Peregrine Posted March 8, 2004 Share Posted March 8, 2004 Both of you are extremely off topic. IIRC this debate is about the comparison ad contrast of immortality versus eternal life; now you're taking it to another level that involves philosophies that are much more complicated than the two topics originally discussed. Good and Evil have nothing to do with immortality or eternal life yet they've managed to work themselves into the debate. My point exactly, as I've been trying to say... All the things he's bringing up are talking about something completely different from immortality alone. But in trying to prove the connection wrong, I have to discuss some off topic things. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
thanateros Posted March 8, 2004 Share Posted March 8, 2004 Death is a corruption in the body whereas it ceases to function. Thus, the proper working order of the normal bodily functions becomes irreversibly flawed. Ok back to the subject at hand. Death is not the result of corruption of the body, simply it is the result of the anatomical deterioration of the organs whereby they cease to function and be able to support themselves through the transference of nutrients and proteins that are required. Cells, too go through this deterioration process, the cell membranes break down and the organelles within the cell die. To clarify (without getting off topic), corruption by definition involves external influences to lead to the corruption of a human being (through whatever means). I'm not sure what you mean when you say the proper working order of the normal bodily functions becomes irreversibly flawed.Would you mind clarifying your point before I mistakingly argue against something I don't completely comprehend? Are you saying that corruption causes the body to become anatomically flawed and sent on the path to a hasty death? If so how does the body go through such a transition? How do the cells know to kill themselves when a neurotransmitter of corruption is sent to them? I'll wait for a response before I ask more questions (and I have about a truckload right now) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Malchik Posted March 8, 2004 Share Posted March 8, 2004 Kahenraz, I think you have moved the goal posts since your original post but perhaps by accident. We are not discussing anything but immortality/eternal life. You conclude some way above that an immortal being must be a perfect being. I do not understand what makes you believe that. If you mean physically perfect, why should it be? It may be ill and decrepit if it began like that and still be immortal. If you mean mentally perfect, again, why? It could be as mad as a hatter and still be immortal. I cannot follow your reasoning here. Put aside at the moment your difficulties in communicating with Peregrine and take me there step by step! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Darnoc Posted March 9, 2004 Share Posted March 9, 2004 Back again :) Well, here are my thoughts on the subject. Immortality means that you won't die physically. You will stay in your physical body for all times. If you are immortal, you can also age or get sick but you won't die. Never. Immortality doesn't include having a spirit or a soul, but only an indestructable physical body. Eternal live is something very different. The term comes from religion and it doesn't apply to physical life but to spiritual life. Being in possession of an eternal life doesn't mean that you will not die physically. It means that you have an eternal spirit which will live in even when your physical body has died. In the concept of eternal life, your physical body is only a shell for what is really alive, and this is your spirit or soul. Eternal live applies to this spirit or soul and not to your physical body.So, to say it in one setence: Eternal live is when your spirit will never cease to exist, even when your physical body is destroyed. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Malchik Posted March 9, 2004 Share Posted March 9, 2004 Such a spirit does not immediately seem to have 'life', Darnoc. It may have an eternal existence but I'm not at all sure that was what the debate was intended to be about. Also I do not logically see why an immortal being should not have a spiritual essence. The only difference is that the essence is always part of an immortal whereas, in your definition, it exists in mortals in this symbiotic relationship only until the mortal body dies. You probably need to ask Kahenraz whether he wants to go down the road of mythology or not before bringing in imaginative (and imaginary) creatures invented by world religions. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Darnoc Posted March 9, 2004 Share Posted March 9, 2004 @Malchik: But you can't discuss immortality and eternal live without mythology or religion, because both terms come from mythology and religion. Immortality is always used to describe creatures/people who do not die physically (like the elves) and eternal life is always used to describe the eternal life of the soul/spirit of a lifeform (like in the bible; there eternal life is always applied to the soul of humans and is never applied to the physical body; same is the case in the Coran). Also the term "soul" is always used together with life. According to several religions, "life" and "soul" are the same. E.G. in the bible god gives the soul to all creatures and so they live (including humans). Death of the physical body is when the soul of a being leaves this body, but because the soul is eternal and the soul is life, every human being possess eternal life (at least according to the bible and to the Coran). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Peregrine Posted March 9, 2004 Share Posted March 9, 2004 Remember, eternal life and not dying are two different things. Death only applies to the physical body... if there is something more than the physical body, one could live even after one dies. But an immortal is specifically immune to death. So lets look at it for both cases: THERE IS NO SOUL: Your life is entirely the physical body. Immortality and eternal life are the same, since death of the physical body is complete death of you. THERE IS A SOUL: The most important part of "you" is the soul. The physical body is just an extension of or shell for it. Without the soul, your body is nothing. Without the body, the soul still exists and is still "you". Now eternal life and immortality can be different: Immortality: At absolute minimum, you can not die. Since death is a physical thing, this refers to your physical body. I would also argue that this is the product of a fundamentally different form of existance, in which you are immune to all physical harm. Eternal life: You can live without your mortal body. You are most likely immune to aging and will not die from it, but if killed by something else you can still have eternal life. And of course your body isn't protected from damage... As mentioned by Darnoc, this is what is promised by many religions. You have eternal life for the part of you that matters, but it might not be in the form you know right now. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Malchik Posted March 9, 2004 Share Posted March 9, 2004 Darnoc, I am adopting a purely logical analysis of the meaning of the words. Can an immortal being not have eternal life? I don't think so. Immortality=the state of being immortal=living for ever=having an eternal life. Therefore the words are synonymous. Also I cannot agree with your statement that 'eternal life' is only used to refer to souls or spirits. There are many examples of gods being referred to as having eternal life. Even the christian god is referred to as eternal. I have read stories in which elves are referred to as eternal, living forever and having eternal life. It is an authorial device to avoid being too repetitive. I have used it myself. Similarly the spirit that has eternal life is also called immortal even in the bible (usually the immortal soul) at least in the authorised version. Thus biblical usage also points to the words being interchangeable. You may, for your own purposes, wish to make a distinction and I see nothing wrong with that but it would be your own choice not one borne out by an analysis of common usage IMO. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Peregrine Posted March 9, 2004 Share Posted March 9, 2004 Yes, they are the same in many ways. Eternal life is a part of immortality, but the reverse is not true. Eternal life is a lesser form of immortality. As I said in my first post: Eternal life: You live forever in some form, and age has no meaning to you. Like Tolkien's elves, or the eternal life in the afterlife promised by most religions. But you're not immune to harm. Immortality: Your physical body can not die in any way. You don't really "live" as we know it... your existence is fundamentally different so things like death and injury do not apply to you. Think of this more like the gods themselves. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Darnoc Posted March 10, 2004 Share Posted March 10, 2004 Both are very similar, of course. And the synonym of Malchik shows this. But they aren't exactly the same. Immortality. This word consists of two parts "mortality" and "im" (negative). "Mortality" (coming from the latin word "mors") means death and "im" makes this negative, so immortality means "no death". So, when you are immortal this means you can not die and will stay forever in your physical body, no matter if you possess a soul or a spirit. Immortality includes having a physical body which could die, but won't die because you are immortal (like the Greek gods). Eternal Life. "Eternal" means "forever" and "life" is pretty clear. So "eternal life" means "you live forever". Now it depends on the way "life" is defined. If life is purely physical, then "eternal life" and "immortality" are the same. If life is something spiritual, there is a difference between "eternal life" and "immortality". This difference is that with eternal life your body can still die, but because life is spiritual, your spirit will live forever. Immortality would still mean that your physical body can not die. So immortality is only half of what eternal life is (at least when there are souls/spirits). Immortality only means that your body won't die. Eternal life means that you will live for all times, even when your body is destroyed, because your spirit is eternal. And it is the spirit which is acctually life, not the body. Also I cannot agree with your statement that 'eternal life' is only used to refer to souls or spirits. There are many examples of gods being referred to as having eternal life. Even the christian god is referred to as eternal. I have read stories in which elves are referred to as eternal, living forever and having eternal life. It is an authorial device to avoid being too repetitive. I have used it myself. I said eternal life refers to spirit and souls, if those do exist. Don't forget that god is purely spiritual, he is a spirit. So he is eternal, because spirits are eternal and can not die. The only way a spirit can die, at least according to the bible and some other religious scriptures, is being in hell (or any similar place in any other religion). "Hell" is refered to as "the second death", meaning a spiritual death. But this is not the subject of this discussion. Also in Genesis it is written that god gave spirit into the body of every creature. Before that they were only empty shells and will be again, when the spirit leaves this body (this is what we call physical death). So, as I said, the terms "life" and "spirit" are also interchangeable, at least when we assume that souls/spirits do exist. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.