Who needs heaven, anyway?

[KAW143]

Growing up as I did in a rather evangelical household, I was taught to fear god by learning that some part of me -- "the soul" -- would live forever. Based upon how I comported myself in life, my soul would continue to exist forever in one of two possible settings: hell, a Very Bad Place, full of sin, fire and pain; or heaven, a Very Good Place with virtue, light and happiness. This seems to be a big part of religion in general: our bodies may die, but we will continue to exist, in some form, for all time.

Let's leave aside, for the moment, the ethical questions of whether or not it is right to condemn or reward someone based only on a few decades of behaviour. My question is far simpler: if life after death were true (or even possible) would anyone really want to take advantage of it?

Personally, I have never taken comfort in the idea of life after death -- not even in the rather blissfull, happy version of eternal life that heaven offers. Frankly, the thought of living forever is just about as distrubing a thought as I have ever had. Although I can honestly say that I don't want to die *right now*, I cannot say that I *never* want to die. I'm not waxing existential, here; I'm just saying that it seems perfectly natural and right that one day I will simply cease to be. That thought gives me comfort. But living forever, to continue to have to deal with the pleasures and problems of existing even after one stops living -- well, that's just creepy. Don't we ever get to just stop?

So: living forever: Good thing or bad thing? Is it something you want, something you desire? Or does it kinda' make you feel a little wierd, the way it does me?

(Once again, understand I am not talking about the desire to not be punished forever and ever. I am not talking about not wanting to go to hell. I don't want to be rewarded forever, either. . . .)

 

[agentart]

i dunno if i would want to live forever.... prolly not.

seems like things would get really boring after a few hundred years.... not to mention a few thousand or hundred-thousand years....

 

[Tony]

My question is far simpler: if life after death were true (or even possible) would anyone really want to take advantage of it?

I would. Frankly, I don't see why anyone would not want to live forever.

 

[KAW143]

Re: Re: Who needs heaven, anyway?

I would. Frankly, I don't see why anyone would not want to live forever.

Well, *why?*

I have already explained a few reasons why I would not want to. What are the "pros" for existing for ever and ever and ever and ever and. . .

(I'm not trying to be obtuse, here; I genuinely want to know. And what context are we talking in here? LIving forever as in not dying? Or living forever in some sort of non-corporeal form?)

 

[Tony]

Re: Re: Re: Who needs heaven, anyway?

Well, *why?*

I have already explained a few reasons why I would not want to. What are the "pros" for existing for ever and ever and ever and ever and. . .

Let's make sure we are on the same page first. In what nature would I be existing forever? Immortal and eternally young flesh? Spirutal? "Q" from Star Trek? Ect..

 

[Marian]

I don't want to end.

That doesn't mean I would never take my own life though, for example. There are times and situations where life or continued living doesn't have value. The cost is too high. I don't know for certain what I'd do, but I wouldn't want to 'exist' if that meant being in agony that couldn't be relieved, constantly (for example).

And for lack of a better word, I'm sure that most people wouldn't want to exist if that existance meant a constant torturious hell with no hope.

However, some form of afterlife where I continue on, as myself, without being sick, without pain. Sure, I'd love it.

I'm not a huge Ayn Rand fan, but I recall her saying in an interview after her husband died, that if she believed at all in an afterlife, she'd immediately kill herself to rejoin with her husband. I respect that statement because if I knew I'd exist happily as myself in some afterlife without pain or illness, I'd do the same. Being in pain isn't fun.

I've noticed that people I've talked with about this subject who do not want some form of eternal existence have basically come down to saying because experience is finite and existance wouldn't be, that eventually it would be a boring hell. I don't know about that.

I do know I don't want to end, and whatever amount of time I end up allotted will be too short, but I try not to obsess on that too much. Its inevitible, I'll find out the answers then, and until that time, I'll enjoy what there is. It's not to say I don't think about it, I do. Or that I don't worry about it, or fear it...I do. I really don't want to end. But in a hundred years or less (probably much less) I'll know for sure, one way or another. And non-existence only matters now, because when it happens, I won't be anywhere anymore to care.

 

[Silicon]

I'm assuming that if I would live forever (or at least as long as the universe did), it would continute to be interesting.

That's assuming we eventually start exploring the rest of the universe.

 

[KAW143]

Let's make sure we are on the same page first. In what nature would I be existing forever? Immortal and eternally young flesh? Spirutal? "Q" from Star Trek? Ect..

That is a good question; however, I would say that it is up for you to decide the context. Personally, I can think of no situation in which living forever would be something I would desire. To use some of your examples:

1. "Immortal and eternally young" -- well, this one could concievably be fun, I suppose. Even so, one would still need to make a living. I can think of no job that wouldn't drive me absolutely mad after, say, at best, a mellenium, or so. One could always become a vampire, I suppose (and as long as we're talking about something like immortality, I guess we should go whole hog. . .), but I don't personally have the requisite level of cruelty and/or parasitic nature.

2. "Spiritual" -- well, this one was the one described to me as a child and it *sounded* awfully physical, even though I was also told that it would house my "soul" and not my body. Let's see: "City four-square" -- I had a precher-dude who actually claimed to know what the physical dimensions of heaven were given this phrase. "Pearly gates" -- sounds pretty, of course, but "pearly" does not equate with "gates made out of pearls". It could just be some kind of shoddy pearlescent coating. . . "Streets of gold" -- Granted, this one pre-dates Baum by a thousand years, or so, but I could never hear it without thinking of singing munchkins. I was a heretic from a very young age, I guess. . . . Everyone would have their own "mansion" there -- that's nice. Is there a mortgage? Is it in a good neighborhood? Okay, so all of this is a bit pithy and a little purile, but my point is this: what, exactly, is supposed to appeal to me in this? Pearls, gold and mansions don't interest me *now*, so I can't imagine that I would be interested in them after death. Kinda' sounded like we would die and go to the Vatican, really. . . .

3. "Q" from Star Trek -- Now this one honestly didn't occur to me, and, on one level, sounds like a real gas. (Dig my lingo. Let's rap.) Infinite power, infinite knowlege. That would be disirable, I admit, at least for a little while. The odd thing, there, is the omnipotence. If you know *everything*, what is there to look forward to? Even if you use your great powers to mess with the lesser beings of the universe, they would be so rarely capable of surprising you. . . . Even that seems like it would get very boring.

4. Reincarnation -- Okay, so this is one that neither you nor I have previously mentioned, yet it is a biggie, in the pantheon of human beliefs. But this one is the one that *truly* confounds me. I found my *one* childhood to be annoying enough. Why would I want to go through two? Or three? Or more? Why would I want to be a beetle in another life? Or a cat? Or a paramecium? How annoying would *that* be?

What would be your ideal? And why would it be ideal? Honestly, it isn't as if I have a death wish, or something. I want to live as long as I can, but I don't see a point in living *forever*, that's what I'm saying. Many religions promise people this "eternal life", provided that the people stick to the dogmas the churches are selling; but I don't get why this is such a big deal. Why *would* somebody want to live forever? I just honestly can't concieve of why. Is it that the fear of death is so strong that we are willing to risk an eternity of ennui to avoid it? Or is there something else, some other point that I am missing entirely?

 

[wollery]

There's an interesting assumption in your question - you seem to assume that existence after death (ie in heaven) would be the same as existence on Earth. That we would have the same feelings and experience happiness, sorrow etc. Now whilst I'm not religious myself, if I understand the monotheistic religions correctly then heaven is a place where you would be eternally contented. My reading of that is that boredom would not be a problem.

 

[Scot C. Trypal]

I think I get from where you’re coming KAW143.

There’s something obscene about many afterlives, even the best ones. For example, wollery has a good point in that what religions see as pleasing us in the afterlife is different from what pleases us now. To some of the Christianity with which I’m familiar, we’d have no boredom, no sadness, no pain or fear… We would simply be joyous and content all the time, just by being; we couldn’t escape our bliss .

Here’s where some ideas of heaven start to look less like heaven and more like a crack house with no lows. You’re feeling pleasure, non-stop. I mean, imagine a perfect chemical drug that pleases to a greater extent than any other but has no negative side effects. If you could, would you take it for the rest of your existence? You could feel pleasures you’ve never imagined before, for as long as you exist… To me, even though future-me might be in bliss and completely satisfied with life, that’s a repulsive scenario to today-me and I’d not choose it.

Admittedly the idea of not being is reflexively discomforting for me, but there is something nice about a finite life.

When, for example, I think of the existence I want to have, it goes something like: have parents who love me, have a great childhood, have enough adversity to learn by and make the highs all the more sweet, find a partner, fall in love, have children, raise and love your children, have a productive career, grow old with your spouse as your kids make lives of their own, watch them become adults and parents, then finally let nature take you out with a peaceful stroke at the age of 102 . I’m just over half way done with that list, and along the way there have been some amazing moments. An eternity to go, for this one ego, seems to threaten those moments in a way.

Even if I could have a pleasant yet adequately challenging eternity, I’d not want, for example, the day I became a parent or the day I got “hitched” to be nothing in the infinite reach of my existence. There is something nice about my life being, at its end, a finished static work, and not one eternal work in progress; certainly not something that snows my past under an infinite future.

 

[severin]

One thing (among many) that has always bothered me about the Christian concept of heaven is this: how can it be perfect bliss if people you love are not there? If you are a good little believer and go to sit on your eternal cloud but your loved ones did not believe and so are sent to the Bad Place, do you just forget about them?

Being a vampire is not such an attractive option - only going out at night would seriously curtail the ability to shop, especially here in the UK where we have nearly 18 hours of daylight in midsummer.

 

[roger]

An eternity to go, for this one ego, seems to threaten those moments in a way.

Death threatens them in a much more direct and final way.

 

[Scot C. Trypal]

Death threatens them in a much more direct and final way.

I can see your point. If I end, that memory goes with me.

From the perspective of cherishing the important moments in my life, it simply feels better for them to be part of a finite existence, like the best chapters of a book. They always happened, and nothing will change that, and when I’m gone the work is complete. The story of my life has a beginning and an ending and all those moments in-between are very important.

In this way death threatens those moments in the same way the last page of a book threatens the chapters that came before.

I don’t like the idea of those moments losing more and more significance as infinity piles up, and better days are added, and I keep changing; like a story that never ends, where each chapter will inevitably be overshadowed by another in an infinite text.

I know it’s more sentimentality than anything, but it’s one of the main things that bug me about eternity.

 

[Gregory]

One thing (among many) that has always bothered me about the Christian concept of heaven is this: how can it be perfect bliss if people you love are not there?

The theory, I assume, is that God's love is so complete that it overwhelms any trifling human attachments.

 

[KAW143]

I can see your point. If I end, that memory goes with me.

From the perspective of cherishing the important moments in my life, it simply feels better for them to be part of a finite existence, like the best chapters of a book. They always happened, and nothing will change that, and when I’m gone the work is complete. The story of my life has a beginning and an ending and all those moments in-between are very important.

In this way death threatens those moments in the same way the last page of a book threatens the chapters that came before.

I don’t like the idea of those moments losing more and more significance as infinity piles up, and better days are added, and I keep changing; like a story that never ends, where each chapter will inevitably be overshadowed by another in an infinite text.

I know it’s more sentimentality than anything, but it’s one of the main things that bug me about eternity.

Yes, this is very much to the point I was trying to make; though, I must admit that you have put it far more sussinctly that I could have. Were we to continue after death, what could be accomplished by doing so? If we go on to another plane of existence, one where whatever we are and whatever we care about is no longer valid, then what is the point? Wouldn't that qualify as a *new* life, independent of the earthly one and, therefore, somewhat superflurous should we stay "us"? If, however, in the "next" world, what we did here is still a concern to us, then, how maddening would it be to have no say whatsoever in the conversations about and the understandings of your life made by the persons left behind. Think about it: from their standpoint, your life is a static, finished work. Even worse, you aren't around to correct their assumptions or even to stop them from hijacking your life to support their own ends. How crazy must DaVinci be, by this point, having to deal with people presuming that the Mona Lisa is a self-portrait in drag, watching as his works deteriorate because he made poor choices in media, being used as a plot device in the Bruce Willis clunker "Hudson Hawk"?

Granted, eternal bliss with the ones whom you love does sound nice, but severin had a good point about the ones whom you love who would not be there. What happend to them? Do you remember them? Do you stop caring? If so, then, yet again, it doesn't sound like an "afterlife" so much as a Life: Part II. If not, then, it would probably be a bit difficult to achieve your bliss.

Frankly, if I am going to do something, I would want it to have some meaning; yet I cannot see where continuing to exist as Keith would be particularly advantageous in any setting. Again, I am not *opposed* to the idea; it just seems a rather empty notion.

 

[Polux]

I would take an afterlife, if my feelings as a believer (long time ago!) were right.
I assumed that I couldn't possibly figure out what heaven would be like, but I "knew" that I'd be eternally happy, no boredom, no suffering at all. How would that be possible? God, of course; He takes care of it. Trying to figure out life in heaven with this earthly little mind was simply ridiculous, you just had to wait to get there, and then enjoy forever.

Nowadays I consider ideas like these an insult to intelligence. What a silly fantasy. But if it was true, I'd take it!

 

[Riddick]

First of all, let's assume you go to heaven and not the alternative...hell.

In heaven, you'll find:
No pain or suffering
No broken bones
No dismemberment
No cancer
No death

Wollery nailed it pretty much saying that 'people are assuming life in heaven would be the same as on earth.' Life in heaven is going to be way different than we've experienced here.

The Bible tells us the following about heaven:

1st Corinthians 2:9 However, as it is written: "No eye has seen, no ear has heard, no mind has conceived what God has prepared for those who love him"

So aparently, there's some good eye candy waiting for us. Teleporting between planets, the whole shebang. Space has no boundries; it goes on forever, so there's something to keep you busy.

You'll get to meet everyone from JREF (if you haven't met them already). Remember, here on earth all of your friends die. All them, no exceptions. And that my friend, really sucks. I wouldn't wish for one of my friends to die. But with heaven, you get a chance to renew those friendships, for eternity.

I wouldn't want the people who dislike me to die. But, some of them probably will die a second death, and there'll be nothing I can do about it. I hope all JREF'ers who dislike me get to go to heaven. Space is pretty big, so you do not have to see me. I will, however, most likely be running an espresso bar, making latte's and cappucino's for everyone.

My mom has pictures of me when I was like two years old at her house. Sometimes I look at those pictures of the kid (me) and I think "That kid has to die." Then I get really pissed off at that thought. The thought of that kid in the picture dying just pisses me off. Then, I remind myself that someone will pay for that one day. Satan will pay for it one day.

I'm definately planning on being in heaven.

 

[sorgoth]

To use someone else's example, to me, that just sounds liked an intinite drug high, without the ability to end it.

Now, not that I wouldn't want to live for a very, very long time, but not forever . Many people that I argue with don't grasp the signifigance of this, the immense difference between a few billion years (How long I'd like to live, as long as I could kill myself in case of emergency) and eternity.

The way I see it, eternity is either a drugged up forever, or you do everything that is possible to do a googleplex times until you go insane and hate everything. Well, what if you don't go insane? Then your fundamental psychology has been altered greatly, and it's not 'you' that goes to heaven anyway.

 

[cbish]

Riddick wrote:

First of all, let's assume you go to heaven and not the alternative...hell.

In heaven, you'll find:
No pain or suffering
No broken bones
No dismemberment
No cancer
No death

Yeah and according to most fundies lets add; no booze, no sex, no fun........

......send me to hell!

 

[Ratman_tf]

I'm definately planning on being in heaven.

Just make sure you've got the right afterlife. Would suck to be put in Shoobagawagoo hell just because you didn't believe in Shoobagawagoo.