Defining The Differences Between Heaven and Paradise?

  • Thread starter Thread starter centurionguard
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
C

centurionguard

Guest
Depending upon what scriptural interpretation one reads from in the Catholic Church there seems to be a difference of opinion on the exact definition of between Heaven and Paradise.
“Some” theologians say that both Heaven and Paradise are synonymous. It’s somewhat confusing at best because I have not been able to get an exact interpretation between the two except what is quoted here: newadvent.org/cathen/07170a.htm
newadvent.org/summa/1102.htm and newadvent.org/cathen/14519a.htm Maybe someone can add some more clarification on the differences on Paradise opposed to Heaven. My thoughts too are on aborted unborn babies and children who die without being baptized.
 
Depending upon what scriptural interpretation one reads from in the Catholic Church there seems to be a difference of opinion on the exact definition of between Heaven and Paradise.
“Some” theologians say that both Heaven and Paradise are synonymous. It’s somewhat confusing at best because I have not been able to get an exact interpretation between the two except what is quoted here: newadvent.org/cathen/07170a.htm
newadvent.org/summa/1102.htm and newadvent.org/cathen/14519a.htm Maybe someone can add some more clarification on the differences on Paradise opposed to Heaven. My thoughts too are on aborted unborn babies and children who die without being baptized.
It would seem that Heaven and Paradise are the same…(“though I stand to be corrected”)
In Luke 23:43 I say to thee: This day thou shalt be with me in Paradise; i.e. in a place of rest with the souls of the just. The construction is not, I say to thee this day, &c., but, thou shalt be with me this day in the paradise. – In paradise. That is, in the happy state of rest, joy and peace everlasting. Christ was pleased by a special privilege, to reward the faith and confession of the penitent thief with a full discharge of all his sins, both as to the guilt and punishment, and to introduce him, immediately after death, into the happy society of the saints, whose limbo (that is, the place of their confinement) was now made a paradise by our Lord’s going thither. (Douay Rheims Challoner) — The soul of the good thief was that same day with Jesus Christ, in the felicity of the saints, in Abraham’s bosom, or in heaven, where Jesus was always present by his divinity. (St. Augustine) — St. Cyril, of Jerusalem, says he entered heaven before all the patriarchs and prophets. St. Chrysostom thinks that paradise was immediately open to him, and that he entered heaven the first mankind.

There is also reference by some theologians in biblical passages about the Bosom of Abraham being a resting place in Paradise. See: newadvent.org/cathen/01055a.htm
 
Me and Frances have been discussing this on another thread, “the afterlife”. Paradise was the place that the OT saints went after death, waiting on the Advent of Christ. Christ then took them into Heaven. Due to original sin they had to wait in paradise until the atonement of the Cross. Paradise was the at Hades, one side was for the saints, the other side was for the unsaved, with a great chasm in between, I recommend this litteralchristianlibrary.wetpaint.com/page/Heaven%2C+Hell%2C+and+the+Afterlife
 
Me and Frances have been discussing this on another thread, “the afterlife”. Paradise was the place that the OT saints went after death, waiting on the Advent of Christ. Christ then took them into Heaven. Due to original sin they had to wait in paradise until the atonement of the Cross. Paradise was the at Hades, one side was for the saints, the other side was for the unsaved, with a great chasm in between, I recommend this litteralchristianlibrary.wetpaint.com/page/Heaven%2C+Hell%2C+and+the+Afterlife
I’ve been watching that thread and find it very interesting.
 
Depending upon what scriptural interpretation one reads from in the Catholic Church there seems to be a difference of opinion on the exact definition of between Heaven and Paradise.
“Some” theologians say that both Heaven and Paradise are synonymous. It’s somewhat confusing at best because I have not been able to get an exact interpretation between the two except what is quoted here: newadvent.org/cathen/07170a.htm
newadvent.org/summa/1102.htm and newadvent.org/cathen/14519a.htm Maybe someone can add some more clarification on the differences on Paradise opposed to Heaven. My thoughts too are on aborted unborn babies and children who die without being baptized.
The Bible tells us that heaven is God’s dwelling place, where His throne is (Matt. 5:16, 34).

Now, for the Bible description of Paradise…

In 2 Cor. 12:1-5, Paul describes a vision in which he “was caught up into Paradise” (v. 4). Paul says this paradise was in “the third heaven” (v. 2) – or, God’s throne. We can say, then, that Paradise is located in the presence of God’s throne.

Now, let’s turn to Revelation 2:7 where Paradise is again mentioned. “To him that overcometh will I give to eat of the tree of life, which is in the midst of the paradise of God.” Here, the tree of life is said to be in the Paradise of God.

When we go to Rev. 22:1-2, we find that at the time when the new heaven and the new earth will be established, the holy city, new Jerusalem, will be “coming down from God out heaven” – coming down, that is, to this earth. Now, in the holy city, there is “a pure river of water of life, clear as crystal, proceeding out of the throne of God and of the Lamb” (Rev. 22:1). And, “In the midst of the street of it, and of either side of the river, [was there] the tree of life…” (next verse).

Here, we see that the new Jerusalem contains the tree of life. Since Rev. 2:7 says that the tree of life is in the Paradise of God, we must conclude that the new Jerusalem is the Paradise of God. And since “the throne of God and the Lamb shall be in it [the new Jerusalem]” (Rev. 22:3), then the new Jerusalem fits Paul’s description of Paradise as being a place located in the presence of God’s throne.
 
It would seem that Heaven and Paradise are the same…(“though I stand to be corrected”)
In Luke 23:43 I say to thee: This day thou shalt be with me in Paradise; i.e. in a place of rest with the souls of the just. The construction is not, I say to thee this day, &c., but, thou shalt be with me this day in the paradise. – In paradise. That is, in the happy state of rest, joy and peace everlasting. Christ was pleased by a special privilege, to reward the faith and confession of the penitent thief with a full discharge of all his sins, both as to the guilt and punishment, and to introduce him, immediately after death, into the happy society of the saints, whose limbo (that is, the place of their confinement) was now made a paradise by our Lord’s going thither. (Douay Rheims Challoner) — The soul of the good thief was that same day with Jesus Christ, in the felicity of the saints, in Abraham’s bosom, or in heaven, where Jesus was always present by his divinity. (St. Augustine) — St. Cyril, of Jerusalem, says he entered heaven before all the patriarchs and prophets. St. Chrysostom thinks that paradise was immediately open to him, and that he entered heaven the first mankind.

There is also reference by some theologians in biblical passages about the Bosom of Abraham being a resting place in Paradise. See: newadvent.org/cathen/01055a.htm
If you will notice [on my previous post], the Paradise of God that is the new Jerusalem, is for a FUTURE time. So, Christ could not have assured the repentant thief that he will be with Him in Paradise that day.

Also, the Bible clearly says Christ did not ascend to paradise on that day He died. He went to the grave: “For I delivered unto you first of all that which I also received, how that Christ DIED for our sins according to the scriptures. And that he was BURIED, and that he ROSE again the third day according to the scriptures” (1 Cor. 15:3-4).

If Christ DIED, WAS BURIED, and ROSE the third day only, He could not have ascended to paradise until AFTER His resurrection. Notice that Christ told Mary soon after He had been resurrected: “Touch me not; for I am not yet ascended to my Father…” (John 20:17). That was a full three days after His resurrection, yet Christ Himself clearly said that He had not yet ascended to heaven.

The thief on the cross, after coming to his senses, had asked Jesus: “Lord, remember me when thou comest into thy kingdom” (Luke 23:42). Jesus’ reply, “Assuredly I say to you today” was, according to The Companion Bible, “a common Hebrew idiom… which is constantly used for very solemn emphasis.” Since punctuations were not used in the inspired Greek in which Luke wrote, Jesus’ meaning could be distorted with incorrect punctuation and this Hebrew figure of speech obscured.

Properly punctuated, Jesus’ reply should read: “Verily I say unto thee today, Thou shalt be with me in paradise.” By using the word “today,” Jesus was stressing the time of His promise – not the time He would be in Paradise.

We should remember that Jesus had said: “My kingdom is not of this world” (John 18:36). Jesus’ rule, His government – the Paradise of God – is for the age to come. When Christ “comest into [His] kingdom,” it won’t be until His second coming because that is the time He will establish His Kingdom.
 
Me and Frances have been discussing this on another thread, “the afterlife”. Paradise was the place that the OT saints went after death, waiting on the Advent of Christ. Christ then took them into Heaven. Due to original sin they had to wait in paradise until the atonement of the Cross. Paradise was the at Hades, one side was for the saints, the other side was for the unsaved, with a great chasm in between, I recommend this litteralchristianlibrary.wetpaint.com/page/Heaven%2C+Hell%2C+and+the+Afterlife
There is a problem here. First, your scenario precludes the necessity of a resurrection. Second, the Scriptures tell us that all of God’s saints will be glorified TOGETHER (Rom. 8:17). Christ is first, being the “firsfruits of them that slept” (1 Cor. 15:20) – the first to be raised from the dead and glorified to eternal life. “Afterward, they that are Christ’s” – then notice the timetable – “AT HIS COMING.”

On that day of Pentecost at the beginning of the NT Church, days after Christ’s ascension to heaven, the inspired Peter said: “David is not ascended into the heavens” (Acts 2:34). Clearly, Christ did not take any OT saints with Him into heaven.
 
There is a problem here. First, your scenario precludes the necessity of a resurrection. Second, the Scriptures tell us that all of God’s saints will be glorified TOGETHER (Rom. 8:17). Christ is first, being the “firsfruits of them that slept” (1 Cor. 15:20) – the first to be raised from the dead and glorified to eternal life. “Afterward, they that are Christ’s” – then notice the timetable – “AT HIS COMING.”

On that day of Pentecost at the beginning of the NT Church, days after Christ’s ascension to heaven, the inspired Peter said: “David is not ascended into the heavens” (Acts 2:34). Clearly, Christ did not take any OT saints with Him into heaven.
No, I do not suggest a resurrection, only that Jesus took their souls from paradise to Heaven, He did not raised their bodies, that will come at the Second Coming. You are correct in what you said other than assuming that I meant that the OT saints were raised.👍
 
No, I do not suggest a resurrection, only that Jesus took their souls from paradise to Heaven, He did not raised their bodies, that will come at the Second Coming. You are correct in what you said other than assuming that I meant that the OT saints were raised.👍
Mailman, you have a few good points. 😃

Paradise is simply a garden which is enclosed; the word is not of Greek origin.
The garden in Eden is “paradise” – but that was not heaven.
When Adam and Eve were exiled, cherubim with firey sword were placed to block the way for man into paradise, lest they eat of the “tree of life”.
The Cherubim are the war horses of God’s chariot – in all cases they carry the fire with them – and there is quite a bit more to it, but I can’t go into it now – BUT BUT BUT – God rides, even in heaven, upon cherubim who can carry his throne.
Therefore, at least one paradise (in symbolic vision) is BELOW God’s throne, relatively speaking.

The cross, or the wood, and the tree, are all very much the same thing, The identity of most of the torture devices is simply the same way one would describe a tree – and the very tree Jesus hung on at Calvary clearly qualifies as a tree, if not “the” tree of life. Calvary is also in/next to a garden, for nearby is the unused tomb which Jesus would be laid in, and which we know was in a garden.

Luke 23:43 και ε-ιπ-εν αυτ-ω αμην σοι λεγ-ω σημερ-ον μετ ε-μου εση εν τω παραδεισω

And said to-him, AMEN, to-you I-am-saying(continuously) this-day(N,A) with me(g) you-will-be in the(D) Paradise(D).

There is no double “the” structure to show the extra emphasis “very”, or “I Mean the”, so Jesus is simply singling out a definite (same) garden – possibly one which is walled in, or that belongs to a rich man.

Meta can mean “with” or “after” – from my notes it typically means “with” or “among”, when followed by a “genitive” word, (that is true) so the correct translation is “with me”

“This day” occurs before the clause “with me”, so it does not support well the reading “you will be with-me this day in paradise”, but ignoring the supposed Jewish idiom stuff – the word can be subject or object of the previous phrase in Greek – giving;

AMEN, to-you I-am-saying-continuously this-day(,) you-will-be with me in the paradise.
AMEN, this-day I-am-saying-continuously, you-will-be with me in the paradise.

The present tense, “I-am-saying”, also implies a hitch – eg:the promise could fail, if Jesus stops saying it. That which elicits Jesus’ promise is the thief saying “remember me when you come into your kingdom”; Therefore, if there is any condition – it is that the thief keep that attitutde (faith) until his death “that-day.”

So Mailman has this point basically correct, the Greek does not guarantee when the thief will be in paradise; but it is at (least) a future time, and nothing is said of the present.

The thief could be in “paradise” right there on the cross, if Calvary is part of a garden (It has trees, and the tree of life). The thief may be laid in a tomb which is in a garden nearby just as Jesus was, the bodies all were taken down to prevent profaning the sabbath after their legs were broken – so the thieves had to be moved just as quickly as Jesus was. (John 19:31) Though the scriptures are not concerned with the destination of the individual thieves.

Or the promise may refer to a future time after the resurrection;
…or any combination of the above.

Also, don’t forget, many of the tombs were opened when Jesus died. There were resurrections which David did not share in immediately.

Matthew 27:52-53
and the graves were opened; and many bodies of the saints … arose,
and came out of the graves after his resurrection, and went into …

Copland3 – How did you come to the conclusion that “paradise” could be in the limbo of the dead, or “Abraham’s” bosom? He was buried in a cave with all the patriarchs with the exception of sinful Rachel, the idol thief. I don’t recall his tomb being a garden of any kind … did I miss something?
 
I can tell my medication wasn’t working too well last night; lots of nitpicky mistakes.

Well, here’s what I have the concentration to add now…

More precisely, that should be Golgatha over Calvary – eg: the traditonally held burying place of Adam the gardener. Throughout the OT, rich/important men who died were buried in their “garden” of their house.

eg: 2King 21:18
2King 21:18 και εκοιμηθη μανασσης μετα των πατερων αυτου και εταφη εν τω κηπω του οικου αυτου εν κηπω οζα και εβασιλευσεν αμων υιος αυτου αντ’ αυτου

And Manassa slept with the fathers of-him and was-buried in the garden of his house, in …

As a sort of loosely connected inspiration…
Ps: (94)/95:7-11
If today you hear his voice…
 
I can tell my medication wasn’t working too well last night; lots of nitpicky mistakes.

Well, here’s what I have the concentration to add now…

More precisely, that should be GolgGolgothar Calvary – eg: the tradtraditionallyd burying place of Adam the gardener. Throughout the OT, rich/important men who died were buried in their “garden” of their house.

eg: 2King 21:18
2King 21:18 και εκοιμηθη μανασσης μετα των πατερων αυτου και εταφη εν τω κηπω του οικου αυτου εν κηπω οζα και εβασιλευσεν αμων υιος αυτου αντ’ αυτου

And Manassa slept with the fathers of-him and was-buried in the garden of his house, in …

As a sort of loosely connected inspiration…
Ps: (94)/95:7-11
If today you hear his voice…
As a sort of loosely connected inspiration…
I don’t believe it’s always easy to transcribe an exact translation from Greek to Latin or Latin to English or French and any other vanaclar language. In Biblical translation especially from the original Aramaic and Greek transcripts there is always “some” loss in exact meaning when reading biblical text today. This is why it’s good to educate one-self with multi-lingual languages. I write and speak French and English and do understand some Latin. However; that being said it’s somewhat difficult to translate (“exact”) expressions in my French mother tongue to English. A former priest that I had the privilege of working with has a Master in Theology and was fluent in the understanding seven languages, Greek, Latin, French, English, Italian, Spanish, and German. I have seen some Catholic Bibles with biblical verse translation in four languages with Aramaic, Greek, Latin and English. A gifted handy reference tool.
 
Paradise can be used in a lot of different contexts. In the old days, people used to qualify whether they were talking about the Terrestrial Paradise (Eden) or the Heavenly Paradise, just as there is both the Terrestrial Jerusalem (the city you can reach through your travel agency) and the Heavenly Jerusalem.

Early Christians also talked a lot about Eden as part of the new heavens and the new Earth. Papias gets into collecting these oral teachings, for example.

Meanwhile, of course normal walled gardens are “paradises”, and Mary and the Church are also “a garden enclosed”, ie, a paradise.

Re: the Good Thief –

Frankly, it could be true both ways. This day you will be with Me in the Heavenly Paradise; and this day of eternity, you will be with Me at the Last Judgment and in the new heavens and new earth. Eternity doesn’t worry about chronological time, frankly, so any worries about that can be discarded.

I don’t think you should understand it as “this day you will be dead and buried with Me”, unless you simultaneously understand it with the other two. The clear meaning of the passage is that the Good Thief will be saved and be with Jesus.
 
I don’t believe it’s always easy to transcribe an exact translation from Greek to Latin or Latin to English or French and any other vanaclar language. In Biblical translation especially from the original Aramaic and Greek transcripts there is always “some” loss in exact meaning when reading biblical text today.
I think that it is rather the original which has no precise meaning to translate which lies at the root of this problem.
How would you translate this ecclesiastical bulletin into french?

“Ladies, don’t forget the rummage sale. It’s a chance to get rid of those things not worth keeping around the house. Bring your husbands.”
This is why it’s good to educate one-self with multi-lingual languages. I write and speak French and English and do understand some Latin. However; that being said it’s somewhat difficult to translate (“exact”) expressions in my French mother tongue to English. A former priest that I had the privilege of working with has a Master in Theology and was fluent in the understanding seven languages, Greek, Latin, French, English, Italian, Spanish, and German. I have seen some Catholic Bibles with biblical verse translation in four languages with Aramaic, Greek, Latin and English. A gifted handy reference tool.
Yes, I have access to a 200 year old english-french polyglot with the LXX and greek NT. It is quite useful and reassuring, for its age precludes digital tampering.

BTW: Huios Theou is NOT correct for my intention; you flatter me too much.
forums.catholic-questions.org/showthread.php?p=3232831&highlight=Huios#post3232831

As a side note, I don’t like the resolution of that thread, there are definitely some problems with it besides my learning a new declension pattern of AgapH.

In the OP articles cited, none f the authors show why they connect paradise to Heaven itself, as synonymous. They appear to assume, for example, that because Paul was “caught up to the third Heaven”, and that he was also “in paradise” in the next sentence that the two are identical – when that is foolish; there is a relationship between heaven and paradise proven, but not much else.

Notice in my example of Manassah; he was king – thus he had a royal garden. The owner and luxury is what makes such a place “paradise.”. there are comparative statements about various paridises in the OT.

Note, the thief on the cross introduces the idea of kingship in his statement of faith. Despite Mailman’s assertion, “My kingdom is not of this world”, that does not rule out Jesus owning a garden here. As he says in the Gospels, “then the kingdom of God is upon you” meaning in the present; as he walked the earth.

His kingdom does not belong to this world does not prove his kingdom is not present in this world – for he is the king, at very least; and Peter did draw the sword to protect and fight for Jesus in the garden on the mount of Olives.
Jesus’ words to Pilate bear record of the mission of the prince of peace; who casts out the devil only later, through the sacrifice of the cross where he gains subjects for his kingdom; and through which the other prince is cast out.
Then the Peter fights indeed; but not with the sword.

In the passage previously cited, a specific word is used for “to-day”, it is special in that although it is a “rho” ending root – the particular word endeds with a pattern abnormal for words ending in “rho”. The psalm I cited does not use this particular word, but a correct ending form for “rho”.

In some of the articles cited from New Advent, there is insistence that the construction of Jesus statement to the thief can not emphasize the “day” as being when Jesus says what he does or the theif perseveres – but in fact, I have too many counter examples to agree with the New Advent article; the articles look biased (eisegesis); and influenced heavily by St. Thomas’ incomplete opinions – rather than direct study of the Greek or of any official Dogma I am aware of.

This particular word “to-day” I have found acting as a subject in some places, and agreeing with neuter words in other places/& being an object (accusative case).
If there is a nuance to this particular form of “to-day” as opposed to the expected form – I don’t know; Nor am I up to studying it anytime soon.

For the record, I can’t speak Greek one bit – but I can read it.
Time to go back to bed, my eyes seem to be playing tricks on me when I try to read the rest of your post. g’night.

–Andros Huiou Theou.
 
Re: the Good Thief –

Frankly, it could be true both ways. This day you will be with Me in the Heavenly Paradise; and this day of eternity, you will be with Me at the Last Judgment and in the new heavens and new earth. Eternity doesn’t worry about chronological time, frankly, so any worries about that can be discarded.

I don’t think you should understand it as “this day you will be dead and buried with Me”, unless you simultaneously understand it with the other two. The clear meaning of the passage is that the Good Thief will be saved and be with Jesus.
I agree, because the AMEN would suggest that Jesus is granting the grace of final perseverance.
But, I am not sure it can be “this day” you will be in the Heavenly Paradise.
I have no solid, non speculative way to distinguish when eternity is invoked after death and BEFORE the resurrection of Jesus, the firstborn. (Inheritor).
 
I think that it is rather the original which has no precise meaning to translate which lies at the root of this problem.
How would you translate this ecclesiastical bulletin into french?

“Ladies, don’t forget the rummage sale. It’s a chance to get rid of those things not worth keeping around the house. Bring your husbands.”

Yes, I have access to a 200 year old english-french polyglot with the LXX and greek NT. It is quite useful and reassuring, for its age precludes digital tampering.

BTW: Huios Theou is NOT correct for my intention; you flatter me too much.
forums.catholic-questions.org/showthread.php?p=3232831&highlight=Huios#post3232831

As a side note, I don’t like the resolution of that thread, there are definitely some problems with it besides my learning a new declension pattern of AgapH.

In the OP articles cited, none f the authors show why they connect paradise to Heaven itself, as synonymous. They appear to assume, for example, that because Paul was “caught up to the third Heaven”, and that he was also “in paradise” in the next sentence that the two are identical – when that is foolish; there is a relationship between heaven and paradise proven, but not much else.

Notice in my example of Manassah; he was king – thus he had a royal garden. The owner and luxury is what makes such a place “paradise.”. there are comparative statements about various paridises in the OT.

Note, the thief on the cross introduces the idea of kingship in his statement of faith. Despite Mailman’s assertion, “My kingdom is not of this world”, that does not rule out Jesus owning a garden here. As he says in the Gospels, “then the kingdom of God is upon you” meaning in the present; as he walked the earth.

His kingdom does not belong to this world does not prove his kingdom is not present in this world – for he is the king, at very least; and Peter did draw the sword to protect and fight for Jesus in the garden on the mount of Olives.
Jesus’ words to Pilate bear record of the mission of the prince of peace; who casts out the devil only later, through the sacrifice of the cross where he gains subjects for his kingdom; and through which the other prince is cast out.
Then the Peter fights indeed; but not with the sword.

In the passage previously cited, a specific word is used for “to-day”, it is special in that although it is a “rho” ending root – the particular word endeds with a pattern abnormal for words ending in “rho”. The psalm I cited does not use this particular word, but a correct ending form for “rho”.

In some of the articles cited from New Advent, there is insistence that the construction of Jesus statement to the thief can not emphasize the “day” as being when Jesus says what he does or the theif perseveres – but in fact, I have too many counter examples to agree with the New Advent article; the articles look biased (eisegesis); and influenced heavily by St. Thomas’ incomplete opinions – rather than direct study of the Greek or of any official Dogma I am aware of.

This particular word “to-day” I have found acting as a subject in some places, and agreeing with neuter words in other places/& being an object (accusative case).
If there is a nuance to this particular form of “to-day” as opposed to the expected form – I don’t know; Nor am I up to studying it anytime soon.

For the record, I can’t speak Greek one bit – but I can read it.
Time to go back to bed, my eyes seem to be playing tricks on me when I try to read the rest of your post. g’night.

–Andros Huiou Theou.
I think that it is rather the original which has no precise meaning to translate which lies at the root of this problem.
How would you translate this ecclesiastical bulletin into french?
“Ladies, don’t forget the rummage sale. It’s a chance to get rid of those things not worth keeping around the house. Bring your husbands.”
Yes, I have access to a 200 year old english-french polyglot with the LXX and greek NT. It is quite useful and reassuring, for its age precludes digital tampering.
“Ladies, don’t forget the rummage sale. It’s a chance to get rid of those things not worth keeping around the house. Bring your husbands.”
You bring up a good point about making poor translation.
Here’s the best french translation I could come up with which does exactly match.
:
Les dames, n’oubliez pas la vente de charité. C’est une chance de se débarrasser de ces choses pas la valeur gardant la maison de côté. Apportez à vos maris

Have fun making a better french translation
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top