Christian Writer Insists There’s No Sex in Heaven (In Case You Were Wondering)

[Muffled]

Okay, there's no sex in Heaven and I'd be surrounded only by Christians? So, could you run through my options again?

1. No sex in Heave (I am not sure about that but I believe certainly no physical sex)

2. No sex in Hell (I believe people thinking there is means they are doing wishful thinking)

3. No sex in The Kingdom of God. ( I believe there is no procreation, so no sex is needed and most likely the eternal body will not have a sex drive.

4. Reincarnation (I believe there is sex in the new life if it is available at least until the Kingdom of God comes then the chances are very limited and go away completely after a thousand years)

 

[Muffled]

According to John Milton's Paradise Lost, the angels are boinking in heaven.

I believe he must have missed the statement:
Matt 22:30 For in the resurrection they neither marry nor are given in marriage, but are like angels in heaven.

 

[Trailblazer]

That reflects well on your essential kindness.

Thanks... and it also reflects upon my essential beliefs.

Either that or we're all just dead.

No, I do not believe that anyone will be just dead.

I think that everyone owes it to themselves to read this book: The Afterlife Revealed
It is about the afterlife, from a non-religious viewpoint.

I will die not expecting to be surprised ─ and if I am, I'll say to myself, 'Dang me if Trailblazer didn't nail it!'

Fair enough, and I will hope to see you and all my atheist friends there, wherever there is...
A heaven without my friends would be as bad as a heaven with no cats.

I might say “I told you so” but I won’t rub it in.

What, you think I was joking? This is of the utmost importance!

Okay, if you say so... We all get to determine what is of most importance to us.

Miss Grundy, please take a letter: Dear God ─ It has been brought to my attention that

Please put in a word to God that my cats had better be there too, if you will.

 

[Ancient Soul]

Okay, there's no sex in Heaven and I'd be surrounded only by Christians? So, could you run through my options again?

Hmm... I would find being surrounded by Christians the very definition of eternal torture.

 

[Twilight Hue]

What I don't believe is anybody that would want to be perpetually stuck in church.

Forever.

And ever...

And ever.....

And ever...........

 

[blü 2]

Thanks... and it also reflects upon my essential beliefs.

Kindness beats beliefs all day every day.

I think that everyone owes it to themselves to read this book: The Afterlife Revealed. It is about the afterlife, from a non-religious viewpoint.

Hmm. The blurb says,

As the foundation gives way, the philosophy of materialism takes hold and gives rise to moral decadence, egocentricity, hypocrisy, hatred, disorder, flux, strife, chaos, and fear. Such seems to be the state of the world today.​

So to Mr Tymn I say, I don't think so ─ and what about some evidence? I mean real evidence?

I might say “I told you so” but I won’t rub it in.

What's the old saw about counting your chickens ? ...

Please put in a word to God that my cats had better be there too, if you will.

I see Miss Grundy included a clause to that effect already. Very alert, she is ... and perhaps a cat person herself. (Dogs, of course, for me.)

 

[Trailblazer]

Kindness beats beliefs all day every day.

That is true, but it is not an either/or. A religion that teaches us to be kind helps us stay on track... For example:

“Beware lest ye offend the feelings of anyone, or sadden the heart of any person, or move the tongue in reproach of and finding fault with anybody, whether he is friend or stranger, believer or enemy . . . Beware, beware that any one rebuke or reproach a soul, though he may be an ill-wisher and an ill-doer.” (Abdu’l-Bahá, Tablets of Abdu’l-Bahá v1, p. 44)

“All religions teach that we should love one another; that we should seek out our own shortcomings before we presume to condemn the faults of others, that we must not consider ourselves superior to our neighbours! We must be careful not to exalt ourselves lest we be humiliated.” (Abdu’l-Bahá, Paris Talks, p. 147)​

Hmm. The blurb says,

As the foundation gives way, the philosophy of materialism takes hold and gives rise to moral decadence, egocentricity, hypocrisy, hatred, disorder, flux, strife, chaos, and fear. Such seems to be the state of the world today.​

So to Mr Tymn I say, I don't think so ─ and what about some evidence? I mean real evidence?

I do not know the context of that quote. Why don't you agree with him?
What kind of evidence are you expecting? If you read the book he gets into the sources that he bases his claims upon.

What's the old saw about counting your chickens ? ...

There is nothing I am MORE certain of than that there is a life after this. That is not only covered thoroughly in the Baha'i Writings, but it is corroborated by many other books that cover NDEs and also spirits that have communicated from the spiritual world to this world.

I see Miss Grundy included a clause to that effect already. Very alert, she is ... and perhaps a cat person herself. (Dogs, of course, for me.)

Well, good.

 

[We Never Know]

What I don't believe is anybody that would want to be perpetually stuck in church.

Forever.

And ever...

And ever.....

And ever...........

When I was a youngster I remember people telling me that one wouldn't know anyone in heaven. Not even your own family. I always thought what's the point then.

 

[Trailblazer]

When I was a youngster I remember people telling me that one wouldn't know anyone in heaven. Not even your own family. I always thought what's the point then.

Who the hell told you that?
You will meet up with everyone you knew in heaven, kind of like a reunion.

 

[We Never Know]

Who the hell told you that?
You will meet up with everyone you knew in heaven, kind of like a reunion.

I was young and don't remember who but it was along the lines when we die, we are reborn into heaven. Thus being reborn, you won't know anyone. Something along those lines.

 

[Trailblazer]

I was young and don't remember who but it was along the lines when we die, we are reborn into heaven. Thus being reborn, you won't know anyone. Something along those lines.

Well, that is not true at all. As I said, you will recognize people you knew in this life, friends and relatives.

 

[blü 2]

That is true, but it is not an either/or. A religion that teaches us to be kind helps us stay on track... For example:

“Beware lest ye offend the feelings of anyone, or sadden the heart of any person, or move the tongue in reproach of and finding fault with anybody, whether he is friend or stranger, believer or enemy . . . Beware, beware that any one rebuke or reproach a soul, though he may be an ill-wisher and an ill-doer.” (Abdu’l-Bahá, Tablets of Abdu’l-Bahá v1, p. 44)

“All religions teach that we should love one another; that we should seek out our own shortcomings before we presume to condemn the faults of others, that we must not consider ourselves superior to our neighbours! We must be careful not to exalt ourselves lest we be humiliated.” (Abdu’l-Bahá, Paris Talks, p. 147)​

​

I think he and I would get along very well, but I don't need God or his messenger to teach me values like those. However, I accept your point that some people might find it helpful to be reassured or reinforced through religion.

I do not know the context of that quote.

It's from the blurb for the book on the link you gave me.

Why don't you agree with him?

Because what I quoted is blatantly untrue ─ a defamation of a perceived enemy, not a reasoned case at all.

What kind of evidence are you expecting? If you read the book he gets into the sources that he bases his claims upon.

I expect him to tell me what real thing he intends to denote when he says 'supernatural', for a start ─ the objective test that anyone can use to see if some object or phenomenon is 'supernatural' or not. But a quick flip through the inside pages makes it clear that our author doesn't think like that ─ he thinks in stories, anecdotes, unsubstantiated writings and opinions. That's never going to persuade me.

There is nothing I am MORE certain of than that there is a life after this.

I am every bit as clear that there's no possible way for the products of brain function to continue when the brain has irreversibly ceased to function and is dead ─ no way by which memory, personality, reason, appetites, motivations, feelings &c can continue to exist independently of the brain and the endocrine system.

If I'm right, neither of us will postmortally think or say anything, or care that we don't.

And as I said, if you're right, I'll say, Hot dang, he was right! And then I'll say, without an endocrine system, without need for air water food company, I have no desires, no motivations at all, so I won't bother to think, I can't feel anyway, not even boredom ─ I'll do what everyone else is doing, just shut out whatever's there and be inert for eternity.

 

[Trailblazer]

I think he and I would get along very well, but I don't need God or his messenger to teach me values like those. However, I accept your point that some people might find it helpful to be reassured or reinforced through religion.

No, you don’t need them because you already have those values. Most nonbelievers that I know have them.

It's from the blurb for the book on the link you gave me.

Because what I quoted is blatantly untrue ─ a defamation of a perceived enemy, not a reasoned case at all.

He said: As the foundation gives way, the philosophy of materialism takes hold and gives rise to moral decadence, egocentricity, hypocrisy, hatred, disorder, flux, strife, chaos, and fear. Such seems to be the state of the world today.

Do you think that materialism is the perceived enemy? You do not consider it the enemy?

I expect him to tell me what real thing he intends to denote when he says 'supernatural', for a start ─ the objective test that anyone can use to see if some object or phenomenon is 'supernatural' or not. But a quick flip through the inside pages makes it clear that our author doesn't think like that ─ he thinks in stories, anecdotes, unsubstantiated writings and opinions. That's never going to persuade me.

To expect an objective test to see if some object or phenomenon is 'supernatural' is not a very realistic expectation, but I understand.

I am every bit as clear that there's no possible way for the products of brain function to continue when the brain has irreversibly ceased to function and is dead ─ no way by which memory, personality, reason, appetites, motivations, feelings &c can continue to exist independently of the brain and the endocrine system.

You are absolutely right about that. When the body dies, the brain ceases to function, but the soul does not die and since the soul is what was responsible for conscious thought we do not lose the ability to think or feel after we die physically.

The soul animates the human body while we are alive on earth. The soul communicates its desires through the brain to the physical body, which thereby expresses itself, so the soul is responsible for the mind, senses and emotions as well as physical sensations. The body is just a vehicle that carries the soul around while we are alive on earth, a place to house the soul. The soul is our self, our true reality.

The soul is the sum total of the personality so it is the person himself; the physical body is pure matter with no real identity. The person, after he dies and leaves his physical body behind, goes to the spiritual world where the soul takes on a spiritual body made up of heavenly elements that exist in the spiritual realm.

If I'm right, neither of us will postmortally think or say anything, or care that we don't.

But if you are not right, I’ll see you on the other side, if I can find you.

And as I said, if you're right, I'll say, Hot dang, he was right! And then I'll say, without an endocrine system, without need for air water food company, I have no desires, no motivations at all, so I won't bother to think, I can't feel anyway, not even boredom ─ I'll do what everyone else is doing, just shut out whatever's there and be inert for eternity.

No, you will say Hot dang, she was right.

No, that is not what will happen… You will still be you.

“Physical death is nothing. There really is no cause for fear.....
You see, I was so little 'dead' that I imagined I was still physically) alive. Think of it a moment before we pass on. I had been struck by a shell splinter. There was no pain. The life was knocked out of my body; again, I say, there was no pain. Then I found that the whole of myself--all, that is, that thinks and sees and feels and knows--was still alive and conscious! I had begun a new chapter of life. I will tell you what I felt like. It was as if I had been running hard until, hot and breathless, I had thrown my overcoat away. The coat was my body, and if I had not thrown it away I should have suffocated. I cannot describe the experience in a better way; there is nothing else to describe.” Private Dowding, p. 14, 16

That part I bolded above concurs with what Baha’u’llah wrote about the soul, that it will still be alive and conscious in the afterlife. Baha’u’llah also wrote that the physical body is like the overcoat that gets thrown away and the soul take on a new form that best befits its celestial habitation.

Please note that the above quote is not Baha’i Writings so it is not “official.” Baha’u’llah said that “their life hereafter is such as We are unable to describe. The knowledge thereof is with God, alone, the Lord of all worlds.” Gleanings, p. 346

Here is a more in depth description of what happens in the afterlife: Death and Dying in the Bahá'í Faith

 

[blü 2]

He said: As the foundation gives way, the philosophy of materialism takes hold and gives rise to moral decadence, egocentricity, hypocrisy, hatred, disorder, flux, strife, chaos, and fear. Such seems to be the state of the world today.

Do you think that materialism is the perceived enemy? You do not consider it the enemy?

Oh. that kind of materialism. On the one hand, a splurge or two is fun, and on the other there'll always be people who overdo things ─ or rather, overdo overdoing things. Esteem for shallowness isn't new. On the other hand you could blame the Great Depression on an extreme of it.

But it's only one of many things to be guarded against. It's not the enemy. I don't think there is a single enemy.

To expect an objective test to see if some object or phenomenon is 'supernatural' is not a very realistic expectation, but I understand.

Without an objective test, there's no way the 'supernatural', the 'spiritual', the 'immaterial', can be distinguished from the imaginary. Nor can I so distinguish them.

When the body dies, the brain ceases to function, but the soul does not die and since the soul is what was responsible for conscious thought we do not lose the ability to think or feel after we die physically.

Ah, what they call 'irreconcilable differences' in another context.

When I was in my teens, I tried to work out what a soul could be. I came up with the romantic notion that the body is like a stained glass window, and that the soul is generic white light shining through it and being colored / personalized accordingly. But this imagines the soul as a 'life force' ─ I never found a way to pack the 'soul' with memories, personality, intelligence, aptitude, the eleme0nts of being a social human ─ they all exist as a result of the physical brain function of an individual brain, and when that brain permanently ceases to function, they cease to exist. Nor is an external 'life force' necessary to explain life on earth, of which our kind is only one example ─ biochemistry is the key to that.

The brain is entirely material. You can affect its functions with alcohol or drugs, trauma, disease, hypoxia, anoxia, genetic fault, and so on. In this way, permanently or temporarily, memory, personality, reasoning power and so on can be lost. Depression can in appropriate cases be treated by increasing the amount of serotonin in the neuronal synapse. None of that requires or suggests a soul. If a soul is necessary for consciousness, then very many animals, perhaps all, have souls.

The person, after he dies and leaves his physical body behind, goes to the spiritual world where the soul takes on a spiritual body made up of heavenly elements that exist in the spiritual realm.

I strongly and confidently expect, on the basis of the evidence presently available, that the 'soul', the 'spiritual world', 'the spiritual body', exist only in the imagination of the living.

But if you are not right, I’ll see you on the other side, if I can find you.

I'll be the one taking measurements, observations and notes, and doing experiments.

And enquiring into the system of government and agitating for democracy ─ or maybe a breakaway nation.

And working on a cheap and reliable means of communication with the living. Their medicine will benefit enormously from knowing how emotional life can continue in the absence of endocrine glands.

The ultimate aim will be tourism in both directions. That may solve all those problems with the speed of light for exploring the galaxy and the universe too.

No, you will say Hot dang, she was right.

Mille pardons, ma dame!

 

[Trailblazer]

Oh. that kind of materialism. On the one hand, a splurge or two is fun, and on the other there'll always be people who overdo things ─ or rather, overdo overdoing things. Esteem for shallowness isn't new. On the other hand you could blame the Great Depression on an extreme of it.

But it's only one of many things to be guarded against. It's not the enemy. I don't think there is a single enemy.

I agree that materialism is not the only problem that mankind faces; it is just one of the problems. Hatred, racism, social inequality, injustice, bigotry, global warming, these are some other problems mankind faces.

Without an objective test, there's no way the 'supernatural', the 'spiritual', the 'immaterial', can be distinguished from the imaginary. Nor can I so distinguish them.

Agreed.

Ah, what they call 'irreconcilable differences' in another context.

When I was in my teens, I tried to work out what a soul could be. I came up with the romantic notion that the body is like a stained glass window, and that the soul is generic white light shining through it and being colored / personalized accordingly. But this imagines the soul as a 'life force' ─ I never found a way to pack the 'soul' with memories, personality, intelligence, aptitude, the elements of being a social human ─ they all exist as a result of the physical brain function of an individual brain, and when that brain permanently ceases to function, they cease to exist. Nor is an external 'life force' necessary to explain life on earth, of which our kind is only one example ─ biochemistry is the key to that.

The brain is entirely material. You can affect its functions with alcohol or drugs, trauma, disease, hypoxia, anoxia, genetic fault, and so on. In this way, permanently or temporarily, memory, personality, reasoning power and so on can be lost. Depression can in appropriate cases be treated by increasing the amount of serotonin in the neuronal synapse. None of that requires or suggests a soul. If a soul is necessary for consciousness, then very many animals, perhaps all, have souls.

There is no way to prove we have a soul or that it animates the body because the soul is immaterial, the reality of which the most learned of men have failed to grasp, and whose mystery no mind can ever hope to unravel.

“Thou hast asked Me concerning the nature of the soul. Know, verily, that the soul is a sign of God, a heavenly gem whose reality the most learned of men hath failed to grasp, and whose mystery no mind, however acute, can ever hope to unravel. It is the first among all created things to declare the excellence of its Creator, the first to recognize His glory, to cleave to His truth, and to bow down in adoration before Him. If it be faithful to God, it will reflect His light, and will, eventually, return unto Him. If it fail, however, in its allegiance to its Creator, it will become a victim to self and passion, and will, in the end, sink in their depths.” Gleanings From the Writings of Bahá’u’lláh, pp. 158-159​

The soul is unaffected by any infirmities of body or mind. So if the body of a person is depressed or has Alzheimers disease in this world because of a brain dysfunction, the soul is unaffected. When the body dies and the soul ascends to the spiritual world, nothing related to the body or mind goes with it. All that goes with us is our personality, of which we will be fully conscious. We will be free of any physical disease and we will only take with us what we have become as a spiritual being, our character based upon the way we lived and the choices we made between right and wrong.

“Thou hast asked Me whether man, as apart from the Prophets of God and His chosen ones, will retain, after his physical death, the self-same individuality, personality, consciousness, and understanding that characterize his life in this world. If this should be the case, how is it, thou hast observed, that whereas such slight injuries to his mental faculties as fainting and severe illness deprive him of his understanding and consciousness, his death, which must involve the decomposition of his body and the dissolution of its elements, is powerless to destroy that understanding and extinguish that consciousness? How can any one imagine that man’s consciousness and personality will be maintained, when the very instruments necessary to their existence and function will have completely disintegrated?

Know thou that the soul of man is exalted above, and is independent of all infirmities of body or mind. That a sick person showeth signs of weakness is due to the hindrances that interpose themselves between his soul and his body, for the soul itself remaineth unaffected by any bodily ailments. Consider the light of the lamp. Though an external object may interfere with its radiance, the light itself continueth to shine with undiminished power. In like manner, every malady afflicting the body of man is an impediment that preventeth the soul from manifesting its inherent might and power. When it leaveth the body, however, it will evince such ascendancy, and reveal such influence as no force on earth can equal. Every pure, every refined and sanctified soul will be endowed with tremendous power, and shall rejoice with exceeding gladness.”
Gleanings From the Writings of Bahá’u’lláh, pp. 153-154​

I strongly and confidently expect, on the basis of the evidence presently available, that the 'soul', the 'spiritual world', 'the spiritual body', exist only in the imagination of the living.

We will all find out someday, or not find out anything. Till then we can have our beliefs or opinions, but it is nothing to fight over, since it cannot be proven either way.

I'll be the one taking measurements, observations and notes, and doing experiments.

And enquiring into the system of government and agitating for democracy ─ or maybe a breakaway nation.

And working on a cheap and reliable means of communication with the living. Their medicine will benefit enormously from knowing how emotional life can continue in the absence of endocrine glands.

The ultimate aim will be tourism in both directions. That may solve all those problems with the speed of light for exploring the galaxy and the universe too.

Well, in the Writings of Bahaullah He said that we will be “a service in both worlds” so given you like working on things I think you will fit in quite well. It is those who expecting sitting around in heaven on a poufy cloud and doing nothing who will be disappointed.

Mille pardons, ma dame!

No problem, and here I thought you must have known all along.
I have heard that I am the only female Baha’i on this forum so I am kind of an oddity.

 

[blü 2]

There is no way to prove we have a soul or that it animates the body because the soul is immaterial, the reality of which the most learned of men have failed to grasp, and whose mystery no mind can ever hope to unravel.

Alternatively, if as appears highly probable it's imaginary, there's no mystery to unravel.

The soul is unaffected by any infirmities of body or mind.

This is the same kind of idealism, the same imagining of a perfection of some kind, that marks a lot of religious thought. The idea is essentially aspirational. I have nothing against aspiration, but for me the foremost question remains, What's true in reality?

So if the body of a person is depressed or has Alzheimers disease in this world because of a brain dysfunction, the soul is unaffected.

But if consciousness is not possible in the absence of the soul, and I'm gaga with Alzheimers, why is my body in charge of my consciousness and not my soul?

It is those who expecting sitting around in heaven on a poufy cloud and doing nothing who will be disappointed.

It certainly gets sold as the perfect retirement home.

You quote your scriptures relevantly. I don't precisely have scriptures, but FitzGerald's Rubaiyat of Omar Khayyam might serve here. for example this verse:

XLVIII (4th edn)

A Moment's Halt ─ a momentary taste
Of Being from the Well amid the Waste ─

And Lo! ─ the phantom Caravan has reach'd​

The Nothing it set out from ─ Oh, make haste!​

 

[Trailblazer]

Alternatively, if as appears highly probable it's imaginary, there's no mystery to unravel.

Since it cannot be unraveled it is a moot point.

This is the same kind of idealism, the same imagining of a perfection of some kind, that marks a lot of religious thought. The idea is essentially aspirational. I have nothing against aspiration, but for me the foremost question remains, What's true in reality?

That is my foremost question as well: What is reality?
It might not be what I want, but that does not matter to me. What matters is what is real because I do not want to live for a fantasy.

But if consciousness is not possible in the absence of the soul, and I'm gaga with Alzheimers, why is my body in charge of my consciousness and not my soul?

Your body is not in charge of your consciousness, your soul is, but while you are alive in a body, your soul works through the brain. The soul communicates its desires through the brain to the physical body, which thereby expresses itself in various ways. The soul is responsible for the mind, senses and emotions as well as physical sensations, but these are expressed through the body. When the brain is damaged hindrances interpose themselves between the soul and the body and cause physical illness. However, the soul remains unaffected.

The soul is like the light of the lamp. An external object may interfere with its brightness, but the light itself continues to shine. Or think about the soul as the sun above the clouds. The clouds are simply preventing us from seeing the sunshine, but the sun is shining just as brightly nevertheless.

Every illness afflicting the body of man is an impediment that prevents the soul from manifesting its inherent might and power. When the soul leaves the body, however, it will be unaffected by any bodily ailments and it will be able to fully manifest its power.

“Know thou that the soul of man is exalted above, and is independent of all infirmities of body or mind. That a sick person showeth signs of weakness is due to the hindrances that interpose themselves between his soul and his body, for the soul itself remaineth unaffected by any bodily ailments.” Gleanings From the Writings of Bahá’u’lláh, p. 153-154​

It certainly gets sold as the perfect retirement home.

That reminds me of something I just quoted to my atheist friend on my forum from the book The Afterlife Revealed. It was in the Preface.

This screenshot is from the Look Inside on Amazon, part of one page in the Preface to the book. Note that he says that there are three approaches to the afterlife: 1) a march into the abyss of nothingness; 2) a humdrum heaven or a horrific hell; 3) like beginning retirement with an around-the-world cruise. He says that the atheists stoically accept 1), the few who embrace death opt for 3), but the majority of people in Western countries who are Christians opt for 2). They do not really believe in an afterlife, they just mindlessly opt for one, and hope for one. Meanwhile, they live completely in the moment, for the material world, having no conception of what death really brings.

You quote your scriptures relevantly. I don't precisely have scriptures, but FitzGerald's Rubaiyat of Omar Khayyam might serve here. for example this verse:
XLVIII (4th edn)

A Moment's Halt ─ a momentary taste
Of Being from the Well amid the Waste ─

And Lo! ─ the phantom Caravan has reach'd

The Nothing it set out from ─ Oh, make haste!

Thanks, those are very poetic verses. I am not very good at writing poetry but I like reading it.

 

[blü 2]

Since it cannot be unraveled it is a moot point.

Two replies to that. First, the total absence of evidence, even without the total absence of a testable hypothesis as to how a soul could exist, means we have no reason to think that souls exist. Second, the proposer carries the burden of making the case proposed, in this case the existence of the soul; and this the proposers have unequivocally failed to do,

That is my foremost question as well: What is reality?

Reality is the world external to the self, what will be there whether I am or not. (Objective) reality, nature, the realm of the physical sciences, are synonyms.

The soul communicates its desires through the brain to the physical body, which thereby expresses itself in various ways. The soul is responsible for the mind, senses and emotions as well as physical sensations, but these are expressed through the body.

Why does the soul bother to have a body at all? What possible benefit can a body be to such a being?

And it makes no sense to say that 'the soul is responsible for the mind' if alcohol or drugs or disease or injury or genetics operate the mind and the emotions instead. (I usually avoid the word 'mind' in discussions like this ─ the word refers to a vaguely defined parcel of brain functions. But it'll do for the moment.)

And if the soul is 'immaterial', how can it communicate with the brain, which is a real thing? If it could do this, we should be able to observe the process as a purposeful series of changes to the brain that have no physical cause, but are too gross to be quantum effects. What is your theory of the interface? What region of the brain handles these communications, do you think?

Note that he says that there are three approaches to the afterlife: 1) a march into the abyss of nothingness;

It's not a march into an abyss. It's the irreversible cessation of biological functions necessary for to keep the system going; and the consequent end of the self, its memories, characteristics, talents, vices, everything. It's most often a simple slipping away, not least in these days of expert palliative care. It's no different to the death of any other living thing.

the majority of people in Western countries who are Christians opt for 2). They do not really believe in an afterlife, they just mindlessly opt for one, and hope for one. Meanwhile, they live completely in the moment, for the material world, having no conception of what death really brings.

Are they to blame? Should they go to church or to philosophy classes?

Thanks, those are very poetic verses. I am not very good at writing poetry but I like reading it.

Glad you liked it.(No one is ever as good at writing poetry as they'd like to be, but that shouldn't stop anyone trying.)

 

[The Reverend Bob]

I believe he must have missed the statement:
Matt 22:30 For in the resurrection they neither marry nor are given in marriage, but are like angels in heaven.

So we get to boink then?

 

[Trailblazer]

Two replies to that. First, the total absence of evidence, even without the total absence of a testable hypothesis as to how a soul could exist, means we have no reason to think that souls exist.

I have a reason to think that souls exist because I believe what Bahaullah wrote about souls, but since that is not your belief, you have no reason to think that souls exist.

Second, the proposer carries the burden of making the case proposed, in this case the existence of the soul; and this the proposers have unequivocally failed to do,

No, I cannot prove that the soul exists because as I said before, the soul is immaterial.

Reality is the world external to the self, what will be there whether I am or not. (Objective) reality, nature, the realm of the physical sciences, are synonyms.

Yes, that is reality. I believe there is physical reality and spiritual reality. We can prove the existence of anything in the physical reality but we cannot prove what is in the spiritual reality, because it is an immaterial realm of existence.

Why does the soul bother to have a body at all? What possible benefit can a body be to such a being?

A body is absolutely necessary for the soul while that soul resides in this material world because the body is the house wherein the soul resides and it is the vehicle that carries the soul around from place to place. The soul works through the body in order to express itself in this physical world but after we die the soul will take on another form, which has been called a spiritual body. We cannot ever understand what that form or what the spiritual world will be like while still residing in this material world because it is so very different than this material world.

And it makes no sense to say that 'the soul is responsible for the mind' if alcohol or drugs or disease or injury or genetics operate the mind and the emotions instead. (I usually avoid the word 'mind' in discussions like this ─ the word refers to a vaguely defined parcel of brain functions. But it'll do for the moment.)

It is really difficult to explain this and I knew I would say something that would be confusing… One word can really change the entire meaning of a sentence. So let me try to explain what I meant…

The soul is the underlying force that animates the body and mind, so the soul is responsible for the senses and emotions as well as physical sensations, and these are expressed through the body.

And if the soul is 'immaterial', how can it communicate with the brain, which is a real thing? If it could do this, we should be able to observe the process as a purposeful series of changes to the brain that have no physical cause, but are too gross to be quantum effects. What is your theory of the interface? What region of the brain handles these communications, do you think?

The changes in the brain do have a physical cause but it is the soul that animates the brain and causes these changes to take place.

It could be that the pineal gland is the region of the brain handles these communications: There’s An Organ In Your Brain Which Seats Your Soul: Meet Your Pineal Gland

Here is an interesting article I found while looking around…

Does Consciousness Exist in the Brain or the Soul?

Here is part of another article I found…

The journey of the soul is a process of endless growth and infinite possibilities

From the Bahá'í view, then, the journey of the soul is a process of endless growth and infinite possibilities. In this respect the Bahá'í belief about the afterlife differs significantly from some other views, particularly those which assert that the afterlife is but a reflection of this life, a final judgment--we spend eternity in paradise if we have done well or in hell if we have not. In contrast, the Bahá'í writings tell us that our lives are never static, never finished or completed. Even in the next world we will continue changing and developing. The encouraging part of Bahá'í belief in the eternal progress of the soul is the promise of endless growth and change. The intimidating part of this belief is that we are given only one soul to work with for the rest of eternity. Whether we like ourselves or not, we are stuck with ourselves forever. This belief alone should prompt us to pay careful attention to our progress in this physical life………

The reason progress can take place in the afterlife is simple. All the powers that distinguish us as human beings - reason, memory, abstract thought, inventiveness, willpower--are properties of the soul, not the body. Some scientists theorize that the essential capacities of the human reality are nothing more than the powers of a highly evolved brain. The Bahá'í writings assert that all distinctive human powers are functions and faculties of the soul. The brain may channel the soul's will into specific acts, but memory, thought, decisions, willpower, identity itself all derive from the soul.
Life after death​

It's not a march into an abyss. It's the irreversible cessation of biological functions necessary for to keep the system going; and the consequent end of the self, its memories, characteristics, talents, vices, everything. It's most often a simple slipping away, not least in these days of expert palliative care. It's no different to the death of any other living thing.

Physical death is not the end of self, and even scientists are discovering that the brain is not responsible for the self, or the personality. In the future, I think they will know more about the soul, when God wills it is time for humanity to know more. There is already a lot of research going on so who knows?

Are they to blame? Should they go to church or to philosophy classes?

No, they are not to blame, but they should think more about what heaven and hell might actually be given how much emphasis they put upon them.

Glad you liked it.(No one is ever as good at writing poetry as they'd like to be, but that shouldn't stop anyone trying.)

It stops me because I am completely inept with that kind of writing.