There are sound arguments for believing in Life after Death"Analyse and evaluate this claim with reference to the following terms; Resurrection and Immortality of the soul

Authors Avatar

 Danielle Hilton

“There are sound arguments for believing in Life after Death”

Analyse and evaluate this claim with reference to the following terms; Resurrection and Immortality of the soul

What if we cease to exist at physical death?  Being mortal with no soul and there is no afterlife?  We will never be able to think to ourselves again when it life on earth ends.  It is the same as never existing in the first place?

Resurrection is a unique view of life after death where human do indeed die as by nature humans are mortal. We all have a finite life span! There are several arguments that support life after death and the first is the concept of Reincarnation/Resurrection which is split into two categories of Materalistic and Dualistic. One view is that there is no disembodied soul that survives death and carries on living rather we die and after a period of time God brings us back to life with an identical body. This is a materialistic view because it sees the body as an essential part of life and the soul isn’t separate to it. The other view of reincarnation suggests that we are resurrected in spiritual form in another realm- a Dualistic view however not in the same way as Plato or Descartes would understand it as they would have seen the soul and body as completely separate entities.

Several theologians have come up with theodicy’s that highlight this and in my view John Hicks “Replica” theory is most successful as he uses his theory to explain the coherence of bodily resurrection (Materalistic view) to signify the reappearance of a person who is essentially the same as a person who has just died – this person is seen to be a replica of the first, for example Man “A” is in London and suddenly dies.  At the same moment man “B” appears in New York, has the same memories, personality and physical looks as man “A”. They are the same in every way! It is therefore coherent to say that “A” and “B” is the same person; “B” is a replica of “A”. From this he went on to say that it is possible that when man “A” dies his replica appears/is resurrected in another universe, time and space. It is not actually logically possible for this to take place after a previous embodied existence! This is due to time and space being connected, in order for the afore mention advent to take place there would have to be another “space and time” in existence so actually logically Man “B” (replica) wouldn’t be resurrected before or after the pervious life of Man “A” (original)   in time or space. Hick gets around this problem by saying that it isn’t physically possible to synchronise the clocks and calendars of each and every “world” and that in reality there is a single timeline that contains each and every timeline.

Join now!

There are many problems raised by the replica body theory for is a person is replicated, they are not the same person but in reality a carbon copy – even though identical there are a duplicate and at the end of the day a copy is a copy!

Another problem is that of continuity as it is broken at the point of death and replication, as for a moment in time the person didn’t exist. It isn’t possible for two existences to overlap and throws into doubt the self of the replica. However Steven T. Davis suggests that it ...

This is a preview of the whole essay