An afterlife would be terrifying for me

[Angrboda]

What's the difference supposed to be between being separated from god and the current state of my soul?  

Additionally, the noted content of truth with an asterisk seems awfully limited - and unlikely to mean anything about any other matter.

Knowledge of God. In our fallen state, we are ignorant of the true import of God's absence.

[Apollo]

Can you give some examples of such complex ideas of happiness in afterlife in Christianity? This is interesting.

It's a fascinating topic!

There are a lot of variations, of course. One thing you can count on with Christians is that they'll disagree with other Christians. 

It's probably simplest to start with Dante, whose descriptions are in nearly all cases (allowing for poetic license) standard Catholic views. 

For him, God is the form of the Good, as in Plato. The more people have access to the Good, the happier they are. In the material world, in life, our access to the Good is limited and divided. What goodness we perceive in the world is an emanation from God, and shows some tiny percentage of what goodness is. (If we can speak of a percentage of something infinite.) So moving toward what we perceive as good both makes us happy and also brings us nearer to God. In the material world, goodness is divided into different aspects, so we perceive different good things, but these have their source in the one Good, and in heaven are united into One. 

For many Neoplatonic Christians, like Eriugena (though perhaps not Dante) the Fall of Man didn't occur because of disobedience, but because our perceptions of the world shattered into division -- we lost the view of the One, which is the Good, which we will have in heaven.

We are likely to be mistaken in what we perceive as good while it is divided in this world, and this is where Dante follows the Nicomachean Ethics almost completely. When we love the good properly, we have good results. When our love is misguided, this is called sin. Sin is based on love for something which we think is good but isn't. 

Heaven is direct unimpeded access to the form of the Good. It is, like the Platonic forms themselves, outside of matter, outside of space and time. There is no change, playing around, having parties etc., which sounds boring to us because we can't conceive of being without time. Those things demand division, though, and a partial view of the Good which is incompatible with the full unity of the One.

I'm not saying that anyone should believe this. Only that the standard theological view of heaven in Christianity is not simply a pretty picture of an improved earthly life.

Interesting—thanks.

So the “happiness “ becomes more abstract in middle ages. I am guessing because mere worldly rewards were no longer inaccessible for many to yearn for material things but rather people with more fed bellies needed more intellectually stimulating ideas of reward system in afterlife.

So while ancient Egyptians worried about wealth and slaves and utensils in afterlife and packed them up with pharaohs, medieval people had more self-actuating ideas about afterlife and focused more on the “spirit” than carnal desires. This to me sounds like evolution in human conscious and abstract thinking.

[Belacqua]

So the “happiness “ becomes more abstract in middle ages.

Hmmm... I don't quite see where this would follow from what I said. Theology in the Middle Ages followed on directly from Greek philosophy. If happiness is presented as something abstract in the Divine Comedy then it's also abstract in Plato's Symposium. 

 I am guessing because mere worldly rewards were no longer inaccessible for many to yearn for material things but rather people with more fed bellies needed more intellectually stimulating ideas of reward system in afterlife. 

So while ancient Egyptians worried about wealth and slaves and utensils in afterlife and packed them up with pharaohs, medieval people had more self-actuating ideas about afterlife and focused more on the “spirit” than carnal desires.  This to me sounds like evolution in human conscious and abstract thinking.

Egyptian culture lasted a long time. Were people in the time of the pyramids particularly worried about material conditions -- more so than in Plato's Athens or Dante's Florence? Were those who were in material need the same ones who made up their theological rituals, or was this the role of an elite class? I'm not sure if the facts are in keeping with your explanation here. 

Were Egyptian burial rituals developed during a time of material hardship and then unchanged for millennia? Remember that the time between the building of the pyramids and Cleopatra's life is greater than the time between Cleopatra's life and now. There was "abstract" philosophy going on in Egypt -- did it have an affect on ideas of the afterlife?

Your explanation sounds like a just-so story to me -- too neat and too much in conformity with modern prejudices to be persuasive. I think you've started with a theory -- that ideas of the afterlife are fantasy extensions of what we want in this life -- but I'm not convinced yet that this is generally true. To be confident I think we'd have to do a lot more research.

The afterlife as depicted in Homer is horrible -- the opposite of a wish-fulfillment fantasy. The final goal of the afterlife in Indian and Buddhist philosophy is generally seen as the total extinction of the individual. So these, too, would work against your theory.

[Prycejosh1987]

Haven't posted on here a while so here it goes.

To be honest, the idea of existing forever and ever in either a heaven or a hell would be terrifying to me, because the thought of going on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on X∞ would I think be the worst thing ever, you would have no end, no nothing, even scarier thing to think if in hell. You would be just begging to end it just go back to sleep. I mean, considering this is the only existence I know, I believe that everything has a beginning and end. With eternal darkness/sleep, you wouldn't have feelings of any-sort, because you would be dead, no fear, no sadness, no nothing, you would be at peace.

I agree with you, but i acknowledge that it this life is full of problems and bad things. I do not enjoy being here, and to know that this life would go on forever in this state would be horrible to say the least. Heaven is much better than here, and hell is much worse.

[downbeatplumb]

Spiritual beings exist beyond physical death. Some do not want to be under God's moral authority, and he will accommodate their wishes. For them, he will withdraw his involvement so that they will become untethered from his influence. If that appeals to you, then eternal separation would be your preferred choice. That choice would mean one would not know what the truth* is on any matter.

*John 14:6  - I am the way, the truth, and the life.

You said that like its a thing rather than the unsupported speculation it is.

[Apollo]

So the “happiness “ becomes more abstract in middle ages.

Hmmm... I don't quite see where this would follow from what I said. Theology in the Middle Ages followed on directly from Greek philosophy. If happiness is presented as something abstract in the Divine Comedy then it's also abstract in Plato's Symposium. 

Sure. Makes sense.  My point was that a lot of ideas and knowledge are incremental built upon other cultural ideas. e.g. Plato did not come up with the notion of "afterlife" nor did Dante. They inherited it from their culture/previous generations and build upon it with respect to their appetite, which in their case was more philosophical and abstract.

 I am guessing because mere worldly rewards were no longer inaccessible for many to yearn for material things but rather people with more fed bellies needed more intellectually stimulating ideas of reward system in afterlife. 

So while ancient Egyptians worried about wealth and slaves and utensils in afterlife and packed them up with pharaohs, medieval people had more self-actuating ideas about afterlife and focused more on the “spirit” than carnal desires.  This to me sounds like evolution in human conscious and abstract thinking.

Egyptian culture lasted a long time. Were people in the time of the pyramids particularly worried about material conditions -- more so than in Plato's Athens or Dante's Florence? Were those who were in material need the same ones who made up their theological rituals, or was this the role of an elite class? I'm not sure if the facts are in keeping with your explanation here. 

Were Egyptian burial rituals developed during a time of material hardship and then unchanged for millennia? Remember that the time between the building of the pyramids and Cleopatra's life is greater than the time between Cleopatra's life and now. There was "abstract" philosophy going on in Egypt -- did it have an affect on ideas of the afterlife?

Your explanation sounds like a just-so story to me -- too neat and too much in conformity with modern prejudices to be persuasive. I think you've started with a theory -- that ideas of the afterlife are fantasy extensions of what we want in this life -- but I'm not convinced yet that this is generally true. To be confident I think we'd have to do a lot more research.

The afterlife as depicted in Homer is horrible -- the opposite of a wish-fulfillment fantasy. The final goal of the afterlife in Indian and Buddhist philosophy is generally seen as the total extinction of the individual. So these, too, would work against your theory.

Not necessarily.  Every culture has its own view of afterlife.  For Mohammad and his followers having abundant of sex in afterlife was of prime inspiration, for Buddha, something different deeper was important. So all these guys came up with different view of afterlife.  But core idea of afterlife itself is many millennia old and goes back to what archaeological digs show us believing that dead would rise and would have a life.  I think going back, say, 20,000 years, people's idea of afterlife was not that abstract and was more in line with their physical realities.  I think a lot change after writing was invented because knowledge could be stored and transmitted with more fidelity and that helped boost more abstract ideas to be transmitted.

(Again, this is inference. I have no way of getting into ancient Egyptian mindset as to why they preferred utensils and food to be buried with the dead instead of any alternative. But food and utensils point to very few logical possibilities).

[Belacqua]

this is inference. I have no way of getting into ancient Egyptian mindset

Yes.

[AniKoferBo]

(Again, this is inference. I have no way of getting into ancient Egyptian mindset as to why they preferred utensils and food to be buried with the dead instead of any alternative. But food and utensils point to very few logical possibilities).

 i am a new egyptian mindset here 

[Belacqua]

 i am a new egyptian mindset here 

Have you picked out the utensils for your pyramid yet? 

Don't forget your phone charger!

[snowtracks]

Spiritual beings exist beyond physical death. Some do not want to be under God's moral authority, and he will accommodate their wishes. For them, he will withdraw his involvement so that they will become untethered from his influence. If that appeals to you, then eternal separation would be your preferred choice. That choice would mean one would not know what the truth* is on any matter.

*John 14:6  - I am the way, the truth, and the life.

You said that like its a thing rather than the unsupported speculation it is.

 Eschatology is given to discern final destinies*; science has limited range.


* I am He who lives, and was dead, and behold, I am alive forevermore. Amen. And I have the keys of Hades and of Death. Rev 1:18