Glorified body

[Fenris]

Asimov might like that

I miss that guy.

[Cloudwalker]

Asimov might like that

I miss that guy.

At least a good number of his books are still around.   I just checked and my ebook reader has 169 of his books on it.thought

[Aijalon]

That's... confusing.

Asimov might like that

Only if he was willing to consider the One who spoke light into existence.

[Athanasius]

That's... confusing.

Asimov might like that

Only if he was willing to consider the One who spoke light into existence.

Or you've proposed an idea worthy of Asimov. I don't think that's a bad thing. I think as theological speculation it's a bit out there, but we've all got out "our there" speculation.

[Fenris]

Only if he was willing to consider the One who spoke light into existence.

He educated and entertained millions of people, and left the world a better place for him having been in it. So he didn't believe in God. Not a big deal to me.

[Fenris]

I'm fond of this quote by Moses Mendelssohn

"Suppose there were living among my contemporaries a Confucius or a Solon, I could, according to the principles of my faith, love and admire the great man without falling into the ridiculous idea that I must convert a Solon or a Confucius."

Someone doesn't have to think or believe as I do in order to bring value to the world.

[Athanasius]

The other fact of the matter, is that no one knows another's standing before God short of the extremes. Asimov would believe in a God of deeds rather than one of words, should he think God exists. Seems like that's between Asimov and God. Is Asimov worse-off before God than the professing self-identifying Christian who recites all the creeds but doesn't live them?

There are plenty of Christians who profess a 'God' I don't recognise. So what then?

[Fenris]

The other fact of the matter, is that no one knows another's standing before God short of the extremes.

And not even then. There were (Catholic) churches in Spain that were saying mass for Hitler's soul (!!) well into the 1980s. So those churches felt that Hitler should also have good standing with God. For whatever reason.

Asimov would believe in a God of deeds rather than one of words, should he think God exists.

Or perhaps God as s scientist. Which has appeal to me also.

Seems like that's between Asimov and God. Is Asimov worse-off before God than the professing self-identifying Christian who recites all the creeds but doesn't live them?

Or the so self identifying men of God who carried out the Crusades, the Inquisition, etc.

There are plenty of Christians who profess a 'God' I don't recognise. So what then?

This is a good question.

[Athanasius]

And not even then. There were (Catholic) churches in Spain that were saying mass for Hitler's soul (!!) well into the 1980s. So those churches felt that Hitler should also have good standing with God. For whatever reason.

You'd think God would have been able to figure out what to do with Hitler well before the 1980s. Huh.

Or perhaps God is a scientist. Which has appeal to me also.

I find the notion quite agreeable.

This is a good question.

Isn't it just.

[Ta-An]

. God is fair and just and we leave that to Him.

Thank you Fenris. I think this answer has given me the peace to all the question I had.

[Fenris]

Thank you Fenris. I think this answer has given me the peace to all the question I had.

May the Almighty console you, and may Brent's memory be a blessing for you always.

[ProDeo]

Given in Genesis 1 + 2 we're told that humans are a synthesis of the physical and spiritual, I've often thought about the notion of intermediate states, i.e., if a body without a spirit is dead, is the same true of a spirit without a body? We like to think of the spirit as enlivening, but in the case of a human person that's still only part of the ontic equation. Which does mean that I understand the "glorified body" Paul speaks of, as continuing to be a synthesis of the physical and the spiritual. We do not, as the Gnostics pine for, dispense with our physicality. We are in part physical creatures. Our eternity exists in a new creation on a new earth, not in some ethereal realm.

So probably I think that from the perspective of the person who has passed away, everyone passes away at the same time; you die and suddenly it's the end, and everyone else is there with you. Of course, there's also Revelation 5 - 7 that would speak to/against such a notion. And it's probably a bit too SDA / White leaning. But all of that to say -- I have no idea. Probably I agree with Wright on the matter of death in the meantime. As for Luke 16, what if a parable is just that?

Mind you, I do have a bit of a vested interest in what kind of glorified body I end up with. I suppose most people do.

Luk 23:43 And he said to him, “Truly, I say to you, today you will be with me in Paradise.”

Said a few hours before His death on the cross.

[Athanasius]

Given in Genesis 1 + 2 we're told that humans are a synthesis of the physical and spiritual, I've often thought about the notion of intermediate states, i.e., if a body without a spirit is dead, is the same true of a spirit without a body? We like to think of the spirit as enlivening, but in the case of a human person that's still only part of the ontic equation. Which does mean that I understand the "glorified body" Paul speaks of, as continuing to be a synthesis of the physical and the spiritual. We do not, as the Gnostics pine for, dispense with our physicality. We are in part physical creatures. Our eternity exists in a new creation on a new earth, not in some ethereal realm.

So probably I think that from the perspective of the person who has passed away, everyone passes away at the same time; you die and suddenly it's the end, and everyone else is there with you. Of course, there's also Revelation 5 - 7 that would speak to/against such a notion. And it's probably a bit too SDA / White leaning. But all of that to say -- I have no idea. Probably I agree with Wright on the matter of death in the meantime. As for Luke 16, what if a parable is just that?

Mind you, I do have a bit of a vested interest in what kind of glorified body I end up with. I suppose most people do.

Luk 23:43 And he said to him, “Truly, I say to you, today you will be with me in Paradise.”

Said a few hours before His death on the cross.

Yeah, but who is the "you" if the body has not been resurrected + glorified? Is the "spirit" of a person what wholly constitutes the "you"? How can he be himself if he himself is not the whole of himself, as in, what is the role of the body if "you" is exhaustively only the spirit? Why glorified bodies at all if we can ascend as states of consciousness or be pure energy beings I mean spirits or something like that?

[ProDeo]

Given in Genesis 1 + 2 we're told that humans are a synthesis of the physical and spiritual, I've often thought about the notion of intermediate states, i.e., if a body without a spirit is dead, is the same true of a spirit without a body? We like to think of the spirit as enlivening, but in the case of a human person that's still only part of the ontic equation. Which does mean that I understand the "glorified body" Paul speaks of, as continuing to be a synthesis of the physical and the spiritual. We do not, as the Gnostics pine for, dispense with our physicality. We are in part physical creatures. Our eternity exists in a new creation on a new earth, not in some ethereal realm.

So probably I think that from the perspective of the person who has passed away, everyone passes away at the same time; you die and suddenly it's the end, and everyone else is there with you. Of course, there's also Revelation 5 - 7 that would speak to/against such a notion. And it's probably a bit too SDA / White leaning. But all of that to say -- I have no idea. Probably I agree with Wright on the matter of death in the meantime. As for Luke 16, what if a parable is just that?

Mind you, I do have a bit of a vested interest in what kind of glorified body I end up with. I suppose most people do.

Luk 23:43 And he said to him, “Truly, I say to you, today you will be with me in Paradise.”

Said a few hours before His death on the cross.

Yeah, but who is the "you" if the body has not been resurrected + glorified? Is the "spirit" of a person what wholly constitutes the "you"? How can he be himself if he himself is not the whole of himself, as in, what is the role of the body if "you" is exhaustively only the spirit? Why glorified bodies at all if we can ascend as states of consciousness or be pure energy beings I mean spirits or something like that?

Oh, you have questions, me too if I get dementia (it's in the family) will I still know who I am in my glorified body? Do I even forget who Jesus is in my wiped out personality? Will I remember my loved ones? Does Paul comes after me telling me -> what you wrote in that forum about me was false? Will humor still exist? What will be my new name per Rev 2:17?

We actually know very little about afterlife.

[Athanasius]

Given in Genesis 1 + 2 we're told that humans are a synthesis of the physical and spiritual, I've often thought about the notion of intermediate states, i.e., if a body without a spirit is dead, is the same true of a spirit without a body? We like to think of the spirit as enlivening, but in the case of a human person that's still only part of the ontic equation. Which does mean that I understand the "glorified body" Paul speaks of, as continuing to be a synthesis of the physical and the spiritual. We do not, as the Gnostics pine for, dispense with our physicality. We are in part physical creatures. Our eternity exists in a new creation on a new earth, not in some ethereal realm.

So probably I think that from the perspective of the person who has passed away, everyone passes away at the same time; you die and suddenly it's the end, and everyone else is there with you. Of course, there's also Revelation 5 - 7 that would speak to/against such a notion. And it's probably a bit too SDA / White leaning. But all of that to say -- I have no idea. Probably I agree with Wright on the matter of death in the meantime. As for Luke 16, what if a parable is just that?

Mind you, I do have a bit of a vested interest in what kind of glorified body I end up with. I suppose most people do.

Luk 23:43 And he said to him, “Truly, I say to you, today you will be with me in Paradise.”

Said a few hours before His death on the cross.

Yeah, but who is the "you" if the body has not been resurrected + glorified? Is the "spirit" of a person what wholly constitutes the "you"? How can he be himself if he himself is not the whole of himself, as in, what is the role of the body if "you" is exhaustively only the spirit? Why glorified bodies at all if we can ascend as states of consciousness or be pure energy beings I mean spirits or something like that?

Oh, you have questions, me too if I get dementia (it's in the family) will I still know who I am in my glorified body? Do I even forget who Jesus is in my wiped out personality? Will I remember my loved ones? Does Paul comes after me telling me -> what you wrote in that forum about me was false? Will humor still exist? What will be my new name per Rev 2:17?

We actually know very little about afterlife.

Yes yes, many questions.

I experienced a traumatic brain injury when I was ~2. The doctors said this might cause my personality to change, so over the years I have wondered -- am I the same person I was, who experienced the traumatic brain injury? Or, did that personality die and we're left with a me that is more shy, reserved, risk averse, and near-violent if anyone touches my head? Am I who I was, or did a version of me die that day? What does "change in personality" mean a change to rather than a change of?

And like you say, what exactly does glorification entail? What does it mean for me to be most fully me post-glorification? What actual body do I spend eternity with? Is that me so different from me today that it might as well be a different person? Or is it akin to the personal development I've undergone over the last ~decade, where I'm "more me" not "other than me"?

I think dementia is personality death, and that's as solid a death as any. I think post-glorification, you do remember everything. I don't think such people are held accountable for what "they" do once the disease has sufficiently progressed because "they" aren't there anymore. So I hope that personality doesn't get "wiped out". I hope that it's like what I experienced -- the most me, rather than other than me. Because if not that, then who is Jesus actually dying for? What is the actual power of the cross if at the end of the day the personality doesn't survive? You get someone else living in your body, and glorification is really out with the old, in with the new.

I think Jesus shows up and smacks me. But I already know He hugs me. I got to see the future to endure the present.

Of course, humour will exist. Just like when I see that white stone, I'm going to bust out laughing when I read:

Regina Gladiorum, Gloria Personificata, Virtus Incarnata.
Maiestas Aeterna, Lux Fulgida Imperii Solis.
Regnatrix Invicta, Victrix Formae, Anima Divina.