Immortality ?

[headheart]

Attachment 84956

According to some Christians, the non-material part of us, is immortal. In simple terms it will continue after we have been buried or cremated, or whatever is the custom or ritual adhered to by your particular religion, faith, belief system, culture or lack thereof and the material part will be re-joined to it, by being re-constituted, or something like that.

Yet the apostle Paul in 1 Corinthians 15:50-56, does not seem to be saying this. In fact, he seems to be saying that our whole being is not immortal, but instead wretched and worm like, and that the resurrection of the whole being is in mind, and that means that instead of immortality of one part, later reassembled with the made to be immortal other part, will make one immortal part, the ideas is more like we do not have immortal non-material or material parts, and that at death we go doo-doo until the wake up call, or if we happen to be alive on the earth at the Return of the King, we shall be changed in a blink. Like magic if you will!

I find this idea, is complimentary, to what I have learned as a Christian. Namely that even though we have been given eternal life, by promise, that does not mean that we are now Supermen. We are being quickened, and certainly may achieve a state that is getting there, but no way Jose is our non-material part immortal!

As there are as many views about this as the colours in a rainbow, I would be interested to read some of your thoughts, rebukes, corrections, and whatever else you think I might need to get my chad, or chi, or non-material part in line with the so called 'standard Christian doctrine here'



Coming in out of the Cold.
Eric J. Sawyer.

[headheart]

So, are we immortals? (take the poll, and tell us all about it)

Attachment 84991

[franktalk]

We can be viewed as two parts that make a whole. We have the mechanistic flesh that is driven by our choices. The other part is information. How we react to stimuli, how we listen or ignore our moral compass, and a host of emotions that make life hell or heaven. All of these in their simplist form are coded information. And just as we can copy information from one computer to another God can copy our information from one body to another. The Key being God. Without God there is no one to transfer the information. Without God there is no replacement body to move into. So the belief in immortality rest on the belief in God. Of course the reality of an afterlife is independent of our belief, it is or is not. I stand as a witness that there is a God.

[Alien]

And just as we can copy information from one computer to another God can copy our information from one body to another.

If true, an interesting question arises. Is the new body/mind truly ME?

In case my question is not clear, imagine God creating a new body and copying my "mind" into it while I still exist. There would then be two "me's", initially identical, but separate. Which is me?

Eric, I really don't know. I think we survive after death in some form (probably not a human-like body), but for ever? I doubt that.

[Kenny]

I’m a dualist. I believe that human persons are identical to immaterial souls. But I used to be a Christian materialist about human persons. And I still think that Christian dualists need to be very careful not to undermine the fact that our ultimate hope for life after death is not found in the immortality of the soul, but in the resurrection of the body.

I don’t believe that our souls are immortal. I believe that our souls naturally depend on the proper functioning of our bodies in order to properly function themselves (this explains, in part, why if you hit someone on the head hard enough, they are no longer able to think properly). I suspect that a disembodied human soul, left to itself, with no further assistance from God (over and above his usual sustaining activities) would simply “shut down”, so to speak, and cease to have mental properties (perhaps even cease to exist).

I don’t believe, however, that upon death our souls do in fact shut down or cease to exist. I believe that between death and the resurrection of the body human persons exist in a conscious intermediate state. However, we needn’t think that this is because of any natural immortality on the soul’s part. It may simply be that God artificially sustains our souls in existence and artificially causes them to function even while disembodied (kind of like disembodied brains in vats, except without the brains and without the vats ). But this is a suboptimal existence for human beings.

[franktalk]

If true, an interesting question arises. Is the new body/mind truly ME?

In case my question is not clear, imagine God creating a new body and copying my "mind" into it while I still exist. There would then be two "me's", initially identical, but separate. Which is me?

The Bible speaks of being asleep so I have to believe we are shut down and stored. But it also speaks of a temporary place where souls wait. There they can talk and think. So both must be true. Who sleeps and who is "awake" would be a guess on my part.

We perceive one reality with our senses. But reality is not bound by our senses. We are bound by our senses but reality is not. I believe in a much more complex and greater reality. So a new body with senses we don't have today may answer all of those questions and make them trival. At least that is what I expect.

Once I accepted that I am a spirit then this body is but a shell. I don't identify it as me in the bigger sense.

[headheart]

The Bible speaks of being asleep so I have to believe we are shut down and stored. But it also speaks of a temporary place where souls wait. There they can talk and think. So both must be true. Who sleeps and who is "awake" would be a guess on my part.

We perceive one reality with our senses. But reality is not bound by our senses. We are bound by our senses but reality is not. I believe in a much more complex and greater reality. So a new body with senses we don't have today may answer all of those questions and make them trival. At least that is what I expect.

Once I accepted that I am a spirit then this body is but a shell. I don't identify it as me in the bigger sense.

Do you mean something like 'stasis' or perhaps 'Zion' in Matrix-Reloaded ?

Attachment 85075

[franktalk]

Do you mean something like 'stasis' or perhaps 'Zion' in Matrix-Reloaded ?

Attachment 85075

The term sleep in the Bible when referring to death means an inactive spirit. That is different than an inactive body. While on this earth we are trapped in our body by some force or lack of knowledge on our part. But the body can be influenced by the world and a body can sleep or can be forced to sleep. I don't believe that either of these stop the communication of the spirit with God.

Again we are limited in our imagination due to the limits of the senses. So the greater reality can of course be way different. Like our thoughts may manifest into physical reality. But even in exploring the limits of what we can imagine may not be enough.

I would hope that the connection with God is much more solid than here on earth. Now we do know that angels fell so any connection currently does allow free will. But we are promised a new heaven and a new earth so I am not sure what that means.

[robertb]

So, are we immortals? (take the poll, and tell us all about it)

I suppose that our stuff that we are made of is, but as far as ourselves are concerned, there is no good reason to believe such to be the case and plenty of good reasons to believe that such is not the case.

[franktalk]

I suppose that our stuff that we are made of is, but as far as ourselves are concerned, there is no good reason to believe such to be the case and plenty of good reasons to believe that such is not the case.

You point out a greater truth. There is no path of knowledge that leads to God. But the opposite is also true, that God can not be disproven by knowledge. It is faith that is required to believe in either one.

[robertb]

You point out a greater truth. There is no path of knowledge that leads to God. But the opposite is also true, that God can not be disproven by knowledge. It is faith that is required to believe in either one.

I suppose that there are countless things that cannot be disproven by knowledge.

[headheart]

You point out a greater truth. There is no path of knowledge that leads to God. But the opposite is also true, that God can not be disproven by knowledge. It is faith that is required to believe in either one.

robs, comments always remind me of Paul Simon's song 'One Trick Pony' ..'herky jerky motion'

[headheart]

franktalk,

The idea of an 'inactive spirit' is really hard to conceptualize. Did you click through on the link, I gave you to stasis?
It is becoming clearer to me, as I study the Scriptures, that if we were to divide ourselves up into these different parts, we might be missing the fuller understanding of the resurrection, which is a completely new vehicle and driver, rather than the old driver with a new vehicle etcetera.
<snip>

Sincerely,
Eric J. Sawyer

[headheart]

I’m a dualist. I believe that human persons are identical to immaterial souls. But I used to be a Christian materialist about human persons. And I still think that Christian dualists need to be very careful not to undermine the fact that our ultimate hope for life after death is not found in the immortality of the soul, but in the resurrection of the body.

I don’t believe that our souls are immortal. I believe that our souls naturally depend on the proper functioning of our bodies in order to properly function themselves (this explains, in part, why if you hit someone on the head hard enough, they are no longer able to think properly). I suspect that a disembodied human soul, left to itself, with no further assistance from God (over and above his usual sustaining activities) would simply “shut down”, so to speak, and cease to have mental properties (perhaps even cease to exist).

I don’t believe, however, that upon death our souls do in fact shut down or cease to exist. I believe that between death and the resurrection of the body human persons exist in a conscious intermediate state. However, we needn’t think that this is because of any natural immortality on the soul’s part. It may simply be that God artificially sustains our souls in existence and artificially causes them to function even while disembodied (kind of like disembodied brains in vats, except without the brains and without the vats ). But this is a suboptimal existence for human beings.

Interesting.

I also found that this comment, in a discussion I endeavoured to have in October 2006 on the Theology 201 forum - titled 'Did Jesus' spirit die?' rather interesting:

'The question is hard for me to answer, since it presuposes a kind of platoic dualism that I don't hold. Therefore, either answer I give will be false from my point of view.'

Dr Jack Bauer

Plus a recent, rather befuddling retreat in an essay discussion titled: 'The Immortality of the Soul' by MichaelB.

In order to directly answer your objections, the proponent of conditional immortality would be regurgitating rebuttals that have been given before, and the standard responses to them have been heard many times before, and the answers to those have been heard many times before, and so on. In short, a huge volume of water has passed under the bridge since these very old criticisms were first heard, and in my estimation, the current score well and truly favours the proponents of conditional immortality. As such a believer, I read your arguments and was not in the least bit worried, because they have for many years now been part of the museum of arguments against conditional immortality that did not work the first time, and are no better now.

Dr Jack Bauer

It was hard not to notice the ongoing argument between Sparko and Dr. Jack Bauer, who though both Christians, seem to have extremely different views about this. I am not exactly sure where I am going to settle, but after reading through a motley old commentary by Professor RH Fuller, I would agree with you. We definitely do not have immortal souls. Such thinking only happens by imposing the idea upon the Scriptures, rather than letting them declare to us the standard.

So much of this terminology is new, and confusing to me, but I am finding it very interesting, and 'Yes' a blessing. It is always great to learn about what a wonderful thing the Lord has done. I think that if I can retain the biblical focus, and not be swayed by my own preconceptions, I shall emerge a brighter lad.

Sincerely,
Eric J. Sawyer

[franktalk]

franktalk,

The idea of an 'inactive spirit' is really hard to conceptualize. Did you click through on the link, I gave you to stasis?
It is becoming clearer to me, as I study the Scriptures, that if we were to divide ourselves up into these different parts, we might be missing the fuller understanding of the resurrection, which is a completely new vehicle and driver, rather than the old driver with a new vehicle etcetera.
<snip>

Sincerely,
Eric J. Sawyer

The idea that our spirit becomes dormant is not something I embrace. But scripture does say asleep. To me this means inactive to some extent. It obviously is an unknown. In the Rapture the dead in Christ rise from the grave. Does this mean that the spirit of all those is still tied to the flesh somehow? It is still confusing. We have so little information. Or is the spiritual grave like Abraham's bosom. Interesting to ponder but impossible to figure out.

Just like God holds back Satan from using his power I think God holds us back with spiritual blindness. How are we to come to Him through faith if we see the spirit world surrounding us. I think we are enhanced in the afterlife. I think that driver that we were is a subset of a much more complex and enhanced new model. The verse that says that we will see Christ as He is tells me that we are limited now.