HEAVENLY DECEPTIONS Is it good to believe that we will remain alive after death?
PREFACE
The doctrine of life after death is very popular and there is very little
agreement on what this life will be like. Many ask if God will keep us alive
after we die. We will test the doctrine of the afterlife to see if it is as
really beneficial as most people have been tricked into believing.
It is obvious that any theory that says we will be alive
for all eternity and our lives on earth no matter how long are nothing at all -
not even a speck - in comparison should lead to disparaging and not caring about
earth life. If it does not, then how deeply do believers believe?
How much do they think it is more important to be alive forever than to have a
reasonable standard of life forever? Obviously the living matters more
than the quality for you have to live to have the chance to enjoy it.
We will pay little heed to the doctrine that the soul is immortal for it could
be that though the soul can survive death, there might be other forces that
makes sure this doesn't happen.
The need for life after death is not based on virtue. People should reason like
sensible and kind atheists do. They reason thus, "I cannot avoid death.
Therefore when death comes, I accept it knowing that I am going so that I can
make room for another person. If we all lived forever on earth there would soon
be no room and life would be hell."
The general outlook of the New Testament is captured in a line given by St Paul
which says that sufferings on earth are nothing at all compared to the glory
that will come. That is an evil statement. The truly good person sees suffering
as an abomination and any good future is not a consideration. It is not right to
use a good future - especially one that may not be real such as Heaven, to try
and trivialise suffering. If there is a problem of evil, Christianity adds to
the problem and is an evil religion with a smile on its face.
GOD DOES NOT IMPLY AFTERLIFE
The notion that if you believe God exists and loves you then you will not cease
to exist at death but will somehow live on possibly forever is popular. But it
does not follow that God will stop us going out of existence at death. People
want to think injustices will be made up to us in the afterlife but that cannot
be done and it makes evil people feel better. The injustice still happened. God
has mysterious plans and purposes and he might intend for us to cease to exist
at death.
Religion has always sought to make God and the afterlife inseparable. This
served the purpose of making out that you are person with dangerous views if you
think people go out of existence at death.
NO MORAL REASONS FOR AFTERLIFE BELIEF
To believe that death is the complete destruction of the mind and body of what
is more valuable than money or happiness, a human person, is to find a reason
for condemning murder. Even if we will return to life, it is still the
destruction of what is valuable. But could it really be evil to put a diamond
out of existence for a while and then bring it back into existence again? No.
So, it must be the same if this is done to a person. If we simply go to another
place at death then murder is not wrong and the grief left behind would be the
fault of the bereaved.
The killer who sends us to God or Heaven would be doing us a favour. And we must
be ready for God and Heaven when we go to them. No divine purpose is thwarted
for if we are not ready then it is God's will for he takes ultimate
responsibility for all that happens for being the all-powerful creator he has
to. God has the power to take care of his plans. Even if we have free will, our
choices proceed from our thoughts and feelings which can be manipulated without
detriment to our freedom for thoughts and feelings are not free will. They only
address it and guide its direction. So if a man kills it is because God wills
it. Murder would only be a sin for one who did not intend the killing to be done
for God. It is fanaticism to approve of human beings being prone to death and
you have to approve if you want to believe in God. You have to agree that life
after death makes murder less evil than it would be if we did not live on and
that is sinister.
The attitude, “Our troubles are nothing at all no matter how big they seem when
we have all eternity to be happy” is a popular religious piece of
sentimentalism. It is a religious doctrine. It is a dangerous way of thinking
despite being comforting. It will lead to at least some apathy for your personal
suffering and especially that of others. It can't give you comfort without
trying to give you apathy. And the attitude/doctrine is a natural and
unavoidable consequence of the doctrine of a happy afterlife. Ignore those who
try to persuade you that the attitude is innocuous. They will try to do that
with statistics that allegedly prove that believers in the unchangeably happy
hereafter are mentally and spiritually better than unbelievers down here below.
Even if they are right the fact remains unchanged that the people supposedly
helped by their faith are helped in spite of their belief. Perhaps the
statisticians are able to boost the statistics by rationalizing the failures.
Anyway, only greater suffering can come from the promotion of and adherence to
the attitude/doctrine mainly in the long-term.
Some prefer to deny the afterlife is about perfect happiness. They say you just
have to grin and bear it there like you do in the present life. If the afterlife
will have its ups and downs the dangers of the doctrine of a happy afterlife is
avoided. Another danger that is avoided is the approval for murder implied by
the concept of a blissful afterlife. The danger is also avoided if you drop the
idea of divine beings or super-scientific beings that care for us and have a
purpose for our deaths.
And how are we supposed to believe the doctrine makes people better when the
majority of people claim allegiance to religious beliefs when we know that
religion is manipulative and bad? Would the picture be much different if they
did not?
The doctrine that everlasting happiness lies beyond the grave certainly makes
that life more important than this one and makes normal people feel the pain of
being stuck here on earth while Heaven has all these everlasting goodies.
If the next life will be better than this one that would entitle you to neglect
people who are not important in your daily life on earth now? You could argue
that you may as well enjoy yourself now at their expense for they will be fine
in the end. This makes sense if suffering is only an insignificant blip as
Christianity tries to make out.
Some would say that you would expect it to imply that you could devote yourself
to them at your own expense because there are so many goodies waiting for you in
the hereafter and so you will only have to endure the inconvenience for a while
and then it is permanent relief. But since you would rather look after yourself
and gratify your affections, you can neglect the other people for you come first
for all the loving you do is about fulfilling yourself. You are surer you exist
than anybody else so the only compromise would be to just help those who are
useful to you. The doctrine of bliss beyond the grave is a bad influence.
If the next life will not be much better then it seems you should do all you can
to help others be as happy as possible now. But is this right? Why not focus on
yourself now and put off the helping others till later? Plus leaving others
without help ensures that they will get tougher and will struggle better to help
themselves in the rest of this life and in the next. It is not wrong to neglect
their lives in this world when the next world will be no better. We know that
life ends in suffering and loss and death but that doesn't stop us trying to
help people now. Why should it if they live on after death? It is more natural
to help people. You cannot just ignore people because life is cruel. If you
ignore others, they will ignore you. It is unnatural to do nothing at all for
others.
It is certain that it is better to hold that the next life will be imperfect for
that is a bit more encouraging to do good works for others than is the view that
the next life is perfect.
When you deny the next life, you will find it is more encouraging to help people
now for we are more sure people exist and that they need help than we are that
the next life exists. Then the tendency towards good is maximised. We know we
have to deny some of our inclinations in order to gain acceptance of the trials
of life so that we can bear them better because this life is all there is and we
have to make the best of it. We have to help others even if we would rather not.
Not helping people does us no good.
We must never teach that this life is nothing and the next life is more
important. Making the next life more important is what happens when we see it in
terms of everlasting happiness. We must not teach that we came here for some
sensible purpose for that implies that suffering is necessary. Acceptance of a
life after death should give us courage to do good better and if it does not
there is little use in believing in it and there is no point in believing in it.
Recognise that it is not how long you live that is important but how much you
enjoy the time you have got and we dedicate ourselves to help you to do that. If
you fear death you are not grateful enough for the time you have here and for
being born. Your gratitude should be able to handle the fear and neutralise it.
If you were content with life on earth and with helping other people you would
not be even looking for evidence for an afterlife. Looking demonstrates a
selfishness that is certainly unbalanced. How can apparitions and near-death
experiences prove life after death when they proceed to defend a harmful
doctrine?
To believe that you should endure terrible inconvenience and suffering to help
others while thinking you will have a superb life after death because of it is
fanaticism for this life, the life that you are most sure of, comes first. You
are not as sure that you will live on as you are that you are alive now.
It would be selfish to say prayers and do good for the sake of an afterlife. It
would be selfish to spend years writing the laws down that you are going to make
when you become Emperor of the world for that is not likely to happen or you
can't be sure enough it will happen. So it is with the alleged afterlife.
CONCLUSION
People are trained to take comfort in the idea of God who will keep them alive
after death but this is a false hope for even if God existed why think that he
would do that? There is no reason to think we can live on. However it is still
possible that we survive death. We have no reason however to think that we do
and to really care for our lives in this world we have to abandon the concept.
The doctrine certainly tells us that murder is not really murder. It is
luck that people don't take it seriously enough to do harm with it though they
think they do. It is not the doctrine. It is luck. It is the
people. The doctrine remains appalling and some do kill or let others die.
Mormonism used to murder certain sinners in the belief that if they spilled
their blood they would atone their sin and go to Heaven. Gary Gilmore is a
well-known instance. Christian Science lets sick people die without a
doctor for it thinks death is not real. The Bible says God praised Abraham
for being ready to kill his young son Isaac. God asked him to.
Hebrews says that this was because he believed God who promised to make a nation
of the grown-up Isaac. To kill him meant that for God to keep his promise
he would have to revive him back to life. So the New Testament is
admitting that belief in an afterlife can lead to murder.
BOOKS CONSULTED
AFTER DEATH – WHAT? Fred Pearce, Christadelphian Publishing Office, Birmingham
ETERNAL LIFE, Hans Kung, Collins, London, 1984
GOD AND THE NEW PHYSICS, Paul Davies, Penguin Books, London, 1990
HANDBOOK OF CHRISTIAN APOLOGETICS, Peter Kreeft and Ronald Tacelli, Monarch,
East Sussex, 1995
JEHOVAH OF THE WATCHTOWER, Walter Martin and Norman Klann, Bethany House
Publishers, Minnesota, 1974
IS THERE LIFE AFTER DEATH? Paul Kroll, Worldwide Church of God, Pasadena,
California, 1988
MIND OUT OF TIME, Ian Wilson, Gollanez, London, 1981
LIFE AFTER DEATH THE WONDERFUL FACTS, Alan Hayward, Christadelphian, ALS,
Birmingham
REASONS FOR HOPE, Ed Jeffrey A Mirus, Christendom College Press, Virginia, 1982
TEACH YOURSELF PHILOSOPHY OF MIND, Mel Thompson, Teach Yourself Books, London,
2003
THE AFTER DEATH EXPERIENCE, Ian Wilson, Corgi, London, 1987
THE DEVIL HIDES OUT, David Marshall, Autumn House, Grantham, 1991
THE LIFE OF ALL LIVING, Fulton J Sheen, Image Books, New York, 1979
THE INCREDIBLE CREED OF JEHOVAH WITNESSES, Frs Rumble & Carty, TAN, Illinois,
1977
WHATEVER HAPPENED TO HEAVEN? Dave Hunt, Harvest House, Publishers, Oregon, 1988
The Web
www.csicop.org/sb/9803/reincarnation.html
Case of Reincarnation Re-examined by Joe Nickell. This refutes the reincarnation
claims of Jenny Cockell.
BIBLE QUOTATIONS FROM:
The Amplified Bible
