What do you think?
Rate this book
Heaven Is a Place on Earth: Why Everything You Do Matters to God
"I don't want to go to heaven. Not that I'm lobbying for the other place . . ." —Michael Wittmer This planet is more than just a stopover on your way to heaven. It is your final destination. God wants you to enjoy your earthly existence, and to think otherwise is to miss the life he intends for you. Exploring the book of Genesis, Heaven Is a Place on Earth gently but firmly strips away common misconceptions of Christianity and broadens your worldview to reveal the tremendous dignity and value of everyday life. Taking you from creation, to the fall, to redemption, and to glimpses from the book of Revelation, Michael Wittmer opens your eyes to a faith that encompasses all of life--baseball games, stock reports, church activities, prayer, lovemaking, work, hobbies . . . everything that lies within the sphere of human activity. To be fully Christian is to be fully human, says Wittmer, alive and responsive to the kingdom of God in all that you are and all that you do. Discover the freedom and impact God created you for. It starts with a truly Christian worldview. And its fruit is the undiluted gospel, powerful not only to save souls, but to restore them to a life that is truly worth living. Includes discussion/reflection questions after each chapter.
272 pages, Paperback
First published May 1, 2004
43 people are currently reading
242 people want to read
About the author
Michael E. Wittmer
21 books22 followersMichael Wittmer is currently Professor of Systematic Theology at GRTS in Grand Rapids, MI. He is the author of Heaven Is a Place on Earth, Don’t Stop Believing, The Last Enemy, and Despite Doubt. He and his wife, Julie, live in Grand Rapids, Michigan with their three children: Avery, Landon, and Alayna.
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 20 of 20 reviews
October 14, 2014
Since a friend (who is friends with the author of this book) recommended it to me, I thought I’d give it a shot. I only read about ¼ of the book--got a little tired of the author making broad statements, then acknowledging they were too general, as well as using stereotypical examples of gender roles. He also brought in some highly political issues and basically told readers that we should agree with his viewpoints, subsequently brushing off the fact that the issues can actually be much more complex than he was making them out to be. He could have done well using some less extreme examples and condensing his arguments.
The author’s basic premise is that many Christians focus on the concept of “Heaven” as though it’s the reason why a person should become a Christian--the reason why the gospel should be shared. “The flesh” and “the world” are considered inherently sinful by many. However, he goes through lots of examples to demonstrate that the idea that this world is completely evil and we must take no pleasure in it is actually a Gnostic concept, not a Christian one (look up Gnosticism on Wikipedia). He also goes through some annoying and unnecessary hemmings and hawings to make sure that readers understand what he’s NOT saying, i.e. that we can take pleasure in this world as part of God’s creation, but NOT in any aspect of it that is actually sinful.
The gist of the whole book seems to be that that the physical world is not inherently sinful in and of itself, and we shouldn’t focus on Christianity as solely a magic ticket to get people into Heaven. Rather, it should be a life-giving faith that transforms our time here on Earth.
As a Christian who was already sold on that concept, and in fact who probably never would have chosen to become a Christian if I were not, this seems very obvious. So, I don’t think I am the kind of reader for whom this book was intended. What I did appreciate about it, however, was that he brings up how things that we do in our everyday lives are important to God. In other words, it’s okay to live your life--you don’t have to be a perfect super-Christian devoting all of your spare hours to the church and flagellating yourself for sitting down and watching a movie sometimes. As long as it’s not a SINFUL movie, that is. ;D
***
Beyond my basic review of this, I want to engage the text a little bit more. There were a lot of things that I found odd, although they did make me think, which I appreciate. There were also a few statements I especially agreed with:
“...Anselm replied that God is a unique case. He is not merely the greatest possible being in his category (such as islands), but the greatest possible being, period. And as the greatest possible being, he must, necessarily, exist. Anselm’s point—and this is the staying power of his argument—is that as “that than which nothing greater can be conceived,” God is qualitatively superior to anything in his creation. There is nothing that compares with the greatest possible being. He is in a class by himself—literally.” (Kindle Locations 454-458).
Wittmer states that Anselm’s argument is not really his focus, but rather the fact that God is the greatest possible being… then re-states Anselm’s argument, which makes me think it actually is a focus for him. It’s a strange and silly argument, because it’s completely circular. If A is defined as B, and a B exists, then A must exist! It feels kind of like saying that if a banana is defined as the sweetest, most delicious fruit, and the sweetest, most delicious fruit exists, then bananas must exist! However, this is in fact subjective depending on whether or not we believe in bananas in the first place. To someone else, apples might be the sweetest, most delicious fruit. I believe in God. However, if I didn’t believe in God I could easily argue that there could be some alien being out there who might unbeknownst to us fit Anselm’s definition of God, but that wouldn’t necessarily make that alien the God of the Bible as we know Him. i.e. From an agnostic perspective, there could very well be a greatest possible being, but that doesn’t equate that being automatically to the God of the Bible--that presupposes a belief that our particular God exists.
“Every part of creation, from best friends to root beer floats, continues to exist only because God wants it to. Should God ever take his mind off us—should he ever for one moment stop affirming our existence—we would dissipate faster than soft butter on a hot griddle.” (Kindle Locations 548-550)
So, we exist because God constantly has his mind on us? Where does this idea come from? Does that mean we’re all, ontologically, kind of like the Greek Gods in the Star Trek episode “Who Mourns for Adonis” (except instead of humans believing in them, it’s God believing in us)? Or dreams of the fayth in Final Fantasy X? This is an imaginative thought, but is it Biblical? Weird.
“There will be times, perhaps often, when the mystery surrounding our topic will force us to leave a question open. Don’t be disturbed when this happens, figuring that surely an author with more brains or guts would come up with something.” (Kindle Locations 589-590)
Disturbed? At a question being left open? Does he think his readers are so closed-minded and insecure that we can’t handle an unanswered question? Cut yourself some slack, Mr. Wittmer; we know you’re not a Jehovah’s Witness!
“Have you ever walked in on the closing scene of a movie? You watch the final car chase, shoot-out, or climactic kiss, but it doesn’t mean much to you. Why? Because you didn’t see the scenes that led up to the final smooch. Yet your wife, who has just lived through the near misses and desperate longings of the lonely lovers, is working through her second box of Kleenex. The kiss means so much more to her because she watched the entire movie. Granted, some of us guys could watch the entire chick flick and still not get it, but in general what I’m saying is true. Miss the earlier plot development of a story and you have little chance to understand its ending.” (Kindle Locations 638-642)
Oh, barf. Because all wives love chick flicks. He lost me there.
“As one pastor put it, it may not be quite a sin to golf, fish, garden, live in a house, or hold a job, but if we really want to serve God, then we will use most of our time to pursue ‘spiritual values.’” (Context: pointing out how problematic and wrong that concept is) (Kindle Locations 771-772)
Yes. Thank you!
“When reading Scripture, we must continually ask ourselves whether the author is speaking ontologically or ethically. As we saw in 1 John 2 and Colossians 3, the context of the passage in question will always yield important clues. If we confuse ontology with morality, as many readers do when they interpret these passages, we will never be able to understand our Bible or even life itself. For instance, those who take ‘world’ in 1 John 2:15 and ‘earthly things’ in Colossians 3:2 in an ontological sense will mistakenly think that their main problem is their physical environment. So in Gnostic fashion they will continually strive to rise above the material world and meditate on ‘spiritual’ things. In time they may turn themselves into pretty good angels, but they will also become a sorry excuse for human beings.” (Kindle Locations 839-845)
Yes! Very interesting!
“Certainly we should avoid any music, movie, or visual art that stirs up sin, such as pride and lust.” (Kindle Locations 870-871)
I totally agree that we should personally avoid so-called “entertainment” (my quotes) that causes us to sin; however, as a librarian I’m always a little uncomfortable when somebody starts going off on this… people can really be led to sin by anything and everything, so who gets to decide which art leads whom to the most sin? I would have appreciated some clarification as to whether he’s talking about on a personal level or on a larger scale of censorship. i.e. Some random film that one person may find desensitizes them to violence another may find to be a interesting artistic commentary on the human condition. Everyone’s limits are different, so who gets to decide?
“Printing ‘cross-training’ or ‘cross-eyed’ on a T-shirt trivializes both the cross (do we really want to compare Jesus’ suffering to a type of exercise or astigmatism?) and ordinary T-shirts (which are perhaps not as good as those with religious slogans). The same holds true for spill-proof cups emblazoned with John 4:14—“whoever drinks the water I give him will never thirst”; key chains that parody milk advertisements with the probing question ‘Got Jesus?’; dinner plates that claim to be ‘Home Grown and Heaven Bound’; and stuffed ducks wearing rain gear on account of recurring ‘Showers of Blessing’ (honestly, I could not make this stuff up). Rather than improve creation, such silliness only distracts from the goodness that is already there while mocking the gospel it seeks to advertise.” (Kindle Locations 872-878)
Another thank you is in order here. Wittmer gets this; he gets it deeply. Although I love my Biblical quote magnets, there is nothing about them that makes me more Christian. Displaying things like this publicly may even serve to alienate further people who have yet to hear the gospel. It’s a way of saying “I belong to this group, you don’t, and you don’t get it either.” How is that a message that Christians want to send? It’s not, or at least it shouldn’t be.
(In the context of American youth not knowing who they are anymore) “No wonder! When it comes to their identity, today’s young people are besieged with a barrage of conflicting messages. On the one hand, our culture wants men to be aggressive and athletic and women to be sexy and slim. But these ideals are so completely unattainable for most of us that we can only hope to reach them by cheating—usually through steroids for the guys and eating disorders for the girls. Even worse, just as we’re wracking our bodies to approach the Western ideal, our culture warns us not to give in to its stereotypes. Rather than become a dominating force that demands attention, wouldn’t it be great if our guys could be soft and a tad mushy—more like Hugh Grant and less like Sylvester Stallone? So we encourage men to embrace their emotions, celebrate stay-at-home dads, and generally cultivate their feminine side. Likewise, rather than become beautiful playthings for their macho men, wouldn’t it be wonderful if our girls could break through the glass ceiling and occupy leadership roles? So we encourage our girls to go out for sports, celebrate ‘Take Your Daughter to Work Day,’ and generally cultivate their masculine side.” (Kindle Locations 901-909)
Ouch, the stereotypes. I get that Wittmer is trying to say “no wonder our youth are confused,” but he puts forth the idea of a stay-at-home-Dad or a girl who wants to break the glass ceiling with a tone that says those are bad things. I agree that they could be bad things if they were pursued obsessively to the exclusion of balance in life, but in and of themselves I would say they are good things. Is there some anti-feminism going on here?
(In the context of relating Adam to the Hebrew word “Adama”, or “ground”) “...there is a vital connection between us and the ground. There is a connection physically because we are made from dust. …” (Kindle Locations 954-955)
Maybe we are, metaphorically, but… ummmm…
“The Christian hope is not that someday we get to join our Christian friends and family in the presence of God, but that God will bring our loved ones with him when he returns to live with us on planet earth.” (Kindle Locations 977-978)
Okay, now he does sound like a Jehovah’s Witness. Sort of. The whole thing about falling asleep in death and paradise on Earth and whatnot. I’m fascinated that he brings that stuff up, actually.
“We must guard human life at conception, protesting the practice of abortion and actively providing support to young mothers with unwanted pregnancies.” (Kindle Locations 1015-1016)
Oh, please tell me he did not just go there. I’m rubbing my eyes, but it won’t go away. He just went there.
And, shortly thereafter… “I recognize that this quick survey of life-and-death issues tends to oversimplify matters. Individual scenarios can raise unique concerns that may dramatically qualify the situation. Nevertheless, I believe this thumbnail sketch of medical ethics generally describes Scripture’s high value on human life. It is worth noting that many of our current abuses of modern medicine arise from the limitations of our culture’s modern world-view. The same worldview that supported the development of modern science also stymies the ability of modern ethics to keep pace. If, according to that worldview, God does not exist,12then we cannot very well be created in his image. And if we are not created in his image, there really isn’t anything uniquely special about us—we’re just the top rung (so far) of the evolutionary scale. Therefore, since we readily abort, clone, and euthanize other animals, why not do the same with humans, who, though highly advanced, are only animals after all? No. Scripture reminds us that all people, though fallen, remain uniquely special. We dare not treat any person, no matter how mentally or physically impaired, with less or even equal respect than we give to the rest of creation.” (Kindle Locations 1044-1054)
First: Maybe if it suffers from being that oversimplified, it shouldn’t be used for a “quick survey of life-and-death issues”?
Second: Does the “worldview that supported the development of modern science” really tout that “God does not exist”? Scientists may make some questionable decisions, but the author seems to be unfairly pitting science against religion here.
Third: I would certainly hope that we don’t treat people with “equal respect than we give to the rest of creation,” considering how people tend to treat creation these days. On one hand, I fully believe that people were created in the image of God. On the other hand, I don’t like comparing that too emphatically with the rest of creation. Too many Christians seem to use it as an excuse to treat the rest of what God has made like garbage. I personally prefer to think of humans mattering to God in a unique way rather than mattering "more than" creation per se. Just too much room for abuse in that concept.
And, after accidentally skipping to the notes at the end, I ran across this: “Thanks to the common grace of God, even unregenerate people may still enjoy some basic knowledge of God, deep intimacy with others, and even productive care for God’s earth. Although nothing they do will ever be righteous enough to merit everlasting life, they are still able to accomplish some good.” (Kindle Locations 3328-3330)
Soooo… this almost sounds like it is implying that Christians have done something “righteous enough to merit everlasting life,” which is completely not right. I’m sure Wittmer would agree with that, so I’m probably mis-reading his intentions in this statement. It sounds like if “unregenerate people” haven’t done anything to merit everlasting life, then the people who do have everlasting life (...regenerate… people?) have? Weirdly-phrased.
That’s where I stopped--I’m sure the rest of the book would have provided more intellectual conundrums for me, but so many of these things tripped me up that I couldn’t really continue. All very thought-provoking, however, and worth some contemplative time, even if the experience overall left me with a feeling of "meh."
The author’s basic premise is that many Christians focus on the concept of “Heaven” as though it’s the reason why a person should become a Christian--the reason why the gospel should be shared. “The flesh” and “the world” are considered inherently sinful by many. However, he goes through lots of examples to demonstrate that the idea that this world is completely evil and we must take no pleasure in it is actually a Gnostic concept, not a Christian one (look up Gnosticism on Wikipedia). He also goes through some annoying and unnecessary hemmings and hawings to make sure that readers understand what he’s NOT saying, i.e. that we can take pleasure in this world as part of God’s creation, but NOT in any aspect of it that is actually sinful.
The gist of the whole book seems to be that that the physical world is not inherently sinful in and of itself, and we shouldn’t focus on Christianity as solely a magic ticket to get people into Heaven. Rather, it should be a life-giving faith that transforms our time here on Earth.
As a Christian who was already sold on that concept, and in fact who probably never would have chosen to become a Christian if I were not, this seems very obvious. So, I don’t think I am the kind of reader for whom this book was intended. What I did appreciate about it, however, was that he brings up how things that we do in our everyday lives are important to God. In other words, it’s okay to live your life--you don’t have to be a perfect super-Christian devoting all of your spare hours to the church and flagellating yourself for sitting down and watching a movie sometimes. As long as it’s not a SINFUL movie, that is. ;D
***
Beyond my basic review of this, I want to engage the text a little bit more. There were a lot of things that I found odd, although they did make me think, which I appreciate. There were also a few statements I especially agreed with:
“...Anselm replied that God is a unique case. He is not merely the greatest possible being in his category (such as islands), but the greatest possible being, period. And as the greatest possible being, he must, necessarily, exist. Anselm’s point—and this is the staying power of his argument—is that as “that than which nothing greater can be conceived,” God is qualitatively superior to anything in his creation. There is nothing that compares with the greatest possible being. He is in a class by himself—literally.” (Kindle Locations 454-458).
Wittmer states that Anselm’s argument is not really his focus, but rather the fact that God is the greatest possible being… then re-states Anselm’s argument, which makes me think it actually is a focus for him. It’s a strange and silly argument, because it’s completely circular. If A is defined as B, and a B exists, then A must exist! It feels kind of like saying that if a banana is defined as the sweetest, most delicious fruit, and the sweetest, most delicious fruit exists, then bananas must exist! However, this is in fact subjective depending on whether or not we believe in bananas in the first place. To someone else, apples might be the sweetest, most delicious fruit. I believe in God. However, if I didn’t believe in God I could easily argue that there could be some alien being out there who might unbeknownst to us fit Anselm’s definition of God, but that wouldn’t necessarily make that alien the God of the Bible as we know Him. i.e. From an agnostic perspective, there could very well be a greatest possible being, but that doesn’t equate that being automatically to the God of the Bible--that presupposes a belief that our particular God exists.
“Every part of creation, from best friends to root beer floats, continues to exist only because God wants it to. Should God ever take his mind off us—should he ever for one moment stop affirming our existence—we would dissipate faster than soft butter on a hot griddle.” (Kindle Locations 548-550)
So, we exist because God constantly has his mind on us? Where does this idea come from? Does that mean we’re all, ontologically, kind of like the Greek Gods in the Star Trek episode “Who Mourns for Adonis” (except instead of humans believing in them, it’s God believing in us)? Or dreams of the fayth in Final Fantasy X? This is an imaginative thought, but is it Biblical? Weird.
“There will be times, perhaps often, when the mystery surrounding our topic will force us to leave a question open. Don’t be disturbed when this happens, figuring that surely an author with more brains or guts would come up with something.” (Kindle Locations 589-590)
Disturbed? At a question being left open? Does he think his readers are so closed-minded and insecure that we can’t handle an unanswered question? Cut yourself some slack, Mr. Wittmer; we know you’re not a Jehovah’s Witness!
“Have you ever walked in on the closing scene of a movie? You watch the final car chase, shoot-out, or climactic kiss, but it doesn’t mean much to you. Why? Because you didn’t see the scenes that led up to the final smooch. Yet your wife, who has just lived through the near misses and desperate longings of the lonely lovers, is working through her second box of Kleenex. The kiss means so much more to her because she watched the entire movie. Granted, some of us guys could watch the entire chick flick and still not get it, but in general what I’m saying is true. Miss the earlier plot development of a story and you have little chance to understand its ending.” (Kindle Locations 638-642)
Oh, barf. Because all wives love chick flicks. He lost me there.
“As one pastor put it, it may not be quite a sin to golf, fish, garden, live in a house, or hold a job, but if we really want to serve God, then we will use most of our time to pursue ‘spiritual values.’” (Context: pointing out how problematic and wrong that concept is) (Kindle Locations 771-772)
Yes. Thank you!
“When reading Scripture, we must continually ask ourselves whether the author is speaking ontologically or ethically. As we saw in 1 John 2 and Colossians 3, the context of the passage in question will always yield important clues. If we confuse ontology with morality, as many readers do when they interpret these passages, we will never be able to understand our Bible or even life itself. For instance, those who take ‘world’ in 1 John 2:15 and ‘earthly things’ in Colossians 3:2 in an ontological sense will mistakenly think that their main problem is their physical environment. So in Gnostic fashion they will continually strive to rise above the material world and meditate on ‘spiritual’ things. In time they may turn themselves into pretty good angels, but they will also become a sorry excuse for human beings.” (Kindle Locations 839-845)
Yes! Very interesting!
“Certainly we should avoid any music, movie, or visual art that stirs up sin, such as pride and lust.” (Kindle Locations 870-871)
I totally agree that we should personally avoid so-called “entertainment” (my quotes) that causes us to sin; however, as a librarian I’m always a little uncomfortable when somebody starts going off on this… people can really be led to sin by anything and everything, so who gets to decide which art leads whom to the most sin? I would have appreciated some clarification as to whether he’s talking about on a personal level or on a larger scale of censorship. i.e. Some random film that one person may find desensitizes them to violence another may find to be a interesting artistic commentary on the human condition. Everyone’s limits are different, so who gets to decide?
“Printing ‘cross-training’ or ‘cross-eyed’ on a T-shirt trivializes both the cross (do we really want to compare Jesus’ suffering to a type of exercise or astigmatism?) and ordinary T-shirts (which are perhaps not as good as those with religious slogans). The same holds true for spill-proof cups emblazoned with John 4:14—“whoever drinks the water I give him will never thirst”; key chains that parody milk advertisements with the probing question ‘Got Jesus?’; dinner plates that claim to be ‘Home Grown and Heaven Bound’; and stuffed ducks wearing rain gear on account of recurring ‘Showers of Blessing’ (honestly, I could not make this stuff up). Rather than improve creation, such silliness only distracts from the goodness that is already there while mocking the gospel it seeks to advertise.” (Kindle Locations 872-878)
Another thank you is in order here. Wittmer gets this; he gets it deeply. Although I love my Biblical quote magnets, there is nothing about them that makes me more Christian. Displaying things like this publicly may even serve to alienate further people who have yet to hear the gospel. It’s a way of saying “I belong to this group, you don’t, and you don’t get it either.” How is that a message that Christians want to send? It’s not, or at least it shouldn’t be.
(In the context of American youth not knowing who they are anymore) “No wonder! When it comes to their identity, today’s young people are besieged with a barrage of conflicting messages. On the one hand, our culture wants men to be aggressive and athletic and women to be sexy and slim. But these ideals are so completely unattainable for most of us that we can only hope to reach them by cheating—usually through steroids for the guys and eating disorders for the girls. Even worse, just as we’re wracking our bodies to approach the Western ideal, our culture warns us not to give in to its stereotypes. Rather than become a dominating force that demands attention, wouldn’t it be great if our guys could be soft and a tad mushy—more like Hugh Grant and less like Sylvester Stallone? So we encourage men to embrace their emotions, celebrate stay-at-home dads, and generally cultivate their feminine side. Likewise, rather than become beautiful playthings for their macho men, wouldn’t it be wonderful if our girls could break through the glass ceiling and occupy leadership roles? So we encourage our girls to go out for sports, celebrate ‘Take Your Daughter to Work Day,’ and generally cultivate their masculine side.” (Kindle Locations 901-909)
Ouch, the stereotypes. I get that Wittmer is trying to say “no wonder our youth are confused,” but he puts forth the idea of a stay-at-home-Dad or a girl who wants to break the glass ceiling with a tone that says those are bad things. I agree that they could be bad things if they were pursued obsessively to the exclusion of balance in life, but in and of themselves I would say they are good things. Is there some anti-feminism going on here?
(In the context of relating Adam to the Hebrew word “Adama”, or “ground”) “...there is a vital connection between us and the ground. There is a connection physically because we are made from dust. …” (Kindle Locations 954-955)
Maybe we are, metaphorically, but… ummmm…
“The Christian hope is not that someday we get to join our Christian friends and family in the presence of God, but that God will bring our loved ones with him when he returns to live with us on planet earth.” (Kindle Locations 977-978)
Okay, now he does sound like a Jehovah’s Witness. Sort of. The whole thing about falling asleep in death and paradise on Earth and whatnot. I’m fascinated that he brings that stuff up, actually.
“We must guard human life at conception, protesting the practice of abortion and actively providing support to young mothers with unwanted pregnancies.” (Kindle Locations 1015-1016)
Oh, please tell me he did not just go there. I’m rubbing my eyes, but it won’t go away. He just went there.
And, shortly thereafter… “I recognize that this quick survey of life-and-death issues tends to oversimplify matters. Individual scenarios can raise unique concerns that may dramatically qualify the situation. Nevertheless, I believe this thumbnail sketch of medical ethics generally describes Scripture’s high value on human life. It is worth noting that many of our current abuses of modern medicine arise from the limitations of our culture’s modern world-view. The same worldview that supported the development of modern science also stymies the ability of modern ethics to keep pace. If, according to that worldview, God does not exist,12then we cannot very well be created in his image. And if we are not created in his image, there really isn’t anything uniquely special about us—we’re just the top rung (so far) of the evolutionary scale. Therefore, since we readily abort, clone, and euthanize other animals, why not do the same with humans, who, though highly advanced, are only animals after all? No. Scripture reminds us that all people, though fallen, remain uniquely special. We dare not treat any person, no matter how mentally or physically impaired, with less or even equal respect than we give to the rest of creation.” (Kindle Locations 1044-1054)
First: Maybe if it suffers from being that oversimplified, it shouldn’t be used for a “quick survey of life-and-death issues”?
Second: Does the “worldview that supported the development of modern science” really tout that “God does not exist”? Scientists may make some questionable decisions, but the author seems to be unfairly pitting science against religion here.
Third: I would certainly hope that we don’t treat people with “equal respect than we give to the rest of creation,” considering how people tend to treat creation these days. On one hand, I fully believe that people were created in the image of God. On the other hand, I don’t like comparing that too emphatically with the rest of creation. Too many Christians seem to use it as an excuse to treat the rest of what God has made like garbage. I personally prefer to think of humans mattering to God in a unique way rather than mattering "more than" creation per se. Just too much room for abuse in that concept.
And, after accidentally skipping to the notes at the end, I ran across this: “Thanks to the common grace of God, even unregenerate people may still enjoy some basic knowledge of God, deep intimacy with others, and even productive care for God’s earth. Although nothing they do will ever be righteous enough to merit everlasting life, they are still able to accomplish some good.” (Kindle Locations 3328-3330)
Soooo… this almost sounds like it is implying that Christians have done something “righteous enough to merit everlasting life,” which is completely not right. I’m sure Wittmer would agree with that, so I’m probably mis-reading his intentions in this statement. It sounds like if “unregenerate people” haven’t done anything to merit everlasting life, then the people who do have everlasting life (...regenerate… people?) have? Weirdly-phrased.
That’s where I stopped--I’m sure the rest of the book would have provided more intellectual conundrums for me, but so many of these things tripped me up that I couldn’t really continue. All very thought-provoking, however, and worth some contemplative time, even if the experience overall left me with a feeling of "meh."
June 11, 2023
Wittmer makes an excellent biblical case for Christians to be the BEST stewards of the earth and lovers of both Creation and human artistry. Worth at least one careful read--probably repeated reading.
June 23, 2018
Great Insights!
Michael Wittmer is a first-rate theologian and writer. He addresses a critical topic with wit and wisdom. Pastors must learn how to integrate these theological topics (goodness of creation, work as calling and fulfillment of the cultural mandate, new earth, resurrected physical bodies, etc.) into our sermons.
Michael Wittmer is a first-rate theologian and writer. He addresses a critical topic with wit and wisdom. Pastors must learn how to integrate these theological topics (goodness of creation, work as calling and fulfillment of the cultural mandate, new earth, resurrected physical bodies, etc.) into our sermons.
September 1, 2015
Not sure who this is addressed to. I and friends, not to mention many of my favorite authors, have discussed this subject together for as long as I can remember. I quit half way through a long chapter on the fall despairing that anything interesting would come from continuing.
March 3, 2022
Main takeaways from this book:
1. The author differentiated between ontological (earthly) and ethical (spiritual) renewal - I found it interesting in that I had not thought about our sanctification in these categories before, but a bit tedious and something I would have understood better in a lecture format where I could ask questions than in an audiobook…but maybe reading the hard copy would have been more helpful because he alluded to charts/illustrations that would have been found in the book.
2. I liked his insights into the interaction between Eve and the serpent in the garden.
3. He calls our flesh “our autonomy” and that was helpful.
4. I love the illustration of how we “grow into” the too-big clothes we are given at conversion of our elderly brother, Christ.
5. He has some well-worded thought-provoking sentences sprinkled throughout like, “Israel foolishly abandoned her living God for impotent idols she could see and touch.”
6. I love how he explained the story of Scripture is the story of Emmanuel - God with us - not us with God…we don’t go to where he is to be with Him, He comes to us and will live here on this planet with us for eternity (hence the title heaven is a place on earth) as found throughout the Bible from
Eden to Revelation.
7. I really loved his thoughts on the Sabbath.
Lastly, some stories he used felt too predictable and drawn out: a friend he couldn’t recognize on life-support, William Wilberforce and Mother Teresa. The stories from the author’s own life were my favorite. And the order of the chapters felt a little disjointed. I would have liked for the last chapter about renewing culture to-point-people-to-Christ to have been more about our role vs. God’s role in the Great Commission explicitly. But other than that, and wishing it were interactive, I liked it.
1. The author differentiated between ontological (earthly) and ethical (spiritual) renewal - I found it interesting in that I had not thought about our sanctification in these categories before, but a bit tedious and something I would have understood better in a lecture format where I could ask questions than in an audiobook…but maybe reading the hard copy would have been more helpful because he alluded to charts/illustrations that would have been found in the book.
2. I liked his insights into the interaction between Eve and the serpent in the garden.
3. He calls our flesh “our autonomy” and that was helpful.
4. I love the illustration of how we “grow into” the too-big clothes we are given at conversion of our elderly brother, Christ.
5. He has some well-worded thought-provoking sentences sprinkled throughout like, “Israel foolishly abandoned her living God for impotent idols she could see and touch.”
6. I love how he explained the story of Scripture is the story of Emmanuel - God with us - not us with God…we don’t go to where he is to be with Him, He comes to us and will live here on this planet with us for eternity (hence the title heaven is a place on earth) as found throughout the Bible from
Eden to Revelation.
7. I really loved his thoughts on the Sabbath.
Lastly, some stories he used felt too predictable and drawn out: a friend he couldn’t recognize on life-support, William Wilberforce and Mother Teresa. The stories from the author’s own life were my favorite. And the order of the chapters felt a little disjointed. I would have liked for the last chapter about renewing culture to-point-people-to-Christ to have been more about our role vs. God’s role in the Great Commission explicitly. But other than that, and wishing it were interactive, I liked it.
February 14, 2023
Wittmer provides an important counterbalance to the popular notion among Christians that the earth is not our home but just a temporary and broken habitation. While it is true that there is much that is wrong with the world we live in, there is also much that is right. It is the home God made for us and the home we will live in for eternity (albeit a renewed and sinless version). While this book is much more surface level than what I would prefer, its walk through the story of creation, fall, redemption, and consummation showing the value of the physical world God made is a helpful one and a valuable one for all to take.
January 1, 2022
I picked this one up because either my husband or I had bought it in college and I hadn't read it. It has some good concepts and addresses some unbiblical concepts that are fairly common in evangelical culture, but I quit in the middle of chapter 4. I wasn't finding anything that was making me see anything broader and deeper about God or His Word. This would probably be a good book for someone who is in the early stages of really solidifying their Christian beliefs.
September 10, 2021
The title attracted me but I'm finding it disappointing. I prefer straightforward writing and I'm not particularly interested in learning scientific terminology or digesting philosophical ideas and research. I will try to pick out final conclusions among the abstract discussions but don't have the patience for long theoretical discourses.
February 14, 2019
Very necessary to the believer
Everything he says it's scriptural. He never departs from the word when he makes a claim. You can read this book as it is and understand what God is saying plainly
Everything he says it's scriptural. He never departs from the word when he makes a claim. You can read this book as it is and understand what God is saying plainly
August 27, 2010
An excellent treatment of the creation, fall, redemption story and a much needed corrective to common theological extremes. On the one hand the remnants of Gnostic influence leas to the idea that the ultimate goal of the Christian is to escape this world to heaven and on the other hand the Gospel is reduced to simply a social gospel in the here and now. These extremes lead to either an escapist attitude and neglect of the creation and human society or an unhealthy focus on them.
Mike Wittmer does a great job of balancing the tension between the “already” and “not yet” of the Kingdom, while also explaining how the life to come gives deep significance to our life now. God’s original intentions for His creation and humanity haven’t changed. He never intended for creation to be static, for human culture to never advance and develop. The Fall has hampered and tainted that , but it will ALL be redeemed someday, not replaced.
The book reflects many of the concepts popularized by Abraham Kuyper. Wittmer exhorts Christians to “celebrate creation, hone our humanity, and extend the grace of redemption to every corner of our existence.” The spiritual disciplines are important, but God is interested in EVERY area of our life, “Does our purpose for life consist entirely in these spiritual activities, or is there also some value in showing up for work, waxing our car, playing with our children, or taking a trip to the beach - just a few of the many things we do, not because we are Christian, but primarily because we are human? “ (p. 12)
I particularly found his discussions of the theological concept of vocation and the role of the Sabbath well done and I loved how he put the concept that creation “began in a garden and ends in a city”...human culture has a significant role to play in eternity! Well worth reading.
Mike Wittmer does a great job of balancing the tension between the “already” and “not yet” of the Kingdom, while also explaining how the life to come gives deep significance to our life now. God’s original intentions for His creation and humanity haven’t changed. He never intended for creation to be static, for human culture to never advance and develop. The Fall has hampered and tainted that , but it will ALL be redeemed someday, not replaced.
The book reflects many of the concepts popularized by Abraham Kuyper. Wittmer exhorts Christians to “celebrate creation, hone our humanity, and extend the grace of redemption to every corner of our existence.” The spiritual disciplines are important, but God is interested in EVERY area of our life, “Does our purpose for life consist entirely in these spiritual activities, or is there also some value in showing up for work, waxing our car, playing with our children, or taking a trip to the beach - just a few of the many things we do, not because we are Christian, but primarily because we are human? “ (p. 12)
I particularly found his discussions of the theological concept of vocation and the role of the Sabbath well done and I loved how he put the concept that creation “began in a garden and ends in a city”...human culture has a significant role to play in eternity! Well worth reading.
Want to read
January 6, 2010Graham Cooke once quoted his daughter's response to his question about how her relationship with God was lately. To paraphrase, she said that sometimes it feels like her relationship with God is dynamic and it's like she's taking an elevator to the very top floor and meeting with God on a higher spiritual plane. She went on to say that other times she feels like she has to take the stairs and when she can only muster enough strength to get up a couple of steps, God meets her there, as well.
Lately, I've been feeling like I'm taking the stairs. At times like these, I find it very fulfilling to read back-to-basics books. This book is rich and I would necessarily call it a "back-to-basics" book. However, it is all about paradigm or worldview and how it relates to our spiritual lives and the Kingdom of God. I'm currently only a few chapters in, but this is good spiritual food that I need right now and I am already benefitting from it. I'd recommend it for anyone who feels a need to get back to basics, fill in the gaps of wrongly-held worldviews, or be reminded of the vision that God has set before us.
Lately, I've been feeling like I'm taking the stairs. At times like these, I find it very fulfilling to read back-to-basics books. This book is rich and I would necessarily call it a "back-to-basics" book. However, it is all about paradigm or worldview and how it relates to our spiritual lives and the Kingdom of God. I'm currently only a few chapters in, but this is good spiritual food that I need right now and I am already benefitting from it. I'd recommend it for anyone who feels a need to get back to basics, fill in the gaps of wrongly-held worldviews, or be reminded of the vision that God has set before us.
February 23, 2016
From the description, I was under the impression this book was about Christian living and exploring the relationship of heaven and earth now and after the final resurrection. While there were certainly a few chapters devoted to those topics, the book is mostly just a very broad, accessible, theology text. It reads as a much more enjoyable Theology 101 textbook than most doctrinal theology books I've read. However, if I had known that's what it was I would have probably passed. I've read plenty of those and I was looking for something more specific.
September 18, 2008
"I don't want to go to heaven. Not that I'm lobbying for the other place..." With a opening line such as that, I knew I was in for a good, challenging book. I was not disappointed. What are we ultimately created for? Heaven? or Earth? Where do we spend eternity? Heaven? Or a recreated heaven that comes down and "sets up shop" on a recreated, renewed, restored Earth?
February 14, 2013
The biblical story is formative of a redemptive (world)view of all of God's world. This book is a well-written presentation of all of that. Pleased to see that a professor of systematic theology (the author) could keep the "big picture" in mind. Ha! Highly recommended for those weaned on the "Repent! Avoid Hell! Trust Jesus! message.
December 9, 2007
Currently reading.
April 7, 2015
Excellent read covering the basic categories of Creation, Fall, Redemption & Restoration. Accessible.
June 13, 2012
Good book
Want to read
July 13, 2013recomendado por TGC
http://thegospelcoalition.org/blogs/t...
http://thegospelcoalition.org/blogs/t...
started-not-finished
April 3, 2009read portions for a class
February 23, 2016
A solid book but others do a better job (theologically) exploring the topic of heaven and earth.
Displaying 1 - 20 of 20 reviews