What is suffering?

[juvenissun]

OK, then does this mean that there is a similar ghost brain structure that functions like physical brain structures, in turn allowing a ghost body to have sensations? Also, from what I know of dark matter, it doesn't seem likely you think ghost bodies have similar characteristics because all the evidence for dark matter comes from it's observed effects on gravity. If this is merely speculation on your part, can you refer me to any references that deal with this matter? I'm still having a difficult time understanding how christians characterize the soul, or at least what characteristics are agreed upon.

Pull one step back. We can not prove there is a life after this life. So, all your questions can not be answered with any certainty by science.

But the Bible does have some verses that describe our "heavenly" body after this body. For example, we do not need to eat food in the Heaven. And we will not need to sleep either. But I will still be me and can be recognized as me. etc. etc.

So, if you like to explore, ask what, not how or why. Christianity is the one which can give the most answers to this issue. Other religions don't even talk about it.

 

[roach]

So, if you like to explore, ask what, not how or why. Christianity is the one which can give the most answers to this issue.

Sorry, but exploration implies asking how and why, doesn't it? I am trying to see the christian point of view. On one hand, I see christians valuing critical analysis because it has the ability to provide a way of transcending unreasonable ways of thinking and provide better and better ways of understanding the world. In this sense, christians seem to value truth just as anyone else would. On the other, analyzing religious claims seems to fall into a different category of knowledge. There is no rationale for doing this, though. (If there is, I"d love to hear it). Thus, I am trying to grasp how certain claims cohere in a single mind when there is this dichotomy. I know there are very intelligent christians with sophisticated beliefs about science and religion so I'm interested in how these ideas are integrated into the beliefs of other christians.

 

[juvenissun]

Sorry, but exploration implies asking how and why, doesn't it? I am trying to see the christian point of view. On one hand, I see christians valuing critical analysis because it has the ability to provide a way of transcending unreasonable ways of thinking and provide better and better ways of understanding the world. In this sense, christians seem to value truth just as anyone else would. On the other, analyzing religious claims seems to fall into a different category of knowledge. There is no rationale for doing this, though. (If there is, I"d love to hear it). Thus, I am trying to grasp how certain claims cohere in a single mind when there is this dichotomy. I know there are very intelligent christians with sophisticated beliefs about science and religion so I'm interested in how these ideas are integrated into the beliefs of other christians.

We only know so much. As to things beyond our knowledge, we can use wisdom to understand it. Not all understanding from wisdom are logical and physical. We have to live with this limitation.

Also, science starts with questions on what. Then, if possible, gives how or why. So, before you ask how or why, be sure you know WHAT are the statements. So your question should be: What does an eternal life look like? Then you will get a lot of interesting answers.

 

[chilehed]

I see, the more accepted belief is that there is a different, still physical, body in the afterlife.

I'm not sure that it'd be correct to say it's a different body, because it'll be my body.

Does this mean that heaven and hell are actual places where physical laws are obeyed?

Depending on definitions, I'd say yes. But it's quite likely not like we might expect, given the limited nature of our current existence and ability to understand. Any answers you'll get on this topic will be highly speculative.

 

[roach]

We only know so much. As to things beyond our knowledge, we can use wisdom to understand it. Not all understanding from wisdom are logical and physical. We have to live with this limitation.

Also, science starts with questions on what. Then, if possible, gives how or why. So, before you ask how or why, be sure you know WHAT are the statements. So your question should be: What does an eternal life look like? Then you will get a lot of interesting answers.

I will ask : What does an eternal life look like?

(I'm still not completely convinced that my previous line of questioning didn't imply this but if phrasing it this way helps, I'm eager to know.)

 

[juvenissun]

I will ask : What does an eternal life look like?

(I'm still not completely convinced that my previous line of questioning didn't imply this but if phrasing it this way helps, I'm eager to know.)

I have told you some. No death, no birth, do not need to eat, do not need to sleep. And more:

Has duty and will do works. Has personal identify. May have gender. Has (social) rank. Make music. Has free will and is intelligent.

There are probably more.

With all these "facts", could the question in the OP be answered? (for example, if a "life" does not need to eat or to reproduce, what kind of life is that? Yeah, exactly, it is called an eternal life. )

 

[British Bulldog]

I have told you some. No death, no birth, do not need to eat, do not need to sleep. And more:

Has duty and will do works. Has personal identify. May have gender. Has (social) rank. Make music. Has free will and is intelligent.

There are probably more.

With all these "facts", could the question in the OP be answered? (for example, if a "life" does not need to eat or to reproduce, what kind of life is that? Yeah, exactly, it is called an eternal life. )

And what is the point of this mind-numbingly uninteresting eternal life?

 

[juvenissun]

And what is the point of this mind-numbingly uninteresting eternal life?

Human life is eternal, like it or not. And it is anything but mind numbing.

So, the point is to find a good place for it.

 

[British Bulldog]

Human life is eternal, like it or not. And it is anything but mind numbing.

So, the point is to find a good place for it.

You didn't answer the question.

 

[roach]

I have told you some. No death, no birth, do not need to eat, do not need to sleep. And more:

Has duty and will do works. Has personal identify. May have gender. Has (social) rank. Make music. Has free will and is intelligent.

There are probably more.

With all these "facts", could the question in the OP be answered? (for example, if a "life" does not need to eat or to reproduce, what kind of life is that? Yeah, exactly, it is called an eternal life. )

I'm going to have to confess, I kind of lose interest in claims that are based on "facts" with no basis in physical or logical reality. But, for the sake of argument, lets look at a couple of the things eternal life has. Personal identity, free-will, intelligence and musical ability are, as I've stated either explicitly or implicitly in previous posts, are words (symbols) that describe physical activities in the brain. These activities which are the biological mechanisms of thought and behavior, are undergoing a re-evaluation by research being done, specifically, in cognitive neuroscience. When you say "free-will" what could that possibly mean if it were known that brains react to stimuli in a deterministic way? (As in my initial post, scientists have proven that they can reliably detect a subject's "choice" to move a limb seconds before the subject is even aware of the choice) When you say "personal identity" , how is it the same or different from the physical structures in the brain that literally determine their identity. (A famous example is the case of Phineas Gage.) I could go on about music, intelligence etc., but the point is, I do not understand how the christian perspective can be maintained under the light of such information. I want to know how christians rationally do this, hence the line of questioning.

 

[Lion Hearted Man]

I have told you some. No death, no birth, do not need to eat, do not need to sleep. And more:

Has duty and will do works. Has personal identify. May have gender. Has (social) rank. Make music. Has free will and is intelligent.

There are probably more.

With all these "facts", could the question in the OP be answered? (for example, if a "life" does not need to eat or to reproduce, what kind of life is that? Yeah, exactly, it is called an eternal life. )

Wow. Ignorance begets confidence for sure. Which of these things are your own creation, and which can be referenced to scripture?

 

[juvenissun]

Wow. Ignorance begets confidence for sure. Which of these things are your own creation, and which can be referenced to scripture?

Be humble. Everyone I said are explained in the Bible. If you like to know, you may ask.

 

[juvenissun]

I'm going to have to confess, I kind of lose interest in claims that are based on "facts" with no basis in physical or logical reality. But, for the sake of argument, lets look at a couple of the things eternal life has. Personal identity, free-will, intelligence and musical ability are, as I've stated either explicitly or implicitly in previous posts, are words (symbols) that describe physical activities in the brain. These activities which are the biological mechanisms of thought and behavior, are undergoing a re-evaluation by research being done, specifically, in cognitive neuroscience. When you say "free-will" what could that possibly mean if it were known that brains react to stimuli in a deterministic way? (As in my initial post, scientists have proven that they can reliably detect a subject's "choice" to move a limb seconds before the subject is even aware of the choice) When you say "personal identity" , how is it the same or different from the physical structures in the brain that literally determine their identity. (A famous example is the case of Phineas Gage.) I could go on about music, intelligence etc., but the point is, I do not understand how the christian perspective can be maintained under the light of such information. I want to know how christians rationally do this, hence the line of questioning.

We can sing, because our brain and other parts work.
Angels can sing, because their "brain" etc. work.
Our brain is similar to their brain in function, but is different in physical state.
So, it is not correct if you say angels can not sing because they don't have our brain.

This is your question in the OP. And I think I have given the same answer a few times. So, in order to continue the discussion, please don't ask the same question again, but try to respond to my answer. Otherwise, this will be it.

 

[Lion Hearted Man]

Be humble. Everyone I said are explained in the Bible. If you like to know, you may ask.

You're telling me to be humble? You're the one telling us what will happen after we die.

 

[juvenissun]

You're telling me to be humble? You're the one telling us what will happen after we die.

I tell you something you don't know.
You said: bull
I said: be humble.

What's wrong?

 

[roach]

We can sing, because our brain and other parts work.
Angels can sing, because their "brain" etc. work.
Our brain is similar to their brain in function, but is different in physical state.
So, it is not correct if you say angels can not sing because they don't have our brain.

This is your question in the OP. And I think I have given the same answer a few times. So, in order to continue the discussion, please don't ask the same question again, but try to respond to my answer. Otherwise, this will be it.

Understood, I'll stick to your response here then. You've basically said after people die, they retain all of the same physical structures (cells, tissues, organs, etc) that they had before death. Thus in the afterlife, everything continues to "live" and works the same. You've made a few caveats about not needing food, not dying, etc. For this claim to make sense, (just to maintain logical coherence) wouldn't you ask yourself (cuz I have) the following questions:
1) Humans are a collection of living cells, in a constant state of motion that require oxygen, ATP, etc. in order to function. Every physical action a human body makes uses energy (including singing). Cells are produced and die every second of life. These processes are natural and necessary for life. If these processes were to be suspended, even the act of thinking (See OP) would be impossible. What is similar about the physical cells in the afterlife?
2) Brain function rests upon the actions of nerve cells. These cells also need energy, carry out protein synth, undergo mitosis, apoptosis, phagocytosis, etc. This is contingent for ALL mental function, So when you say "our brain is similar to their brain", Which brain characteristics are similar?
3) Although physically similar, you say there is a different physical state. So not solid, gas, liquid, plasma, ferromagnetic, etc.. right? In your own mind, does it make sense that something can at once be physical, yet lack ALL of the properties that are required to call it physical? What I'm getting at is I don't know if you are confusing the word physical with something non-physical.

I think I've stuck to your response, what say you?

 

[juvenissun]

Understood, I'll stick to your response here then. You've basically said after people die, they retain all of the same physical structures (cells, tissues, organs, etc) that they had before death. Thus in the afterlife, everything continues to "live" and works the same. You've made a few caveats about not needing food, not dying, etc. .....

I stopped right there and did not read the rest. I am speechless.

I "DID NOT SAY THAT" but said the opposite. After death, our new body DON'T have the cell structure like we have it now.

Can you see ghost? That is what I am talking about.

 

[Lion Hearted Man]

I stopped right there and did not read the rest. I am speechless.

I "DID NOT SAY THAT" but said the opposite. After death, our new body DON'T have the cell structure like we have it now.

Can you see ghost? That is what I am talking about.

Memories, senses, musical ability...it's all inherently a cellular process. If you destroy connections in neurons, you destroy memories. There is no evidence that this process is anything but a physical capacity of our cells.

 

[roach]

I stopped right there and did not read the rest. I am speechless.

I "DID NOT SAY THAT" but said the opposite. After death, our new body DON'T have the cell structure like we have it now.

Can you see ghost? That is what I am talking about.

Fine, just tell me what is physical about a ghost then.

 

[juvenissun]

Fine, just tell me what is physical about a ghost then.

I don't know.

But if you believe the existence of ghost, then it must be made of something. The best I can say is energy (?).

I know what you are asking. But nobody will ever know the answer. However, one thing you may do is to jump over this barrier to the next step. If everything beyond this hurdle make sense, then you may deal with this mystery with some confidence even you will still never know until you become one.

It is the same way to study science. Once you hit a dead end in the process, don't just stop there. Find a way to go around it. If we can not find out what a ghost is made of, why don't we start to think about what a ghost can do?