Imortality reachable...

[inquirer]

Here goes my first question…

[FONT=&quot]Over the past weeks, I’ve read several articles in scientific journals by researchers claiming that the combined use of gene therapy, stem cells and integrated technology could theoretically give rise to humans with life spans in the terms of hundreds of years and longer, perhaps even to the extent of eliminating natural deaths altogether. Given the way in which one would accomplish this feat, and also the very act of possibly removing death from the realm of inevitability, what are the religious concerns that this raises?

[/FONT] [FONT=&quot]Would unending life be in conflict with the ‘grand scheme’ some claim is laid out for us? Particularly in the arena of heaven or other post-life realities?

[/FONT] [FONT=&quot]Might the elimination of natural death take away from the importance or the experience of life, spiritually or philosophically?

[/FONT] Are there any great concerns over the method in which this goal is achieved? To what extent might religion allow oneself to modify their body to reach immortality?

 

[kevmicsmi]

Here goes my first question…

[FONT=&quot]Over the past weeks, I’ve read several articles in scientific journals by researchers claiming that the combined use of gene therapy, stem cells and integrated technology could theoretically give rise to humans with life spans in the terms of hundreds of years and longer, perhaps even to the extent of eliminating natural deaths altogether. Given the way in which one would accomplish this feat, and also the very act of possibly removing death from the realm of inevitability, what are the religious concerns that this raises?

[/FONT][FONT=&quot]Would unending life be in conflict with the ‘grand scheme’ some claim is laid out for us? Particularly in the arena of heaven or other post-life realities?

[/FONT][FONT=&quot]Might the elimination of natural death take away from the importance or the experience of life, spiritually or philosophically?

[/FONT]Are there any great concerns over the method in which this goal is achieved? To what extent might religion allow oneself to modify their body to reach immortality?

I actually read one of the articles i think you are talking about, one scientist thinks the human body is able to sustain a life span of up to 1000 years. Makes those Biblical ages not seem so impossible after all

 

[dorcas3000]

genetic engineering can't stop car crashes or plane crashes, people being shot, etc.
People will always die. IMO, engineering oursleves to live 'infinitely' will only make the reality of death more unbearable.

 

[Scarlett Wampus]

[FONT=&quot]Might the elimination of natural death take away from the importance or the experience of life, spiritually or philosophically?

Yes it might. Much of the philosophical and spiritual potency of life comes from having to deal with death. Take mortality away and it could lead to an even more decadent society than we have currently.

[/FONT]Are there any great concerns over the method in which this goal is achieved? To what extent might religion allow oneself to modify their body to reach immortality?

First of all what would concern me is the thought of people being so afraid of death they use this technology prematurely out of blind ambition to avoid it and simply end up extending their life in misery. We can already see that, in the haste to hold on to youthful beauty through body modification, people often do terrible things to themselves that devalue their life.

As the technology does mature all sorts of other questions have to be asked. To begin with there the question of population expansion putting an (even greater) strain on resources. If life extension technologies allowed people to stay alive indefinitely then over-population and what to do about it would become a much bigger issue than it is now. It could lead to some very controversial measures to deal with it. For instance such technologies could by law only be used under the agreement of becoming infertile. I can't see people not wanting to have children, at least, not some people. Also, if (or rather, when) these technologies further divide the rich from the poor, in that richer people could afford to have these genetic & cybernetic 'upgrades' whereas poorer people could not, social tensions could boil over into a nightmarish class war.

I think we have to be very cautious. If we don't look ahead and prepare our civilisation for the induction of these technologies then we could increase many of the underlying problems we already have as well as create a whole set of new ones.

 

[Shadow Wolf]

The big problem will be with many births, and few deaths, the world will have an overpopulation problem of mass proportions.

Me, I don't know if I could, or would really want to, live for 1000 years. I'm only 19, and I already have slight arthritis in my knee. Things I greatly enjoy know might not even be known of a hundred years from now. I can't imagine having to search hard for the music I enjoy today, because it is almost impossible to find later on. There would be more wars, plagues, and horrible events to live through. And unless you can dramitacally change things, life would get very repetitive and boring. Even if I could gain the ability of vampires, and a day walker, life would still get boring after awhile.

 

[joeboonda]

In the BIble during the Millenial Reign of Christ, it is said that anyone who dies at the age of 100 is accursed. People will live longer, and of course, as Christians we believe we have eternal life, that we will inherit our newly ressurected, immortal, incorruptible, glorified bodies. It is interesting to note the longevity of the first men and women, who lived like 8 to 9 hundred years, then after the Great flood, it went down to 70 to 120 yrs. The trend in the US, cuz of our overeating, laziness and fast food, is that our life expectancy is dwindling, unless you are into health and fitness, and all, then it is all good, lol. Well, science won't save us, only Jesus saves! Peace!
Mike

 

[finalfrogo]

I would enjoy living long, but not eternally. Life would become tiring. Besides, you're bound to be eventually killed in an accident.

 

[finalfrogo]

Oh, and if I think God would have a problem with us living an extraordinarily long time, he would have eliminated the scientific means of doing so.

 

[Ody]

genetic engineering can't stop car crashes or plane crashes, people being shot, etc.
People will always die. IMO, engineering oursleves to live 'infinitely' will only make the reality of death more unbearable.

Actually they can make us able to succesfully take those damages and live easily.

 

[Ody]

Oh, and if I think God would have a problem with us living an extraordinarily long time, he would have eliminated the scientific means of doing so.

Agreed. Or he would have gaven us a commandment about it.

 

[Ody]

The big problem will be with many births, and few deaths, the world will have an overpopulation problem of mass proportions.

Or our technology would be able to handle it. As in procure enough food and space.

 

[Sunstone]

Or our technology would be able to handle it. As in procure enough food and space.

Right. The resources of the earth are infinite.

 

[finalfrogo]

Agreed. Or he would have gaven us a commandment about it.

True. The issue comes from within. I don't know about you, but I don't want to live forever. Life is tiring.

 

[Ody]

Right. The resources of the earth are infinite.

Not the resources of space.

 

[Ody]

True. The issue comes from within. I don't know about you, but I don't want to live forever. Life is tiring.

Agreed but a few hundred years wouldn't hurt, think of all that one can do

 

[dorcas3000]

Actually they can make us able to succesfully take those damages and live easily.

so GE can turn us into cockroaches?

 

[Ody]

so GE can turn us into cockroaches?

Not cockroaches, but more stable human bodies.

 

[mortuus monastica]

genetic engineering can't stop car crashes or plane crashes, people being shot, etc. People will always die.

Original articles and question creating this thread did not state a permanent immortal state, only that natural deaths would be come avoidable. Diseases probably would continue to plague humanity throughout (though the advancements in medical science possible, perhaps, if the researchers were able to continue learning for a 1000 years are attractive) and accidents will happen, but the key moral issue here is not “will I die?” but “must I die?” Logically and statistically the former will most likely always hold true, but if advancements make it so the inevitability of death, the certainty of death, is significantly reduced such that the “I will never die,” mindset may have a solid foothold then the psychological and moral problems that are prevented by the inevitability of death as it is now would rise up and bite us.

In the BIble during the Millenial Reign of Christ, it is said that anyone who dies at the age of 100 is accursed. People will live longer, and of course, as Christians we believe we have eternal life, that we will inherit our newly ressurected, immortal, incorruptible, glorified bodies. It is interesting to note the longevity of the first men and women, who lived like 8 to 9 hundred years, then after the Great flood, it went down to 70 to 120 yrs.

Interestingly enough, the religious scholastic count for the age of creation, according to some readings of the Bible, etc., give it as between 5500 and 4000 years old – and the genealogies you mentioned (one’s prior to ‘the Great flood’) total anywhere from 1496 and 1560 years to get from Adam to Noah, which is close the 1500 year difference in readings. I’ve not read quite enough to give an analysis of the implications of this (though I’m betting their minor at best) but I do find it interesting. The claim of some that before the Flood (which I believe varying accounts give rise to the 64 year genealogical discrepancy) life spans were above 800 is quite baseless. Established paleoanthropology gives the evolution of our species at approximately 400,000 years ago, with a full transition by 150,000 years ago. The fossils and remains of our ancestors dating from this period are in clear conflict with the genealogies given in Genesis and other texts. Then from what other sources does your belief that the human race’s age limit was reduced stem from? More inaccurate (I’m not saying completely false) genealogies in texts with inaccurate timelines?

Oh, and the average lifespan of the human race has been steadily increasing since the Elizabethan era, and though it has slowed some lately, it may pick up even more soon.

 

[Super Universe]

Why are we afraid to live our lives as we so desire? We think God is questioning every little choice and judging us on a scale of 1-10?

There is so much damage to correct, damage ye olde bible has done.

We can develop gene therapy to cure many terrible disease but people are afraid that is playing God. If it was really playing God then He would certainly prevent us from achieving it. As it is, only God can truly play God. What human can create a universe?

We are in control. We are responsible and yes we should debate things and determine if they are acceptable to US, not acceptable within God's guidelines. He did not create us to then put us in chains and make us walk a certain way.

 

[dorcas3000]

I agree in that I don't see any necessary correlation between genetic engineering and religion.