[extropy-chat] What the catholic bible says about immortality research- was TransColloquium Meeting: Dealing with New Pope'sCampaign

[The Avantguardian]

--- Zero Powers <zero.powers at gmail.com> wrote:
> Don't even bother.  You're sure to get hit with
> Hebrews 9:27 ("...it
> is appointed unto men once to die, but after this
> the judgment").  As
> you know, the Christian mindset is all about
> professing "eternal
> life."  But what they're really talking about is an
> immaterial
> eternity *after* death.
> 
> Personally, that's not at all what I have in mind.
> Zero

It's not what I have in mind either, Zero. I am merely
pointing out that the xtian doctrine has multiple
precedents for the concept of super-longevity. In
response to Hebrews 9:27 I say this. If I am appointed
to die and be judged then why not let it be 10,000
years from now? God is eternal and surely cannot be in
any hurry. If you are going to argue with brain-washed
people, you had best do it within the context of their
limited meme-set else they will not even acknowledge
anything you say. It is hardly news that there are
enough contradictory statements in the bible to make a
case for just about anything-including death being
somehow part of God's divine plan. But with a bit of
wit and persistence, you can deflect their criticism
and subvert their dogma to your cause. 
     This should force xtians to do one of three
things, either pretend you don't exist, open their
minds to what you are saying, or suffer a mental
meltdown from the contradictions inherent in their
paradigm. This has been done many times and each time
it has caused a splinter sect of xtianity to form.
>From Martin Luther to John Smith, reinterpretation of
the bible has always been a source of change and
progress for xtianity.
    In light of this look at Genesis 3:24 for example:

"24  So he drove out the man; and he placed at the
east of the garden of Eden Cherubims, and a flaming
sword which turned every way, to keep the way of the
tree of life."

Note that God did not uproot or destroy the tree of
life. He merely put angels there to keep us away from
it. The insinuation here is that it if we proved
ourselves worthy, then someday we would be allowed to
once again eat of its fruit. Otherwise why keep it
around? Surely God doesn't need to eat nor do the
angels as far as I know. Therefore a temporary
suspension of our immortality privelages seems to be
the only logical explanation.
Look at these verses from Genesis chapter 5:

5  And all the days that Adam lived were nine hundred
and thirty years: and he died.	  
 8  And all the days of Seth were nine hundred and
twelve years: and he died. 
11  And all the days of Enos were nine hundred and
five years: and he died. 
14  And all the days of Cainan were nine hundred and
ten years: and he died. 
17  And all the days of Mahalaleel were eight hundred
ninety and five years: and he died. 
20  And all the days of Jared were nine hundred sixty
and two years: and he died.
27 And all the days of Methuselah were nine hundred
sixty and nine years: and he died.

It all sure sounds like super-longevity to me. Not
some insubtantial immaterial after-life but real
bonafide walking around, eating, and procreating
here-and-now life. To top it all off, these guys lived
right after Man's fall from grace, so, if anything,
these guys should have LESS reason to be so blessed
with longevity than we do, since Jesus had not yet
been sacrificed to atone for their sins.



The Avantguardian 
is 
Stuart LaForge
alt email: stuart"AT"ucla.edu

"The surest sign of intelligent life in the universe is that they haven't attempted to contact us." 
-Bill Watterson

__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Tired of spam?  Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around 
http://mail.yahoo.com