ARE THERE BOOKS IN HEAVEN?
By Uriah Smith
A writer in the Sabbath Recorder of Jan. 6, 1876, in an article on the “Interpretation of Scripture,” says:— “I have a book before me in which there is the attempt to prove from the Bible that there are literal, material books in Heaven. Among the passages adduced to show that our deeds are written in such a book are Ps. 56:8, ‘Thou tellest my wanderings; put thou my tears in thy bottle: are they not in thy book?’ and Isa. 65:5, 6, ‘Which say, stand by thyself, come not near to me; for I am holier than thou. These are a smoke in my nose; a fire that burneth all the day. Behold it is written before me.’ If these passages prove that there are literal books in Heaven, they also prove that there are bottles in Heaven, in which David’s tears are kept, and that his tears are written in His book; that the wicked are a smoke in God’s nose, and that they are a fire that burneth all the day. But such a conclusion is ridiculous, and cannot be entertained for a moment. The only conclusion we can arrive at is, that these are symbols used to express ideas, and therefore, we have no right to conclude that there are either books or bottles in Heaven.” The fallacy in our friend’s argument as stated above, we conceive to lie in the assumed fact that the Bible never uses a word figuratively in one place and literally in another. Granted that, in the passages quoted, the words book, bottle, and smoke, are figurative; does it follow that nowhere else there are said to be in literal language, books in Heaven? Perhaps “we have no right to conclude that there are either books or bottles in Heaven” from these passages; but does it therefore follow that we have no right to conclude so from any other passages? In describing the solemn scene of the Judgment, in as literal language as the majesty and sublimity of the scene will admit of, Daniel says:— “I beheld till the thrones were cast down, and the Ancient of Days did sit, whose garment was white as snow, and the hair of his head like the pure wool; his throne was like the fiery flame, and his wheels as burning fire. A fiery stream issued and came forth from before him; thousand thousands ministered unto him, and ten thousand times ten thousand stood before him; the Judgment was set, and the books were opened.” Dan. 7:9, 10. Reasoning on this passage, as our friend reasons on Ps. 56:8, we should say, There are no literal books to be used in the Judgment: these are only a figure of speech. Then the thousands that are seen ministering to the Ancient of Days are not literal beings but only figures of speech. Then there is no literal throne nor flame; and finally the Ancient of Days is not a literal being, but only a figure of speech. Thus the whole passage is explained away, and means anything or nothing, just according to the conceptions of the reader. Again, John in describing a like scene, makes use of the following similar terms:— “And I saw a great white throne, and him that sat on it, from whose face the earth and the heaven fled away; and there was found no place for them. And I saw the dead, small and great, stand before God; and the books were opened: and another book was opened, which is the book of life: and the dead were judged out of those things which were written in the books, according to their works.” Rev. 20:11, 12. So here again, the same method of reasoning would lead to the same conclusion: No books, then no literal works brought into Judgment, no real Judgment, no book of life, no assembling21literally of the multitudes of the dead, no throne, and finally no God: all symbols, all mere figures of speech. Thus the effect of the most impressive and salutary truths of revelation, would be entirely destroyed. The trouble is in jumping to the conclusion that because the Bible makes use of figures, therefore everything is figurative. This baleful method, introduced by Origen, is what has made the Christian system of interpretation like a bottomless pit, affording no foundation nor resting place for the soles of our feet. We are safe and our work trustworthy only when we fall back upon the rule given by Archbishop Cranmer, to let the Bible explain itself, taking those portions only to be figurative which are very evidently so, and letting the figurative find an explanation in the literal. U. S.