What appears apparent in your idea of resurrection as a continuation of genes suggests an ongoing cyclic idea of continuity in nature. There are patterns evolving in all aspects of existence. Religious systems may have interpreted this in ideas of reincarnation and resurrection. This may be more of a symbolic expression of eternity with the actual causal aspects being far more complicated.
Does it imply that if one wants to resurrect after his death, one must have many offspring? His genes will be living in his offspringās bodies? Or would there be another ways for bodily resurrection after oneās death?
Sorry for the delay in replying . My phone died completely and I had to buy a new one and transfer documents, which felt like a reincarnation of information. I speak of this because both reincarnation and resurrection are about transfer of some aspect of identity. With resurrection in the religious sense it is about oneās body literally.
In connection to your point about having more offspring there is a more hope for passing on of genes, as information for future lifeforms. In that sense, there may be a biological imperative, or instinct. But what about people who donāt bring children into the world? Are they the mere end of the line? Surely, some aspect of the person will count in the larger scheme, as some form of memory.
There is a possible danger of reducing the idea of immortality to a philosophy of physicalism or materialism. There is the issue of disembodied life after death being questionable. But that is not to disregard the symbolic attributes and the whole phenomena of near death experiences. Some have seen such experiences to be evidence of a whole new dimension after death of the body. Part of the problem though is that the person had not died fully. However,the experiences, which often include seeing a light and being greeted by relatives who had died, suggest some form of continuity in the dying process even if it is symbolic. The symbolic aspects between life forms may be recurrent and contain some memories of the anscestors on an experiential level.
Welcome to the forum and your post about anaesthesia is interesting. There may be too much tendency to dismiss such experiences in a reductionist way, especially in seeing it as just being about chemicals and oxygen deprivation, rather than appreciating the experiences for what they are.
Over a year ago I was in hospital with a chest infection. While my oxygen levels were low I had hallucinatory experiences which seemed to be of a similar nature to āThe Tibetan Book of the Deadā and Egyptian ones. This led me to think how whatever the experiences represent they are a likely source of the imagery of these books.My understanding of the Tibetan framework was about some form of merging in with the astral plane, a subtle dimension, prior to a rebirth in some future bodily incarnation.
No problems. Thanks for letting me know.
Problem of death and the myth of afterlife possibility seems to be that no completely dead person has ever come back to life and told us how death experience is like.
And no one alive at present has ever experienced the complete death of body.
Yes, there is problem in passing oneās genes to their offspring for afterlife. No matter how much oneās gene had been passed on to the offspring, there is no communication from the dead to the surviving offspring.
Offspring become his / her own life just enjoying and concentrating their own life, totally cut off from their parents in mental experience / communication between them after the parentsā deaths.