M
mytruepower2
Guest
I wanted to share some thoughts I’ve been having on the topic of possessions and Heaven. According to C.S. Lewis, no one in Heaven can have possessions, which he admits imperils the significance of the Pearl of Great Price, yet he never addressed the issue any deeper than that.
Quite honestly, as a Thomist, I find this hard to swallow. On Thomism, all pearls, houses, books, food, and other things that one can own are “good things” and all “good things” come from God. So if God can allow people access to good things in this life, it seems baffling that such a thing would be difficult for him in Heaven.
I have puzzled over this conundrum for literally years, and I believe I’ve found a plausible answer to it. It’s possible that by “possessions,” Lewis was referring to exclusive possessions. In short, to having the ability to prohibit other people from using something that you don’t want them to use, even though it costs you nothing, like an IP-holder. I can certainly understand that position, and it does seem to be compatible with the traditional understanding of the Pearl of Great Price (as a real investment in exchange for usable value.)
If, however, any Christian holds the actual position that Heaven is without usable value as a whole, I would very much like to hear why they think this, and how they make sense of the “Pearl of Great Price” and “Treasure in the Field” parables, as well as how, precisely, this is generous of God, since it doesn’t involve him giving good things to the faithful.
My position is that Heaven (even before the New Heavens) is much more physical-like than we usually think, that since spirits can see and hear, it only makes sense that they can also touch, taste and smell, and that Heaven is a real environment in which the faithful are rewarded with both longevity and immunity to temptation, as well as limitless resources of infinite types, and an intimate relationship with God, so that they want for nothing. Anything less would fall short of the needs of the human soul, and would therefore not be an adequate end goal in my mind, but I’m eager to hear what other people have to say on this topic.
Quite honestly, as a Thomist, I find this hard to swallow. On Thomism, all pearls, houses, books, food, and other things that one can own are “good things” and all “good things” come from God. So if God can allow people access to good things in this life, it seems baffling that such a thing would be difficult for him in Heaven.
I have puzzled over this conundrum for literally years, and I believe I’ve found a plausible answer to it. It’s possible that by “possessions,” Lewis was referring to exclusive possessions. In short, to having the ability to prohibit other people from using something that you don’t want them to use, even though it costs you nothing, like an IP-holder. I can certainly understand that position, and it does seem to be compatible with the traditional understanding of the Pearl of Great Price (as a real investment in exchange for usable value.)
If, however, any Christian holds the actual position that Heaven is without usable value as a whole, I would very much like to hear why they think this, and how they make sense of the “Pearl of Great Price” and “Treasure in the Field” parables, as well as how, precisely, this is generous of God, since it doesn’t involve him giving good things to the faithful.
My position is that Heaven (even before the New Heavens) is much more physical-like than we usually think, that since spirits can see and hear, it only makes sense that they can also touch, taste and smell, and that Heaven is a real environment in which the faithful are rewarded with both longevity and immunity to temptation, as well as limitless resources of infinite types, and an intimate relationship with God, so that they want for nothing. Anything less would fall short of the needs of the human soul, and would therefore not be an adequate end goal in my mind, but I’m eager to hear what other people have to say on this topic.
