Objectivity is the Language of Heaven

NDErs (i. e. people who have claimed to have had a Near Death Experience) often report that when they go to Heaven, they frequently see and recognize people such as friends and family members. It is often also reported that when they were communicating with friends and relatives, they realized that they weren’t speaking English, but that they were telepathically speaking to one another.

It seems it would be impossible to have communication with others without learning every language that has ever existed under the sun, but since heaven is a perfect place,[1] then communication should be perfect as well. In other words, it seems unlikely that there are barriers to communication. So, I should be able to communicate with the Apostles, upon my arrival for instance, but how? I personally only really know how to speak English fluently. My Spanish, Japanese, German, Russian, Chinese, and Latin is like that of a child, and my Greek is only in reading and writing.

If communication is merely physical, then without physical parts as disembodied spirits, we would have no ability for such, yet we see that communication is necessary in a perfect world with inhabitants other than oneself. Therefore, communication must ultimately be something spiritual. So how could we understand this communication?

What is interesting is that all languages point to specific objects. This is why it is possible that we can communicate. For instance, when we say the phrase, “Excuse me” in English, a native English speaker knows exactly what that means. If the same phrase were subjective in nature, then there would be no communication. For, if “excuse me” meant say, “I eat oranges,” then there may be communication, but inaccurate communication, and in that sense, there may as well be no communication.

On top of this, “excuse me” translates to many other languages. When I travel to different countries, I find that learning this phrase is one of the most helpful things to learn. The reason I know that it communicates what I want it to mean is because the objective nature of the phrase “excuse me” means the same thing in every part of the world. Granted, there might be some cultural nuances, but essentially it is the same. This is because of the objective nature of language. I can know what someone else is saying in both my language, and in another language that is translated because of this objective nature of language. An orange is an orange in every language, no matter what sound is used by the human mouth to describe it, and no matter when in history it is described.

This also means that the Quran in Arabic translates well enough to other languages including English, because of the objective nature of language, despite what those who say that the Quran must be read in Arabic to be truly understood. So, the Quran in English that one reads is essentially the same message as it is in Arabic. The objective nature of language destroys the idea that the Quran can only be truly understood in Arabic.

From all this, it seems that earthly languages are just a reflection of the objective nature of language, or what one might describe as heavenly language. In other words, it seems to me that objective truth is the language of God. As in, looking at all languages metaphysically speaking. I think that being able to wrap our human minds around this as much as possible, helps us better understand who God is, and what He is like.

What is most fascinating here is that God meets us where we are, in that He used human language to communicate His Word to us. He used human language to tell us about Himself. He used human language to tell us that He loves us. When my wife and I adopted our son from India, he didn’t know a single word of English, being a native Punjabi speaker. Through cognitive disequilibrium, I had an idea… On my phone, I had installed an app where I could type something or dictate something into my phone in English, and it would translate it into Hindi and speak it in such. The second night that we had this amazing little 5-year-old boy in our custody, I spoke, “I love you” into my phone and made my phone say it to him in Hindi several times (audible Punjabi was not available). Knowing Punjabi, he also knew how to understand Hindi. Through about 4 layers of language then, I was able to communicate to my little boy for the first time that I loved him. He looked up into my eyes, grew the biggest smile, and gave me a huge hug. I am so thankful that God speaks to us in human language. We too can know from His powerful, and beautiful Word, the Bible, that He loves us. This is what He is communicating to you. Read His Word and understand.

Knowing His love will unquestionably help you discover your true worth and your true identity as a human being.

Written by Nace Howell through the grace of the Lord Jesus

[1] See Revelation 21:27.

Comments

The Evidence and Power of Testimony: The Apostolic Witness

What to say to People who Demand more Evidence for God. Why is there something rather than nothing? Glacier National Park. © Nace Howell, 2018. The question is, how much evidence do you require? Would Jesus have to come back and slap you in the face with evidence that He is God? It seems to me that there is a line we must draw. We do this in all other areas of our lives, so why would we treat theism any different? When a court convicts, they do so “beyond a reasonable doubt.” I would like to take a few moments to explore this a bit. But before we get to that, I want to pose a question, which is… why are you the standard? What makes you think He has to prove His existence to everyone individually? He already created the universe from nothing. In the beginning, there was a big bang. Seriously… do you believe your mom when she tells you a story about her day? Did you believe the reports of 9/11 when they were happening? Do you accept the testimony of anything you hear on social ...

Self-tests of Some of the World's Religions

It is fairly common for a religion of the world to give itself a sort of test for truth, since this is one question that is asked of any religion: “Why should I believe what you are telling me is true?” After all, the answer to such a question will ultimately result in followers of specific beliefs and doctrines, let alone religions, or will result in a lack of followers. If a religion can answer this question posed by seekers and thinkers, and therefore train its adherents to be able to answer why a religion is true, this will inevitably help people believe in such, even if the claims are false. If there is no answer, this is where a religion will perhaps find more trouble for itself. Many religions make an appeal to a higher authority, namely, God , for the veracity of their existence and as a result, no one can question the truth from such an authority. This is correct in a sense, that if in fact God is making such a claim, then what is said or stated is true ...

Baptism is Not Necessary for Salvation According to the Early Church

Let’s dive right in. The Bible says in Acts 2:37-41, Now when they heard this they were cut to the heart, and said to Peter and the rest of the apostles, “Brothers, what shall we do?” And Peter said to them, “Repent and be baptized every one of you in the name of Jesus Christ for the forgiveness of your sins, and you will receive the gift of the Holy Spirit. For the promise is for you and for your children and for all who are far off, everyone whom the Lord our God calls to himself.” And with many other words he bore witness and continued to exhort them, saying, “Save yourselves from this crooked generation.” So those who received his word were baptized, and there were added that day about three thousand souls. The phrase in Acts 2:38 that reads, “for the forgiveness of your sins” modifies the word repentance, not the word baptism. See more about this Here . What is interesting is that those who translate the above verse as meaning that baptism is a requ...

Using Guilt to Guide to the Truth

While taking a cultural apologetics class in my doctorate, I rambled along in a 30-page paper and in it, I wrote that, “I define religion as an anthropological system consisting of worship which is often filled with specific sacred rituals that seeks to appease or eradicate guilt.” My professor red-penned this and said that I am not yet in an authoritative position to make such definitions. But I was never asked how I came up with such a definition. The thing is, working on my second post-graduate degree in apologetics, studying many other religions on a deeper level was inevitable, and by this, I noticed a pattern in all of them which was the fact that they all seek to appease or eradicate guilt, including Buddhism , even though many adherents of Buddhism claim that it is not a religion . The point is that all religions seek to eradicate guilt on some level, because guilt crosses all cultures and times, to all people . Guilt transcends all people. The ...

Two Problems Jesus has with the Mormon Doctrine of Eternal Families

Mormonism teaches that those who are married in a temple can be married for eternity. In Doctrine and Covenants 132:15–20, we find the following: 15 Therefore, if a man marry him a wife in the world, and he marry her not by me nor by my word , and he covenant with her so long as he is in the world and she with him, their covenant and marriage are not of force when they are dead , and when they are out of the world; therefore, they are not bound by any law when they are out of the world. 16 Therefore, when they are out of the world they neither marry nor are given in marriage; but are appointed angels in heaven, which angels are ministering servants, to minister for those who are worthy of a far more, and an exceeding, and an eternal weight of glory. 17 For these angels did not abide my law; therefore, they cannot be enlarged, but remain separately and singly, without exaltation, in their saved condition, to all eternity; and from henceforth are not gods, but are angels of God for...

Who Made God? Identifying Categorical Errors

A category is simply a distinct class to which something belongs… A set of objects that can be treated as equal in some way. A Macintosh apple belongs to the category, apple, and not what we categorize as an orange. Similarly, colors are in a different category than taste. When we say, “apples and oranges” what we mean is that there has been a confusion of categories. Sure, they are both fruit, but when you examine both, there is an obvious difference. An apple is not an orange, and an orange is not an apple. Macintosh, Granny Smith, and red delicious are all apples. Navel, blood, and Valencia are all oranges. To mix the two, for instance, to call a navel orange an apple, would be a categorical error, sometimes referred to as a category mistake. How Identifying Categorical Errors can Help with Apologetics It seems that simply learning about or being reminded of categorical errors can help us be more aware of them. We have all heard or thought of ourselves, the...

The God of the Killdozer Operator, Marvin Heemeyer

While working toward becoming an apologist and a pastor, I was a heavy equipment operator. I have over 15 years’ experience in the field, focusing on hydrological restorations (stream bank and river restoration and water dam removals) and site development for building pads (ranging from houses to one million + sq. ft. warehouses). I say this because I want to show where the heart for writing article this came about. Marvin Heemeyer purchased a bulldozer from an auction which was a Komatsu D355A with an operating weight of 97,907 lbs. (this does not include the weight of Heemeyer’s fabricated addition). In the picture above, I am operating a Komatsu D155AX which has an operating weight of 89,300 lbs. (If I remember correctly, we were developing the site for a 550,000 sq. ft. warehouse building pad). Heemeyer then went on a rampage in his armored bulldozer in Granby, CO. I don’t want to go into great details about what led up to Heemeyer doing what he did, nor do I want to go into great ...

An Overlooked Argument Against the Book of Mormon

The Book of Mormon is written in a style of language that was not used by anyone at the time that it was written and published. This style of English is called Early Modern English . This fact is an anachronism that I find to be severely overlooked by those who seek the truth about the Book of Mormon. Many Mormons will instantly write this objection off concerning the veracity of the Book of Mormon, even to the point of saying that such an objection is lazy and pitiful, while not giving any rebuttals worth their weight. I recently insinuated the absurdity of the Book of Mormon by asking the question, “Why was the Book of Mormon translated into Early Modern English?” I’m saying that it is absurd that the BoM uses an out-of-date language. A Mormon replied to me that the Bible has equal absurdities. He said, “Why is [The BoM translation into Early Modern English] absurd? Is it absurd that God uses a donkey to speak to Balaam in Numbers 22?” First, this is a tu quo...

How to Show a Mormon the Difference Between the Mormon Jesus and the Biblical Jesus

I find that Mormons frequently claim that they are Christians, and that they want to be referred to as Christians, and that they have even recently sought to distance themselves from the word “Mormon.” The problem is, they worship another Jesus, and here is how to show them the difference between the Mormon Jesus and the Biblical Jesus. Before we get to that, some clarifications are necessary. Specifically, that they cannot even distance themselves from being called "Mormons." The Mormon President Russell Nelson said, “What’s in a name or, in this case, a nickname? When it comes to nicknames of the Church, such as the “LDS Church,” the “Mormon Church,” or the “Church of the Latter-day Saints,” the most important thing in those names is the absence of the Savior’s name. To remove the Lord’s name from the Lord’s Church is a major victory for Satan. When we discard the Savior’s name, we are subtly disregarding all that Jesus Christ did for us—even His Atonement.” [1] ...

Apologetics and Evidence

Search This Blog