Woody Allen HOW I WANT TO LIVE MY LIFE “In my next life I want to live my life backwards. You start out dead and get that out of the way. Then you wake up in an old people's home feeling better every day. You get kicked out for being too healthy, go collect your pension, and then when you start work, you get a gold watch and a party on your first day. You work for 40 years until you're young enough to enjoy your retirement. You party, drink alcohol, and are generally promiscuous, then you are ready for high school. You then go to primary school, you become a kid, you play. You have no responsibilities, you become a baby until you are born. And then you spend your last 9 months floating in luxurious spa-like conditions with central heating and room service on tap, larger quarters every day and then Voila! You finish off as an orgasm!”

Lesson 10: Religious Views on Life after Death Do you have to be religious to believe in heaven and hell?

Bible searching…in pairs and then feedback Look up: Mark 13: 24 – 27 Luke 16: 19 – 31 Luke 20: 9-19 Luke 20: 27 – 40 Luke 23: 39 – 43 Revelation 7:1-17 Draw a table and outline what do each of these passages tell you about Christianity & Resurrection?

Resurrection: what it is From the Latin resurrectus (‘raised up again’). The promise of post-death existence in a re-created (i.e. perfect) human body (not disembodied soul). It is a monist theory, in that a physical body is required for redemption. Traditional ‘eschatological’ teaching of Christianity, Judaism and Islam: concerned with the end of time. The idea of resurrection can be derived from the Bible: Ezekiel 37: God shows Ezekiel a valley of dry bones and states that he is able to “make these live again”. Gospels: the resurrection of Jesus is attested in all four Gospels. 1 Corinthians 15: St Paul argues in favour of the body being “raised imperishable”. The part of theology concerned with death, judgment, and the final destiny of the soul and of humankind

Resurrection: arguments in favour Saint Paul argued in favour of resurrection on two grounds. Firstly, since Jesus was resurrected, so too should Christians hope to be resurrected. Secondly, since God has created many types of bodies in nature, we should believe that he is able to make human bodies perfect (1 Corinthians 15). If we accept that God is creator, then resurrection seems a coherent idea. Thomas Aquinas adopted Aristotle’s idea that the person has no truly independent soul, arguing that: “The natural condition of the human soul is to be united with a body.” We cannot make sense of ourselves without reference to our bodies. This avoids the weaknesses of mind/body dualism.

Based on Aristotle, AQUINAS : “The natural condition of a human soul is to be united with a body” No body = No self Thus: resurrection of the body. SAINT PAUL: “If Christ is proclaimed as raised from the dead, how can some of you say there is no resurrection of the dead?” If Jesus was raised, Christians will be raised. God made everything, so he can make us renewed.

Peter van Inwagen (1942 - ) Whilst still believing that resurrection is possible, Peter van Inwagen came up with lots of different reasons why the aristotlean idea of bodily resurrection is incoherent. Read the article on ‘The Possibility of Resurrection’ and summarise his 3 main arguments in less than 50 words

Considering Resurrection Jews and Christians today have mixed feelings about resurrection. It is a traditional teaching, supported by the Bible. However, many find the idea of a disembodied soul immediately ascending to heaven to be more comforting. Some also wonder whether such a distinctive teaching can be supported in the modern world. Considering Resurrection ROWAN WILLIAMS: resurrection lies “on the frontier of any possible language”. It is a difficult, mystical idea, but a part of Christian faith. Williams may be right, but is it acceptable to maintain a belief in something which cannot adequately be described?

Resurrection: arguments against Christian arguments about creation or the resurrection of Jesus will not be persuasive to non-believers; they are based on Scripture alone. The idea of the physical body being re-made may seem strange or mythological. Is this really plausible in the 21st century? The body could be seen as the source of flaws and limitations: desire, disease, suffering, etc. We might be better off as non-material souls or spirits. There is no empirical evidence for resurrection. On that basis, supporters of the verification principle, such as A.J. Ayer, would reject it.

Resurrection: arguments for and against Which philosophers would support life after death? Which would refute it and why?

Immortality of the soul: what it is The belief that the soul is a distinct and immortal entity within the body (= dualism) which can survive the death of the body and ascend to the afterlife. Although it is not the traditional view of Christianity (which maintains the necessity of the body for ultimate redemption), it has been popular with philosophers in the west. The first major argument in favour of an immortal soul was given by the philosopher Plato. In his dialogue Phaedo Plato sets the scene just before the death of his philosophical mentor Socrates, who decides to talk with his friends about death and the immortality of the soul…

Immortality of the soul: arguments in favour SOCRATES: Life cannot emerge from a dead thing. Something living must have given life to the body: “the soul is that which renders the body living”. The immortal soul enters the body at birth and leaves it at death. DESCARTES: A French mathematician and philosopher, I added my own arguments in favour of an immortal soul. I can prove that my thinking self exists (“I think therefore I am”), so what I am primarily is a “thinking thing” (res cogitans). Thus, basic knowledge of the self is independent of the body; the immortal soul is the source of conscious life.

Lets add in a few more: Disembodied Existence - Richard Swinburne Disembodied existence is the belief that we can survive without a body. Swinburne says that surviving outside the body is a logical concept - because we can imagine it, it is possible (I know, I know). He also says that our use of language points to body and soul being separate; we say 'I have a body', not 'I am a body’.

Yep – others have criticised him too! Brian Davies criticises Swinburne's view that just because we imagine something it is therefore possible. He calls disembodied existence an illogical concept

Others agree with Swinburne Swinburne draws a line between thoughts and actions, suggesting that consciousness can exist independently of the body. H. H. Price agrees with Swinburne, stating that the afterlife is like having a dream; it feels real to us and we have experiences, but we are not bound by time or space. Price suggests that the mental images of the afterlife are so strong that we don't even know we are dead.

This can be criticised… But dreams come from the brain - without the brain we have no mental processes or identity to fall back on This view is inconsistent with the some biblical references to resurrection What about those who do not - or cannot - dream? Is there no afterlife for them? Dreams are made up of experiences - so what if someone's life is made up of suffering? Does this mean that they will be haunted by their experiences even in the afterlife? Price kindly says that he never stated that the afterlife would be pleasant for everyone

Heaven

Hell