My first impression is that aging goes both ways. A child starts as a single cell, which divides, eventually forms organs, which start to function, eventually becomes self sufficient (as far as basic life goes), but is still dependent on another for its support and livelihood. Eventually, it learns enough (and becomes strong enough) to become independent, at which time, it moves away from that supporting being and stands on its own.
Then, after some time goes by, the process begins to reverse. The body begins to weaken. Eventually, the person needs to look to another for support (emotional, financial, physical). This stage could be long or short. Then the body regresses even more. The person cannot completely function (their organs still function, but perhaps they need a diaper, or they have Alzheimer’s that is profound enough that they can’t live alone.) Then, organs begin to fail, which mimics the organs developing in utero. Slowly, they lose functioning, until as they near the end, all that is left are the involuntary actions (breathing, heart beat). This mimics the very first few weeks of life in utero, before the person even looked like a person – just a spinal cord and some cells around it. And then, the breathing stops, the heart stops, and the spirit moves on – the complete opposite of conception – commencement of something else – somewhere else perhaps – that soul has been conceived into a new form: a form where it will go through a similar growth pattern, a similar awakening to new life.
Christians believe that after death, there is an afterlife with God in heaven (for those who were just and good in life) and in Hell (for those who were evil). Some believe that Hell is inescapable for the evil; some believe that even the most evil person may eventually atone for their sins and earn eternal life in heaven. I am not going to argue either way right now; maybe I will later.
Why would we insist that “going to heaven” isn’t a type of rebirth? If we believe what Jesus says about heaven, there will be no bodies, there will be no husbands and wives. Yet he says he will sit at his father’s right hand, so there will be some type of perception – some type of form, but it may not conform to our limited 3 dimensional thinking. Perhaps we cannot conceive of it because we don’t have the right senses. Perhaps it is just in a different dimension. One that is just outside our understanding. One that we sometimes get just a glimpse of. It may be the instigator of those “gut feelings”, “mother’s intuitions”, and “hunches”. Perhaps those who are there occasionally do try to contact us from there, and maybe there are some who are more in tune to “hear” from them (real psychics not the fake ones).
So maybe it is the fourth dimension? How would that look? To a 2 dimensional world (imagine an infinitely flat sheet of paper), a ball that passes through it would not be perceived as a ball, because the two dimensional world can’t comprehend that. The two dimensional world would see a point grow to the size of the diameter of the ball and then shrink to a point again. How would a 4 dimensional object appear to us in this 3-dimensional world?
And, as a three dimensional object, leaves a two dimensional shadow, does that mean a four dimensional object leaves a three dimensional shadow? (Thanks to Bill for this suggestion.) So those people who see what appears to be three dimensional “ghosts”, are those the shadows of the four dimensional beings that the dead have “upgraded” to? Interesting that our ancestors called them “shadows” and “shades”. Did they know something more about the afterlife than we understand now?
Why do people try to keep a terminal patient here? I mean, I can see clutching at straws when it is a child that is dying – someone who had no chance to live a life, or when the death is being caused by some freak accident. My grandmother wa 100 years old. She had lived a very long and full life. She was tired of her body and its failings. She wanted release from it. She was ready to see what comes next, not in a suicide way. Let me make that completely clear. She wasn’t saying she wanted to kill herself. She was saying that she had done all she wanted to do, and that she no longer wanted to be hindered by a 100 year old body that could only go 30 minutes between bathroom breaks, and that got swollen ankles, and had such mangling arthritis that she couldn’t knit, or crochet, or sew or at the end even play cards.
Yet, knowing all this, there were still some who desperately clutched to keep her here. Pleading with her “not to go”, as if she really has much control over the matter. It appeared that all they could see was the change that will be in their lives without her. They didin’t see the burden (guilt) they were putting on her shoulders. Of course, once she wa in a coma, I don’t think that guilt was much of a factor to her. It may still haunt them – that their last time with her was crying and begging instead of something happy.
Now, earlier I mentioned the bit written about the boat. I don’t remember the name of the guy who wrote it, and of course, I didn’t memorize it either, so this is me paraphasing what I read.
If we are watching a sailing ship head for the horizon, it appears to be shrinking, but that is only our perception. The boat hasn’t changed at all in reality. It is always still the same size it always was. And when it finally passes the horizon, and we can no longer see it, we say “There, she is gone.” Meanwhile, on some other shore, there are others waiting, straining to see that first speck that indicates that the ship is coming. As it approaches, they call out, “There, she is coming!” And while we weep at the loss of the ship, those on the distant shore are celebrating her arrival.
For us, it looked like she is diminishing. She never changed. That was just our perspective. She will ever be the same as she always was. She will just be on a different shore. And though we may weep now that she is gone from our sight, I know my grandfather is waiting on that shore for her, and others as well. And they are celebrating her arrival.
