How can something sometimes not be eternal?

[Paraprakrti]

This question is directed toward Christians who hold the belief that souls are created but will exist perpetually from that point in time. It seems quite oxymoronic to place a time constraint on our definition of eternity, doesn't it? That the soul didn't exist eternally regressing in time but will continue to exist eternally henceforth. What a precarious concept. So once again, how is something sometimes not eternal?

 

[Katzpur]

This question is directed toward Christians who hold the belief that souls are created but will exist perpetually from that point in time. It seems quite oxymoronic to place a time constraint on our definition of eternity, doesn't it? That the soul didn't exist eternally regressing in time but will continue to exist eternally henceforth. What a precarious concept. So once again, how is something sometimes not eternal?

Good question. I hope you won't mind my contributing. I am a Christian who believes our souls are eternal. However, unlike most Christians, I believe the essense of our being is co-eternal with God. According to my belief, we existed as "intelligences" (which, loosely translated, means "the light of truth") forever. We believe that God created our spirits from this light and placed each of these spirits into a physical body. From my perspective, we are in fact truly "eternal" in nature -- extending both backwards and forwards.

 

[Paraprakrti]

Good question. I hope you won't mind my contributing. I am a Christian who believes our souls are eternal. However, unlike most Christians, I believe the essense of our being is co-eternal with God. According to my belief, we existed as "intelligences" (which, loosely translated, means "the light of truth") forever. We believe that God created our spirits from this light and placed each of these spirits into a physical body. From my perspective, we are in fact truly "eternal" in nature -- extending both backwards and forwards.

It is interesting that you post because on another forum I am discussing a similar topic and just had a guy post under the name 'Joseph Smith'. He contributed an answer that implied souls existing before creation and I just asked him if he believes this. I guess I have my answer now.

One thing I am unsure of though is that you talk about our spirits being created from this light of truth, and then go on about how the soul is without beginning. So naturally I am having a hard time understanding how the soul is created and has no beginning. Are you saying perhaps that souls first existed in a sort of merged state (in this light) and then God gave them individualities?

 

[Katzpur]

It is interesting that you post because on another forum I am discussing a similar topic and just had a guy post under the name 'Joseph Smith'. He contributed an answer that implied souls existing before creation and I just asked him if he believes this. I guess I have my answer now.

So Joseph Smith and Elvis are both alive and well, huh?

One thing I am unsure of though is that you talk about our spirits being created from this light of truth, and then go on about how the soul is without beginning. So naturally I am having a hard time understanding how the soul is created and has no beginning. Are you saying perhaps that souls first existed in a sort of merged state (in this light) and then God gave them individualities?

Sort of. I think you are on the right track, but that our terminology is causing some misunderstanding. Although we (LDS) occasionally use the words "spirit" and "soul" interchangeably, that is not technically an accurate way of expressing our doctrine. I'll see if I can clarify it.

"Intelligence" is the "light of truth" that has always existed; we believe it is co-eternal with God. From this essence, i.e. this light of truth, He formed the spirits of all things before creating them temporally. And when I say "all things," that is exactly what I mean. All of His creations have a spirit component of some sort, which is not to say that an animal's spirit is the same as a human spirit. We believe that each of us existed as an unembodied spirit prior to coming to earth and lived for billions of years in God's presence before being born. This may have been what the "Joseph Smith" poster was alluding to in his post.

When the spirit enters a physical body, the resulting entity is a "living soul." The "spirit" is essentially the life force that uniquely identifies each soul (the soul being physical body + spirit).

The living soul exists only until death, when the spirit leaves the body. The spirit, however, continues to exist as a cognizant life force until the body is resurrected, at which time it re-enters the body, which is then made perfect and immortal. From this point forward, the spirit resides within the immortal body forever.

Did I manage to shed any light on this, or just further confuse you?

 

[Paraprakrti]

So Joseph Smith and Elvis are both alive and well, huh?

Sort of. I think you are on the right track, but that the terminology is getting in the way of a completely accurate understanding. Although we occasionally use the words "spirit" and "soul" interchangeably, and then throw in the concept of "intelligences," that is not technically an accurate way of expressing our doctrine. I'll see if I can clarify it.

"Intelligence" is the "light of truth" that has always existed; we believe it is co-eternal with God. From this essence, i.e. this light, He formed the spirits of all things before creating them temporally. And when I say "all things," that is exactly what I mean. All of His creations have a spirit component of some sort, which is not to say that an animal's spirit is the same as a human spirit. We believe that each of us existed as an unembodied spirit prior to coming to earth and lived for billions of years in God's presence before being born. This may have been what the "Joseph Smith" poster was alluding to in his post.

When the spirit enters a physical body, the resulting entity is a "living soul." The "spirit" is essentially the life force that uniquely identifies each living soul.

The living soul continues to exist until death, when the spirit leaves the body. The spirit, however, continues to exist as a cognizant life force until the body is resurrected, at which time it re-enters the body, which is then made perfect and immortal. From this point forward, the spirit continues to exist in an embodied state.

Did I manage to shed any light on this, or just further confuse you?

I see. So does the book of Mormon explain why souls come down to take embodiment? Also, why would souls who are liberated from the material body take shelter again in them?

This whole resurrection thing throws a wrench in my understanding, of which part is knowing that material bodies are not resurrected, rather, they rot in the earth. When Jesus resurrected, I understand his new body to be completely spiritual. By "spiritual" I don't mean invisible or without form. In this case, spiritual means eternal. Jesus resurrected and had a completely spiritual body, i.e. a body that was not subject to old age, disease and death. So maybe you are saying that souls float around without bodies (material or spiritual) awaiting for their spiritual body to appear?? And that brings up further questions like, why are they required to wait? If they are eligible, why not just attain the spiritual body immediately?

What do you think about reincarnation? Instead of the spirit floating around waiting for the spiritualization of the dead material body, it takes shelter in another body according to it's desires and natural law. The spirit continues to do this until purification is met and the spirit retains their pure spiritual body?

 

[Katzpur]

I see. So does the book of Mormon explain why souls come down to take embodiment? Also, why would souls who are liberated from the material body take shelter again in them?

Actually, the Book of Mormon is only one of four volumes of scripture that make up the LDS canon, or “Standard Works.” This doctrine may be alluded to in the Book of Mormon, but is more clearly outlined in the “Doctrine and Covenants.”

You are probably not familiar with our belief in an anthropomorphic, corporeal God. We believe that when the scriptures (Genesis 1) state that God created man “in His image, after His likeness,” they mean this literally. We believe that each of us is a spirit son or daughter of God, not merely His creations, but His own offspring, and that we have essentially the same physical form as He has. Since we also believe that He has endowed each of us with the potential to eventually become as He is, obtaining a physical body would be the logical first step that each of us knew we must take to reach that goal. We believe that mortality was a choice that each and every person who has ever been born (or will be born) chose to take. Our experiences here on earth would give us the opportunity to learn to distinguish between good and evil, making decisions that would lead us back to His presence stronger and with more knowledge than when we left Him. We do not see the physical body as a prison from which the spirit longs to be released. On the contrary, the Doctrine and Covenants teaches that “…man is spirit. The elements are eternal, and spirit and element, inseparably connected, receive a fulness of joy; And when separated, man cannot receive a fulness of joy.”

This whole resurrection thing throws a wrench in my understanding, of which part is knowing that material bodies are not resurrected, rather, they rot in the earth. When Jesus resurrected, I understand his new body to be completely spiritual. By "spiritual" I don't mean invisible or without form. In this case, spiritual means eternal. Jesus resurrected and had a completely spiritual body, i.e. a body that was not subject to old age, disease and death. So maybe you are saying that souls float around without bodies (material or spiritual) awaiting for their spiritual body to appear?? And that brings up further questions like, why are they required to wait? If they are eligible, why not just attain the spiritual body immediately?

Actually, we do believe that our material bodies are resurrected, but that when the spirit re-enters the body, the body will be renewed and perfected, made “spiritual” as you say, no longer subject to death or disease, but with a physical form and substance.

As for our spirits just “floating around without bodies, awaiting for their spiritual body to appear,” we don’t believe that will be the case. We believe that, upon death, the spirit leaves the body and goes to the Spirit World to await the resurrection. For the righteous, the Spirit World will be a Paradise, a place of peace and rest, but also a place where we continue to learn and grow spiritually. For the wicked, it will be a Prison, where they are tormented by guilt for their wrongdoings and by the agony of knowing that their lives were spent as they were. We believe, as do other Christians, that Jesus Christ is the only means by which we can be forgiven of our sins and reconciled to God. Unlike other Christians, though, we do not believe that mortality is the last chance a person will be given to accept the Gospel Jesus Christ taught while here on earth. We recognize that billions of God’s children lived and died without ever having even heard of Jesus Christ. At least millions more may have heard of Him but did not really have the opportunity to fully understand the reality of His sacrifice on their behalf. So, rather than just “floating around,” the spirits of those who did know of Him will be sharing the good news with those who either didn’t or who, due to a failure to understand it that only God can truly make allowances for, rejected it. By the time we stand before God to be judged, everyone who ever lived will have had an equal opportunity to hear, understand, and accept the message of salvation through Jesus Christ.

What do you think about reincarnation? Instead of the spirit floating around waiting for the spiritualization of the dead material body, it takes shelter in another body according to it's desires and natural law. The spirit continues to do this until purification is met and the spirit retains their pure spiritual body?

I reject the notion of reincarnation primarily because I see my spirit and my physical body as belonging together. I cannot imagine my spirit wanting to “take shelter” in the physical body that was intended for someone else. I believe we will have the opportunity to reach this pure state you mention without continued lives in different bodies.

Should I apologize for hijacking your thread, or should I let you do that?

 

[standing_on_one_foot]

But it'd still exist for an infinitely long period, whether you're going both ways in time or only one. That's the nifty thing about eternity. You can subtract as much time as you want from it (an infinite amount, if we're assuming time goes forever in both directions), and still have an eternity.

How' does the song go? "When we've been there ten thousand years, bright shining as the sun, we've no less days to sing G-d's praise than when we'd first begun." Nice way of expressing infinity, that.

So is the assumption that if something has a beginning it has to have an end? That it can only be eternal if it has no beginning? I don't see why that should have to be the case.

Sorry to disrupt the hijacking. Please continue

 

[Karl R]

It seems quite oxymoronic to place a time constraint on our definition of eternity, doesn't it? That the soul didn't exist eternally regressing in time but will continue to exist eternally henceforth. What a precarious concept. So once again, how is something sometimes not eternal?

I can give a realistic analogy of how something can be infinite in only one direction.

Point a laser into space. Aim it so it misses any objects (fairly likely if you just aim it randomly, since space is mostly empty). The coherent beam of photons will continue on infinitely. The beam has an origin, but that doesn't mean that it ever stops.

The concept might be wrong, but it's not precarious. If you want more examples, mathematics is filled with examples of things that have a beginning and no end.

 

[stemann]

A half-line is half-infinite in length. It has a beginning point and continues unto infinity. It is a sound mathematical concept.... so I am told.....

 

[Mike182]

i believe the soul is immortal, not eternal

 

[standing_on_one_foot]

A half-line is half-infinite in length. It has a beginning point and continues unto infinity. It is a sound mathematical concept.... so I am told.....

Not so. A half line (or a ray) is also infinite in length. Infinity divinded by two is still infinity, you see. You can't have something half infinite.

 

[Mystic-als]

Not so. A half line (or a ray) is also infinite in length. Infinity divinded by two is still infinity, you see. You can't have something half infinite.

Like a hologram effect?

 

[caminante]

well, i think that we are part of God...us and everything around us is God...tell me why(rethorical) do you think that God is outside in some remote place of the universe?

i think, again, that we are just differen't expressions of God, of truth...we are just to blind to see God in everything, but He is there....we are not souls that were once created...we are just part of this big, universal, infinite, thingy =)

 

[standing_on_one_foot]

Like a hologram effect?

Hmm? Do explain?

 

[caminante]

Hmm? Do explain?

have you guys ever heard of Hilbert's paradox of the Grand Hotel?

<<en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hilbert's_paradox_of_the_Grand_Hotel>>

ok, read it, tell me what you think.

but this is what i think:

If we are to compare the whole universe (which suppously is infinite, or calle it God) with Hilbert's hotel we can't. why?
because the universe is the whole that exist, there are no "new things" created in the universe, everything is transformed (just my opinion). So the problem is that in the hotel there is people coming from "outside", and in the universe (i guess) there are not outsides.
so how would that infinity would work to me?
well, it is not a complex explanation as the mathematical ones given by professors and stuff, but i would say that the hotel would have to be connected to its entrance, somehow making a circle, then it would have an unlimited (infinite) capacity of new guests, because once you reached the "end" you go back on again. so i would see it like that.

the other thing is that this hotel is being imagined by us, thus it doesn't exist and in order to it for exist, there would have to be "someone" administrating that this whole infinite hotel would work, and that would be a good reason to put God in to the universe and then my conclusion would be somwhat like when they say, "we are just a dream that God dreams"

i don't know, sometimes it doesn't even have sense to me, but think about it... i can just speculate.:help:

 

[stemann]

Not so. A half line (or a ray) is also infinite in length. Infinity divinded by two is still infinity, you see. You can't have something half infinite.

That's what I meant, you see.....

 

[Paraprakrti]

Actually, the Book of Mormon is only one of four volumes of scripture that make up the LDS canon, or “Standard Works.” This doctrine may be alluded to in the Book of Mormon, but is more clearly outlined in the “Doctrine and Covenants.”

You are probably not familiar with our belief in an anthropomorphic, corporeal God. We believe that when the scriptures (Genesis 1) state that God created man “in His image, after His likeness,” they mean this literally. We believe that each of us is a spirit son or daughter of God, not merely His creations, but His own offspring, and that we have essentially the same physical form as He has. Since we also believe that He has endowed each of us with the potential to eventually become as He is, obtaining a physical body would be the logical first step that each of us knew we must take to reach that goal. We believe that mortality was a choice that each and every person who has ever been born (or will be born) chose to take. Our experiences here on earth would give us the opportunity to learn to distinguish between good and evil, making decisions that would lead us back to His presence stronger and with more knowledge than when we left Him. We do not see the physical body as a prison from which the spirit longs to be released. On the contrary, the Doctrine and Covenants teaches that “…man is spirit. The elements are eternal, and spirit and element, inseparably connected, receive a fulness of joy; And when separated, man cannot receive a fulness of joy.”

Is it appropriate to say that this is a case of anthropomorphism? Doesn't anthropomorphism imply that human qualities have been attributed to God, i.e. that man made God? That is how I always understand the term. I think that it would be more appropriate to say that we are theomorphic.

You say that we are to become as God is. What do you mean be this? To become like God in all respects, or does there remain some distinction?

You mention knowledge of good and evil. Does this relate to the tree of knowledge of good and evil, and if so, how do you explain that such knowledge has caused man to fall in the first place?

“…man is spirit. The elements are eternal, and spirit and element, inseparably connected, receive a fulness of joy; And when separated, man cannot receive a fulness of joy.”

What is "element"? Material elements? Certainly, energy is eternal, but the manifested forms of this material energy are not.

As far as the body being a prison goes, why can't it be both? I think it was St. Augustine who argued against the idea of the body being a prison. He said that the body is a gift, so how can it also be a prison? But it can be both. We accept material bodies because we have deviated from our constitutional nature. In that way the body is understood to be a prison. On the other hand, the body (esp. the human body) is a facility for transcending material life and returning to God. In this way the body is understood to be a gift.

Actually, we do believe that our material bodies are resurrected, but that when the spirit re-enters the body, the body will be renewed and perfected, made “spiritual” as you say, no longer subject to death or disease, but with a physical form and substance.

As for our spirits just “floating around without bodies, awaiting for their spiritual body to appear,” we don’t believe that will be the case. We believe that, upon death, the spirit leaves the body and goes to the Spirit World to await the resurrection. For the righteous, the Spirit World will be a Paradise, a place of peace and rest, but also a place where we continue to learn and grow spiritually. For the wicked, it will be a Prison, where they are tormented by guilt for their wrongdoings and by the agony of knowing that their lives were spent as they were. We believe, as do other Christians, that Jesus Christ is the only means by which we can be forgiven of our sins and reconciled to God. Unlike other Christians, though, we do not believe that mortality is the last chance a person will be given to accept the Gospel Jesus Christ taught while here on earth. We recognize that billions of God’s children lived and died without ever having even heard of Jesus Christ. At least millions more may have heard of Him but did not really have the opportunity to fully understand the reality of His sacrifice on their behalf. So, rather than just “floating around,” the spirits of those who did know of Him will be sharing the good news with those who either didn’t or who, due to a failure to understand it that only God can truly make allowances for, rejected it. By the time we stand before God to be judged, everyone who ever lived will have had an equal opportunity to hear, understand, and accept the message of salvation through Jesus Christ.

I see. Although I don't understand why the wicked souls have to wait for resurrection. I mean, they aren't really even going to take part in it anyway.

Anyway, I don't quite understand the purpose of waiting for the body to "resurrect". Obviously the material body isn't actually resurrecting. It is a completely new, spiritual body that is coming. But why the wait? If one is eligible for a spiritual body, then what is stopping that from immediately happening? I guess it is all part of your faith. But my understanding is that there are many possibilities. A soul may take another material body, or they may transcend and achieve their pure spiritual body. A key difference between material and spiritual body is that the material body is different from the living entity. Everyone can understand this as fact. I am different from my body. The spiritual body is nondifferent from the living entity. And that spiritual body emerges once one has transcended the material platform. Not that one goes somewhere to wait with no type of body. This just seems fishy to me. As if some of the facts got jumbled around. According to the Bible, don't the saved souls get sent back down to a newly made earth in this universe? I have always wondered why the souls don't just live eternally in God's spiritual kingdom. In light of Vedic knowledge, I think I am starting to understand what is being referred to in the Bible. Although Christians generally won't accept this, my understanding is that these souls who return to earth are not beings who have actually transcended material existence. In the Vedas it explains that at the end of this degraded age, the Lord will incarnate here on earth. He will appear on a white horse and will destroy the kingdoms of the inimical rulers of the world. In the end He will establish a new, enlighted era of mankind. The earth will be renewed and the people on it will all be godly people. There is mention of this incarnation of God in Revelations, particulary about Him appearing on a white horse. My point here is that when the earth is renewed, this does not constitute attainment of the eternal spiritual realm. I think in many (if not all) references to "Heaven" in the Bible, it is referring to another material sphere and not the eternal spiritual realm. But once again, it all seems so jumbled. I see so many parallels between the Bible and the Vedas. The Vedas seem to have a very logical flow as to what the soul is and the possibilities for where it may dwell. I see the same concepts in the Bible, but they seem to be taken apart and jumbled around; things aren't always clearly defined; and it appears almost as if someone had to come in and add a bit of speculation to try ad reconcile the gaps.

I reject the notion of reincarnation primarily because I see my spirit and my physical body as belonging together. I cannot imagine my spirit wanting to “take shelter” in the physical body that was intended for someone else. I believe we will have the opportunity to reach this pure state you mention without continued lives in different bodies.

Well certainly your spirit won't feel belonging to a physical body that is rotting away in the ground. The possibility of reincarnation is there for beings who are still attached to the bodily conception of life. It goes to say that since the soul accepts one body (as we all agree) then why not another? Why should it be automatically assumed that one body is all that is necessary for our learning experience here when it is obvious that many people are not ready after one body? It is not a question of a physical body that was intended for someone else. If you are taking the body, then it is intended for you. We may believe that we all have the opportunity to reach the pure state in one body, but that may not actually be the case, and we have plenty of evidence to suggest that it isn't. I am not saying that reincarnation is an absolute truth that must happen to everyone after they die. I am just saying that it is a possibility. We became attached to the material world and that constituted our first body. If by death we are still attached to the material world, why would that not constitute our accepting another body? Another way to look at it is, the body is changing all the time. We remain the same entities while the body goes through stages of childhood, youth, adulthood and old age. Similarly, at the time of death, there is another change; this time to a new body. So this material change will perpetuate so long as we are in the false ego of bodily identification. Once we purify ourselves in God consciousness, we will accept our final body that will be nondifferent from our being.

Should I apologize for hijacking your thread, or should I let you do that?

No problem.

 

[Paraprakrti]

I can give a realistic analogy of how something can be infinite in only one direction.

Point a laser into space. Aim it so it misses any objects (fairly likely if you just aim it randomly, since space is mostly empty). The coherent beam of photons will continue on infinitely. The beam has an origin, but that doesn't mean that it ever stops.

The concept might be wrong, but it's not precarious. If you want more examples, mathematics is filled with examples of things that have a beginning and no end.

I understand how an infinity concept like this may be a useful tool in mathematics, but practically speaking it goes to say that whereas that which has a beginning also has an end, that which has no beginning similarly has no end. The 'has beginning but no end' idea hasn't even a practical basis in logic. We all have experience of things that begin and each of these things we understand to also have an end. No matter how many trillions of years some cosmic body exists, we can understand that there is some rate of decay, i.e. even the sun is understood to be temporal. So the other side of this logic goes to say that if something were to have no beginning, then it would also have no end.

A discourse on this peculiar "eternity" would go something like this:

"I am eternal."
"Ok. So what were you doing on September 16th, 1829?"
"Oh, I didn't exist."
*smacks forehead* "So which is it, are you eternal or do you not exist? How can time be applicable to a concept that, by definition, transcends time? What about someone who never began, but died in 1829? I guess he is eternal too. One can say, "he is eternal, but he doesn't exist anymore," but how incredibly nonsensical is that? "My friend Bob was eternal until 1829. I guess time caught up with him" (enter rim-shot)"

Does anyone else see the absurdity of this pseudo-eternal concept?

"I feel like I'm taking crazy pills!!" -Will Ferrell as Mugatu (Zoolander)

 

[caminante]

what i have know is that there is potential infinity and infinity.

althought in mathematics, i have undertood that everythins is "potentially infinite" (or eternal)

if you add one number plus another you can keep doing this a long time, however it is potentially infinite, thus not infinite...
gosh, this is hard, i really don't know...=\

 

[Katzpur]

Is it appropriate to say that this is a case of anthropomorphism? Doesn't anthropomorphism imply that human qualities have been attributed to God, i.e. that man made God? That is how I always understand the term. I think that it would be more appropriate to say that we are theomorphic.

Well, I can see it either way myself.

You say that we are to become as God is. What do you mean be this? To become like God in all respects, or does there remain some distinction?

Although he was not LDS, I think C.S. Lewis said it best. “The command Be ye perfect is not idealistic gas. Nor is it a command to do the impossible. He is going to make us into creatures that can obey that command. He said (in the Bible) that we were “gods” and He is going to make good His words. If we let Him – for we can prevent Him, if we choose – He will make the feeblest and filthiest of us into a god or goddess, dazzling, radiant, immortal creature, pulsating all through with such energy and joy and wisdom and love as we cannot now imagine, a bright stainless mirror which reflects back to God perfectly (though, of course, on a smaller scale) His own boundless power and delight and goodness. The process will be long and in parts very painful; but that is what we are in for. Nothing less. He meant what He said."

You mention knowledge of good and evil. Does this relate to the tree of knowledge of good and evil, and if so, how do you explain that such knowledge has caused man to fall in the first place?

Yes, it pertains to the Tree of Knowledge of Good and Evil, of which Adam and Eve were commanded not to eat. But I'm sorry, I'm afraid I don't understand what it is you're asking me.

“…man is spirit. The elements are eternal, and spirit and element, inseparably connected, receive a fulness of joy; And when separated, man cannot receive a fulness of joy.”

What is "element"? Material elements? Certainly, energy is eternal, but the manifested forms of this material energy are not.

According to LDS doctrine, "There is no such thing as immaterial matter. All spirit is matter, but it is more fine or pure, and can only be discerned by purer eyes; We cannot see it; but when our bodies are purified we shall see that it is all matter." (D&C 131:7-8)

As far as the body being a prison goes, why can't it be both? I think it was St. Augustine who argued against the idea of the body being a prison. He said that the body is a gift, so how can it also be a prison? But it can be both. We accept material bodies because we have deviated from our constitutional nature. In that way the body is understood to be a prison. On the other hand, the body (esp. the human body) is a facility for transcending material life and returning to God. In this way the body is understood to be a gift.

Our physical bodies are obviously imperfect. Nevertheless, it is certainly not the goal of any Latter-day Saint to be free from them. We don't see the physical as necessarily inferior to the spiritual, but as complementing it.

I see. Although I don't understand why the wicked souls have to wait for resurrection. I mean, they aren't really even going to take part in it anyway.

According to our doctrine, all will be resurrected. This means that every soul that has ever lived will receive a new, immortal body. Furthermore, we believe that the vast, vast majority of all God's children will inherit the kingdom of heaven and receive at least a portion of God's glory. That's a whole other subject, though, so I won't digress at this point.

Anyway, I don't quite understand the purpose of waiting for the body to "resurrect". Obviously the material body isn't actually resurrecting. It is a completely new, spiritual body that is coming. But why the wait? If one is eligible for a spiritual body, then what is stopping that from immediately happening? I guess it is all part of your faith. But my understanding is that there are many possibilities. A soul may take another material body, or they may transcend and achieve their pure spiritual body. A key difference between material and spiritual body is that the material body is different from the living entity. Everyone can understand this as fact. I am different from my body. The spiritual body is nondifferent from the living entity. And that spiritual body emerges once one has transcended the material platform. Not that one goes somewhere to wait with no type of body. This just seems fishy to me. As if some of the facts got jumbled around. According to the Bible, don't the saved souls get sent back down to a newly made earth in this universe? I have always wondered why the souls don't just live eternally in God's spiritual kingdom. In light of Vedic knowledge, I think I am starting to understand what is being referred to in the Bible. Although Christians generally won't accept this, my understanding is that these souls who return to earth are not beings who have actually transcended material existence. In the Vedas it explains that at the end of this degraded age, the Lord will incarnate here on earth. He will appear on a white horse and will destroy the kingdoms of the inimical rulers of the world. In the end He will establish a new, enlighted era of mankind. The earth will be renewed and the people on it will all be godly people. There is mention of this incarnation of God in Revelations, particulary about Him appearing on a white horse. My point here is that when the earth is renewed, this does not constitute attainment of the eternal spiritual realm. I think in many (if not all) references to "Heaven" in the Bible, it is referring to another material sphere and not the eternal spiritual realm. But once again, it all seems so jumbled. I see so many parallels between the Bible and the Vedas. The Vedas seem to have a very logical flow as to what the soul is and the possibilities for where it may dwell. I see the same concepts in the Bible, but they seem to be taken apart and jumbled around; things aren't always clearly defined; and it appears almost as if someone had to come in and add a bit of speculation to try ad reconcile the gaps.

Well, as I thought I'd explained in my previous post, the "waiting around" does serve a purpose. It is during the period between death and the resurrection that the majority of the former inhabitants of the earth will hear the Gospel of Jesus Christ for the first time. As far as being "eligible" for a spiritual body is concerned, we are all elgible by virtue of the fact that we have experienced mortality. The Bible states that, "...as in Adam all die, even so in Christ shall all be made alive." All shall live again, but since the circumstances of our lives vary so greatly from each other's, God has made the necessary provisions to enable all to come to the knowledge of His Son's Atonement before the Final Judgment.

Well certainly your spirit won't feel belonging to a physical body that is rotting away in the ground. The possibility of reincarnation is there for beings who are still attached to the bodily conception of life. It goes to say that since the soul accepts one body (as we all agree) then why not another? Why should it be automatically assumed that one body is all that is necessary for our learning experience here when it is obvious that many people are not ready after one body? It is not a question of a physical body that was intended for someone else. If you are taking the body, then it is intended for you. We may believe that we all have the opportunity to reach the pure state in one body, but that may not actually be the case, and we have plenty of evidence to suggest that it isn't. I am not saying that reincarnation is an absolute truth that must happen to everyone after they die. I am just saying that it is a possibility. We became attached to the material world and that constituted our first body. If by death we are still attached to the material world, why would that not constitute our accepting another body? Another way to look at it is, the body is changing all the time. We remain the same entities while the body goes through stages of childhood, youth, adulthood and old age. Similarly, at the time of death, there is another change; this time to a new body. So this material change will perpetuate so long as we are in the false ego of bodily identification. Once we purify ourselves in God consciousness, we will accept our final body that will be nondifferent from our being.

You may have misunderstood what I was getting at. I believe that the body in which my spirit now resides will be made perfect at the resurrection. Between now and then, of course it will decay. (Judging from how I feel most days, mine's already started.) When I get a new body, it will not be an entirely different body than the one I have now. As to how that transformation is going to take place, I can't even venture a guess.