/christian/ - Christian Discussion and Fellowship

>>657137

At the risk of sounding banal, we'll find out when we get there. Remember that John was shown things he wasn't allowed to write down, so I assume there are things we currently cannot understand properly and would easily twist from their true meaning.

Where's that anon's examination of this topic? I don't agree with him, but I want to see his reasoning.

>>657137

We'll have fully restored bodies, including genitals. I'm Ortho, but I think Aquinas made good points in summa about our bodies being fully restored. Also, consider the fact, that Jesus ate fish, despite the fact, that He was already with the body that we shall have after resurrection, not requiring maintenance.

>>657142

http://www.newadvent.org/summa/5080.htm

>>657143

and this

http://www.newadvent.org/summa/5081.htm#article2

Not just St. Aquinas, but St. Augustine also made the point that the Original Sin corrupted our will. Previously, the body corresponded 100% to the will, after the Fall, St. Augustine speculates the "shame" that Adam & Eve felt was due to the uncontrolled pudenda. Hard to get into it without being lewd, but you know know what I'm talking about.

Look at it this way, it's said that there will be no strife in Heaven. How can this be? We will still have fists to strike each other with, mouths to insult each other with…yet, our wills will be perfect, and it will literally never happen. Same thing with our genitals.

>>657147

The natural end of hands is not punching, the natural end of mouths is not insulting, contrarily the natural end of the genitals is reproduction.

Honest question: where is it said, on scripture, tradition, or the writings of the fathers, that we won't reproduce in heaven, or in the world to come? If marriage is a symbol of Christ and His Church, why should not this union of man and woman be used in the praise of the Lamb in the world to come?

>>657164

>Honest question: where is it said, on scripture, tradition, or the writings of the fathers, that we won't reproduce in heaven, or in the world to come?

For in the resurrection they neither marry, nor are given in marriage, but are as the angels of God in heaven.(Matthew 22:30)

Unless you interpret it as some sort of bizarre notion of "free love", it means that we wont reproduce after resurrection. It doesnt even say about saints or similar, but just resurrection in general, meaning that damned also wont reproduce.

Even to this day, I find it sort of weird why tho and why would first blessing of mankind would be abrogated, but eh, probably theres more to this and I'll wait for death to find it out.

>>657167

I think a "free love" scenario is possible. We will, after all, be one flesh in Christ living in perfect union, being together the bride of Christ. Certainly this is not in any way clear in revelation, and were this view to become prevalent it would encourage hippies and other sexual deviants attempting to establish Paradise on this fallen Earth.

>>657174

I still find it extremely atrocious

>>657167

>I'll wait … to find it out.

As must we all.

>>657175

I'll admit that I may have a distorted sense of this due to my past sins. Still, it seems at least plausible, though surely it is not for us to know. That the things of heaven may confuse, surprise, or even disturb you now should not be surprising since Heaven is a mystery no man can understand, especially in our fallen state.

>>657174

>>657178

>surely it is not for us to know.

Correct. Now delet

>>657190

>Sex is only and earthly burden, so we can reproduce and conquer, a tool to bring war and destruction upon the enemies of God. Only animals enjoy sex, much like gluttony. Humans overcome.

"Be fruitful and Multiply" was LITERALLY THE FIRST BLESSING OF MANKIND BY GOD HIMSELF.

What you are saying is literally a borderline gn*sticism. Stop defaming Orthodoxy with these retarded theories.

>>657193

>"Be fruitful and Multiply" was LITERALLY THE FIRST BLESSING OF MANKIND BY GOD HIMSELF.

A blessing for earth, the Garden of Eden is on earth. Blessings are useless in heaven, heaven is already the ultimate blessing.

>What you are saying is literally a borderline gn*sticism.

Not at all. You either don't know what gnosticism is, or you are an unyielding slave of your lusts. Whatever it is, you need to fix it.

Heaven isn't the final destination for mankind, it's the new earth, this Earth will be renewed at the end of time.

>>657195

>Garden of Eden is on earth.

And after the resurrection we will live on a new Earth.

>>657195

>you are an unyielding slave of your lusts.

I'm totally willing to accept celebacy in Heaven, and know that the joys of union with God far surpass any earthly pleasure. I'm just not entirely convinced on heavenly celebacy, though I cede it as the more common view of the church in history and thus the more likely scenario. However it is not dogma as far I can tell.