The idea of the resurrection of the body to me is weird.

[Physics Guy]

Two examples of a Hydrogen atom are not just as similar as two Lego bricks of the same size and colour. The two atoms are as identical as two examples of the same word.

How identical is that? The meaning of a word can vary with context; the precise meanings of even the first and second "be" in "To be or not to be", for example, are arguably slightly different in meaning. Normally when we say "be" we don't think right away of the alternative, so when Hamlet's second "be" explicitly poses the choice between being and not being, that's a thought that we didn't have when he spoke the first "be".

Even if Hamlet's first and second "be" have different shades of meaning, however, we can't change the soliloquy by switching them. From a printed script of the play I could take scissors and cut out the two words, and paste them back into the page in switched places, but this would not be a change in the text of the play. I can't claim to have written a new line for Hamlet by saying that in my version Shakespeare's first "be" comes second. Switching one "be" for another isn't a change; words aren't individual things in the way that would let that make sense. In this sense, every instance of the same word is identical. Switching two instances of the same word isn't just an undetectably slight change: it literally is not a change.

Atoms are like that as well. Atoms can be distorted and polarised by their surroundings in different ways, but switching two Hydrogens in a molecule isn't a change, any more than switching the two "be"s would be a change in the text of Hamlet. You could switch the two atoms, using some fancy chemistry and maybe optical tweezers, but it would be a fantastic exercise in nanotechnology whose result was exactly the same as that of doing nothing. Replacing a Hydrogen in a sugar in your tea with a Hydrogen taken from a distant interstellar cloud wouldn't be a change, either, any more than it would change Shakespeare's text to replace a "be" of his with a "be" from a banner ad on YouTube.

This strong, word-like sense in which atoms are identical isn't just my opinion, or an interpretation, or a hypothesis. It's an explicit feature of quantum field theory with strong implications that have been thoroughly tested. Atoms are to molecules—and therefore to cells, brains, and minds—as words are to texts. Which atom is which doesn't matter.

Quantum field theory does not discuss resurrection. Whether or not there is a God or an afterlife is no part of physics. If quantum field theory happened to be at a cocktail party where resurrection came up in conversation, however, quantum field theory would have to offer its professional opinion that the problem of gathering together again the original atoms that had composed someone's body would not be an issue.

Old pagan gods linger on in our minds, and we still think of "God" as a merely superhuman person. We should know now, though, that if there is a God, then this is a being who made far more entire galaxies than all the stars we can see, made our brains out of almost as many cells as there are stars in our galaxy, made cells out of huge molecules, and knew fourteen billion years ago not just what you would have for breakfast today but how every atom in every corn flake would twitch.

If such a God wants to bring your character back in a continuing story, you're alive again as much as you ever were. Who knows, maybe more.

[huckelberry]

I find I have an alternate idea in my mind as a possibility. At the moment I am thinking Physics Guy may have observed this possible theory but may not have liked it much.

I think it could be that there is a spirit dimension to ourselves but it is not a separate id with all of the problems of who, physically, controls who spirit. I think the real person is the living physical creature. Spirit would just be an image of that reality. It could continue to exist after death with the possibility of being the mold for that resurrection of the body, complete person. Perhaps this spirit has existence in the mind of God only. It might be conceived that there would be a spirit dimension that can exist separate from the physical reality. That separate would be grounded in the mind of God.

[drumdude]

I find I have an alternate idea in my mind as a possibility. At the moment I am thinking Physics Guy may have observed this possible theory but may not have liked it much.

I think it could be that there is a spirit dimension to ourselves but it is not a separate id with all of the problems of who, physically, controls who spirit. I think the real person is the living physical creature. Spirit would just be an image of that reality. It could continue to exist after death with the possibility of being the mold for that resurrection of the body, complete person. Perhaps this spirit has existence in the mind of God only. It might be conceived that there would be a spirit dimension that can exist separate from the physical reality. That separate would be grounded in the mind of God.

I really like this idea. To expand on it from my materialist perceptive:

In some sense you are more a pattern of being than a physical being. You’re like an old house constantly being renovated. The flooring comes out and carpet goes in. Is it the same house? The roof takes some hail damage and you strip it down for a metal one. It’s still a house, and it still follows the basic pattern of that specific house.

When you bulldoze the house you can build a completely different pattern. Old makes way for new. That’s the constant of billions of years of life on the planet.

I like being a part of that pattern, and the spiritual idea that I think is reasonable is that the pattern could spring back up in the future. Patterns could be eternal, and in some sense function as the “soul” in the traditional religious sense.

Though our bodies may die now and the pattern fail to repeat, there’s nothing that says it can’t pop back up in the future. Even if that future is trillions of years from now.

[huckelberry]

drumdude, thank you for adding your thoughts.

I wonder about the idea of soul having a tendancy to turn into thinking of some special additional part of a human being. I think soul makes more sense as the dimension of oneself with heart and capable of love.

I think an overemphasis on saving souls can ignore physical people and the real social reality we live in. I view that as covert gnostic heresy seeing salvation as receiving a special spiritual knowledge instead of being how with live with others.

Perhaps American evangelicalism is deeply corrupted by this gnostic heresy and its related versions of positive thinking and miraculous personal wealth. The cancer is bad.

[drumdude]

drumdude, thank you for adding your thoughts.

I wonder about the idea of soul having a tendancy to turn into thinking of some special additional part of a human being. I think soul makes more sense as the dimension of oneself with heart and capable of love.

I think an overemphasis on saving souls can ignore physical people and the real social reality we live in. I view that as covert gnostic heresy seeing salvation as receiving a special spiritual knowledge instead of being how with live with others.

Perhaps American evangelicalism is deeply corrupted by this gnostic heresy and its related versions of positive thinking, and miraculous personal wealth. The cancer is bad.

Jesus did seem to say that we will build a heaven on earth if we treat each other correctly. But then he also said give no thought for tomorrow. One of the many contradictory messages that muddle the Bible for me.

[huckelberry]

These questions remind me of the council of Chalcedon statement of Christ. It is a foundational statement for Christianity.

Copied from Wikipedia:

We all teach harmoniously [that he is] the same perfect in godhead, the same perfect in manhood, truly God and truly man, the same of a reasonable soul and body; homoousios with the Father in godhead, and the same homoousios with us in manhood ... acknowledged in two natures without confusion, without change, without division, without separation.[9]

When I first encountered this statement I found it oddly puzzling and fussy. Is this hair splitting? Yet how can Jesus be truly human? Is it not clear that people have difficulty not seeing him as a special, true Apollo or Zeus, a super human who looks like us but is not like us.

No I don't know exactly how it works but the idea of existing form in the mind of God might be a clue. I think it is necessary and fitting the Bible to see Jesus as genuinely a man like all of us. That means he learned like all people. He was very ignorant about a lot of stuff just like other people. He could be uncertain about the time and meaning of the kingdom of God. He could be wrong about timing. He could however have a special sense and openness to the heart of God and how God hopes for us.

Jesus had to live by faith just like us.

[I Have Questions]

drumdude, thank you for adding your thoughts.

I wonder about the idea of soul having a tendancy to turn into thinking of some special additional part of a human being. I think soul makes more sense as the dimension of oneself with heart and capable of love.

I think an overemphasis on saving souls can ignore physical people and the real social reality we live in. I view that as covert gnostic heresy seeing salvation as receiving a special spiritual knowledge instead of being how with live with others.

Perhaps American evangelicalism is deeply corrupted by this gnostic heresy and its related versions of positive thinking and miraculous personal wealth. The cancer is bad.

Jesus did seem to say that we will build a heaven on earth if we treat each other correctly. But then he also said give no thought for tomorrow. One of the many contradictory messages that muddle the Bible for me.

The Bible is muddled because it’s a collection of disparate writings from Iron Age bloggers who lived in different times, each with their own personal slant and agenda within what they were writing. They were each putting their own words into their interpretation of a deity’s mouth based on what they wanted that deity to say. These writings were only collated and presented as a consolidated volume long after the event, by yet another different set of people with their own, different agenda.

[huckelberry]

Drumdude, I think that Christianity is seriously hampered by the mistaken idea that the Bible is inerrant. In so many ways that can be seen as clear that it is something other than inerrant. (A record of people struggling to understand the inspiration of God.) Some of Jesus' comments about the kingdom are a bit muddled. He was struggling to understand.

I am probably pursuing this idea trying to recover. I wasted too much time recently watching You tube discussion with former fundamentalist arguing against God or fundamentalists arguing with atheists or fundamentalist attacking whoever is not a fundamentalist. I feel like brain cells were injured in the process (hopefully not destroyed).

[huckelberry]

I find I have an alternate idea in my mind as a possibility. At the moment I am thinking Physics Guy may have observed this possible theory but may not have liked it much.

I think it could be that there is a spirit dimension to ourselves but it is not a separate id with all of the problems of who, physical, controls who spirit. I think the real person is the living physical creature. Spirit would just be an image of that reality. It could continue to exist after death with the possibility of being the mold for that resurrection of the body, complete person. Perhaps this spirit has existence in the mind of God only. It might be conceived that there would be a spirit dimension that can exist separate from the physical reality. That separate would be grounded in the mind of God.

I really like this idea. To expand on it from my materialist perceptive:

In some sense you are more a pattern of being than a physical being. You’re like an old house constantly being renovated. The flooring comes out and carpet goes in. Is it the same house? The roof takes some hail damage and you strip it down for a metal one. It’s still a house, and it still follows the basic pattern of that specific house.

When you bulldoze the house you can build a completely different pattern. Old makes way for new. That’s the constant of billions of years of life on the planet.

I like being a part of that pattern, and the spiritual idea that I think is reasonable is that the pattern could spring back up in the future. Patterns could be eternal, and in some sense function as the “soul” in the traditional religious sense.

Though our bodies may die now and the pattern fail to repeat, there’s nothing that says it can’t pop back up in the future. Even if that future is trillions of years from now.

Drumdude, I like your idea that the patterns of individuals which could be called souls could have effects very wide in the future. I feel cautious about speculating to specifics. I run quickly into, I do not really know. Yet if our soul pattern exists in God's mind or also in a spirit dimension in God's mind then we may have effects upon each other in a wider net. ..... see I should be cautious.