthew 6:10; Revelation 21:3,4)

As a sidenote, I had previously mentioned that it appears one particular teaching of the Jews says they will bask in God’s glory but doesn’t explain it. What I have come to believe is that the small number of those being invited by Christ to heaven have a very specific purpose. (Revelation 20:6) Their rulership will be directly over those “meek” ones that will inherit the earth.