In the comments of the first post about sex in heaven, someone left a comment that, in part, said this:
I guess the problem I have accepting your logic is that I don’t think we will still be human in heaven. I don’t think we’ll have human bodies (or human appetites)…we will be changed. It’s possible that we won’t have bodies, as we know them, at all…it really is interesting to think about though.
Well, I believe we will absolutely be human. I see no indication in scripture that we will be anything else. Christ’s own resurrected body, which could be touched, was touched, which could eat, shows us, I think, that there’s a basic parallel between the body that dies and the body that rises again. Jesus’ resurrection gives us a foretaste of what our own glorified bodies — yes, bodies — might be like. I’m not saying we’re going to be gods. We’re not. There’s just one of those. (An aside: I’ve never understood the polytheistic belief systems. I mean, just how many gods do you need? If your gods are all-powerful, you only need one, right? And if they’re not, then they’re not gods, right? I mean, wouldn’t that contradict the meaning of a “god”? Eh. Sorry. Just a thought that rattles around my brain from time to time.)
I am saying that we will have bodies, though. Glorified bodies. Sweet, hot, lovely bodies. Again, God created them, in all their glory, and as Peter Kreeft says in his essay I referred to in that previous post, “God may unmake what we make, but He does not unmake what He makes.” By that thinking, God made our bodies and will not unmake our bodies. That our bodies will be glorified, incorruptible, yes, that’s a biblical notion. That we will forever be little floaty things, no, that’s not.
Honestly, does heaven sound heavenly to you if you’re just a little floaty thing? Does heaven sound heavenly to you if you’re forever neutered?
I don’t think so. If I’m just floating around as a spirit for all eternity, then I lose something essential in the transition from earth to this “alleged” heaven: I lose the ability to touch and to feel the touch of another. Think about it. Think about never being touched again. That’s a horror to me, not heaven. I don’t just mean sexually. Think how innate that is to us, that sense of touch. Touching a child’s cheek, running your fingers through your hair, holding a hand. These are so simple, so natural to us that we barely think of them when we do them. But take that away, that touch, render us eternal vapors, and this “heaven” is a place of loss, which, by definition, heaven cannot be. We were created with corporeal bodies — male and female — BEFORE the Fall ever happened, so we must conclude this design we have is part of God’s original plan, and that we will be tangible, touchable, as Jesus is forever tangible and touchable.
We may be improved, but we won’t be changed. In our natures. I will be a woman with big glorified boobs. (And woo-hoo on that.) You will be who you are. With your deep dimples or your grey eyes or your perfect butt. We will be able to see each other and touch each other and know this one as a man and that one as a woman. Would you WANT it to be another way? If you’re someone who wants to be a floaty thing (I borrow that phrase from the long-since-eaten Timothy Treadwell, mad at the “little Hindu floaty thing” that made it storm all around his tent one night), perhaps God will accommodate you, but I imagine people would miss you. The palpability of you. They would miss seeing you and touching you and holding you. Your face, your eyes, your smile, unlike all the other faces and eyes and smiles in heaven. People would miss that. Think of the people you love, then think of all of you in heaven floating around, amorphous, forever unable to see or touch each other. That’s not heaven. That’s loss. That’s grief. And even if you, as a newly minted floaty thing, could see the other floaty things, who cares? You’re a floaty thing. You can’t touch. You can’t feel touch. You can’t eat. You fly and float and can fit through keyholes. Wow. Neat.
And, you know, if MB wants to be a floaty thing in heaven, I am going to be royally pissed. I need the feel of his arms available for me forever.
But, really, I don’t think that choice will be open to us, The Floaty Thing Option, because I think the resurrected body of Jesus should be our model. His body, not his deity.
As to our human appetites, well, again, we will still be human, so I don’t see those disappearing. Being transformed, yes; disappearing, no. I’m distressed at how many people I’ve talked to about heaven think we will be something entirely alien in heaven. That you will not recognize yourself. That you will not recognize others. That you won’t want to eat. That we will all suddenly be monks and nuns. Christians believe that heaven is “home”; that once there, we will sigh and say, “Yesss” because we’re finally where we belong. That some primal unplayed chord in us will finally finally be struck and we will feel a sense of release. We will be in that place that only flickers at us now, in the tiniest glimpses, for the fleetest of seconds. Sometimes, here on earth, heaven peeks through. In a child’s smile. In the sound of a cello. In an evening of laughter with friends. In the feel of flesh on flesh. It will be the ultimate deja vu, but it won’t be a fleeting moment; it will be forever. We will say, “Ohhh. I know this place. I know this place.” Feeling a sense of familiarity and belonging, I think, includes feeling a sense of familiarity and belonging in our own forms and appetites. I will be in a glorified body, but I don’t think I’ll flip out at what that looks like and how it functions. I think it will be better, not different. My appetites may be purified, but I don’t think they’ll be different, either. I think it’s the difference between being improved and being altered.
And human appetites for, say, food and sex are not sinful. They can be corrupted and perverted and abused, but they’re hardwired into us, are they not? We were created with them, right? Did we learn to want orgasm, for instance? To be blunt, do we usually think when we see a toddler playing with his penis it’s because he saw it on TV? Nope. Unless Sesame Street is a LOT freakier than I remember.
We will be as we were created to be — before the Fall. That includes bodies. That includes male and female. And that includes desiring sex. All of these will be glorified, so, no, I don’t know HOW they manifest, just that they will.
The God who created our amazing bodies turns them into vapors? I don’t think so. The God who created male and female clays over our fancy bits? I don’t think so. The God who created eros love denies us that forever? I just don’t think so.
Not in the heaven I’m hoping for, anyway.
I’m with you on the sex. And the food. Well, let’s just make it pretty much everything. Oh, but there is a but. And hold onto yours.. (heh. okay lame.)
Mormons (and yes, I be one) believe that we can become like God, in that we have the ability to become Gods ourselves someday. I know this is blasphemy on so many levels for so many people, and I’m sorry about that. It’s what I believe, please don’t throw food at me. So, in my world (big ol long ways down the road) not only is there sex, but women orgasm every tmie and men have to work for it sex, and peppermint ice-cream makes you lose weight. And cauliflower is bad for you. (sp? whatever.) Just sayin, there are perks to having your own world.
Comment by Jess — January 13, 2010 @ 7:45 pm
“Sweet, hot, lovely bodies”–that always makes me think of the one guy from my former bible study group who insisted that his glorified body was going to have an awesome six-pack. Hee.
Yeah, I think what I get from what you’re saying is that heaven will be more “sensuous” than “sensual.” Sounds good to me.
Comment by Kate P — January 13, 2010 @ 7:49 pm
I like the way you’re thinking here young lady. Sex, pizza, Hot Tamales and Single Malt Scotch. Nice. I do wonder if we’ll have belly buttons.
But seriously… I think the commenter is way wrong and holds to an un-Biblical view of our restoration. New bodies - yes, different from the way God originally created them - no.
Comment by Brian — January 13, 2010 @ 9:59 pm
I find this conversation fascinating. I still don’t have a strong opinion, but I’ve always been taught from the “perfect bodies, perfect mind” kind of dogma. Most of them tend to shy away from the human appetites. I do wonder what enlightenment will do to us.
@Jess - I am interested in getting your input on something. In the previous discussion, Tracey referenced scripture that talked about there not being marriage in heaven. How do Mormons reconcile that with their own teachings about families being eternally sealed? Please don’t misread this as trolling - I honestly want to know. My wife’s Mormon and I’ve not gotten a satisfactory answer (read = almost any scriptural questioning devolves into an arguscussion, so I avoid it most of the time). I’m interested in your take.
Comment by Cullen — January 14, 2010 @ 3:41 am
Hm… will there be inappropriate laughter in heaven? For example, will I still laugh at the phrase “the long-since-eaten Timothy Treadwell,” followed immediately by awkward silence and stammered apologies? ‘Cause that would be fun.
Back-to-topic, I agree that the Floaty Option is a non-starter. Whenever St Paul gets flummoxed about the resurrection, it’s not because we’re going to be disembodied… that wouldn’t flummox a guy like Paul. He’d either explain it thoroughly or dismiss it thoroughly (he was a man with opinions!). He just sort of lets it alone. We will be changed, in the twinkling of an eye, and be incorruptible. What that means and how it works out, he could not begin to describe.
There are well-documented cases of this sort of thing happening even now: St Cuthbert, for example, died in the seventh century; his body was moved in 1104 when a new church was built, and found amazingly preserved. St Teresa of Avila (16th century) was also incorrupt for many years. Others of great sanctity have been similarly preserved from decay after death. It’s no stretch to say that in heaven, this sign will be confirmed, and the blessed will have perfectly incorrupt bodies to go along with their souls.
How? I hate to drag poor CS Lewis into this again
but here I think he has a good description of it: in The Great Divorce, when the narrator and his cohort of ghosts appear in heaven, they find that they are so ephemeral as to be barely visible, and even the blades of grass do not bend under their feet. He tries to lift even a leaf and can’t budge it. But the true residents are fully real and substantive, “their strong feet sank in the wet turf” and such. There’s also a ghost afflicted with sexual temptations, appearing as a tiny lizard hissing in his ear. The ghost finally says that it would be better to die than live forever at its mercy and asks for it to be killed - but after it gets squished, the narrator is amazed that it doesn’t die, but instead grows into a mighty stallion. The ghost, thus cured, becomes real, and jumps across the back of the horse and they go galloping off.
Lewis is not Scripture, but it’s a fine image, and I think it suggests a true solution to the question - our sexual nature isn’t going away. All things, including that thing, will be made whole and perfect. Floaty Object Heaven is too easy to grasp, too little for the enormity of eternal bliss. The difficulty in description and understanding is that it’s too amazing for us right now… it would literally “blow our minds, maaaaaan.”
(And since that phrase somehow reminds me, I’ll go back off-topic and mention poor Tim Treadwell again - did you know he gets a special thank-you credit at the end of Brother Bear? Yup, the Disney movie in which a man learns about true brotherhood by becoming a bear… they thank Tim Treadwell in the credits. This was long before he was eaten, too. I don’t know what to think of it; it’s apt and sad all at once.)
Comment by nightfyl — January 14, 2010 @ 9:01 am
I’m not sure whether I should feel flattered, insulted, or that I’ve just had my knuckles smartly rapped with a ruler at having a whole post dedicated to answering what I considered to be a rather innocuous comment on the last one…One way or the other, it’s all conjecture. I think God leaves the descriptions of heaven rather “nebulous” in the Bible for a good reason. It is too wonderful for us (as mortals) to grasp. His descriptions of hell are much more graphic, you notice. Your theory is an interesting one that I plan to re-read several times and see if I can reconcile it with scripture. It’ll be fun! But to me, it makes no difference, not really. I trust the Lord that heaven WILL be going home, and that it will be a wondrous home, and well worth the “narrow path” that I have walked.
I’ll say here that I’m a simple person, some might even call shallow. My sisters are both more intellectual than I am, and more introspective as well (navel-gazers, as they call it). My mind just doesn’t work that way. But it’s fascinating for me to read what comes from minds like yours (and many of your followers), minds that love to search and stretch and turn things over. You introduce me to thoughts I would never come up with on my own in a million years. I’m very grateful that mine is not the only kind of brain out there…how dull things would be! Thanks for “enlightening” me. Keep ‘em coming…I may not agree with your conclusions (and sometimes I might even be shocked), but I will continue to read…
Comment by ann — January 14, 2010 @ 3:17 pm
Ann — Well, you know, I didn’t mention your name in the post; you just mentioned yourself. I doubt if people clicked on the link to see who said it. Honestly, I had cut and pasted that bit into my drafts about a week ago, so I’d forgotten who left that comment. I’ve been a bit hazy this week, forgive me. It wasn’t meant to insult you; it was meant to open up further discussion. Of course, I can’t dictate what your response is. I can only tell you my intent.
To be honest, the notion that we will not have bodies or will not be human in heaven is not a biblical one — 1 Corinthians 15:42 for just one reference — but I don’t think you’re the only Christian out there who thinks this and I think it’s important to be as biblically accurate as possible. I could see if someone thinks we won’t have bodies that, by extension, there won’t be sex in heaven, but since we will have bodies, the question is at least open, don’t you think? It wasn’t meant to be a rap on the knuckles. It got me thinking is all.
What you thought was an innocuous comment, I thought was worthy of further exploration. Mostly, I’m curious about different people’s notions about heaven. It’s an interest of mine, so your views were interesting to me.
Maybe you should go with “flattered,” as opposed to anything else, since I did spend a fair amount of time putting this post together based on what you said.
In the future, though, I will be more careful not to quote you. Sorry to offend.
Comment by tracey — January 14, 2010 @ 4:19 pm
I know this is a serious discussion, but every time I click over here and see “more sex in heaven,” I sing it to the tune of “No Tears in Heaven.” (It’s an old hymn probably only Sarahk and I know but I bet the Baptists sing it too.) (You Catholics are out of luck.)
More sex in heaven
More bl*w j*bs given
All will be horny in that land
There’ll be no sadness,
All will be gladness
When we shall join that sexy band!
More sex (in heaven fair)
More sex, more sex up there
More sex in heaven will be had
More sex (in heaven fair)
More sex in heaven will be had
Comment by Lisa — January 14, 2010 @ 4:22 pm
Here’s the tune.
Comment by Lisa — January 14, 2010 @ 4:23 pm
NF — I’d forgotten that bit in The Great Divorce! Thank you for refreshing my memory. I have more dreams based on that book than probably any book I’ve read.
And, no, I didn’t know about the Brother Bear reference. I guess Timothy Treadwell kind of DID become a bear though. He modeled for us ALL just how to do it. Chomp … chomp ….
Comment by tracey — January 14, 2010 @ 4:25 pm
Well, Lisa, YOU are obviously going to HELL.
Hahahahahahaha. I’m an literally crying over here. Now I’m hacking. Okay. Crying again.
/All will be gladness
When we shall join that sexy band!/
I can’t get over this. Tears.
/More sex, more sex up there/
Lisa, you kill me. Naughty girl.
Comment by tracey — January 14, 2010 @ 4:29 pm
I was going to put a disclaimer at the end. Something to the effect of “I know I’m going to Hell, so don’t email me. Or Tracey, she knows I’m going to.”
Comment by Lisa — January 14, 2010 @ 4:32 pm
“too.” GOING TOO.
Comment by Lisa — January 14, 2010 @ 4:32 pm
Hahahahahaha. Yes, don’t email Lisa. Leave the hellbound slattern ALONE.
I adore you, Lisa.
Comment by tracey — January 14, 2010 @ 4:44 pm
And now that Lisa’s made the correlation to Clapton, all I can think of is More Guitar in Heaven.
Comment by Cullen — January 14, 2010 @ 6:19 pm
You people are all wonderful, even the slatterns.
Tracey, someday you and I will be in the back of the heavenly classroom, snickering inappropriately at something some angel or saint has said. Wouldn’t miss it. (Chomp, chomp… I’m dying here!) Lisa may be one row over.
It’s Barry White and Marvin Gaye on a cloudbank, singing smoky Baptist hymns with a heavy bass line. Awwwwww yeah.
Ann - I thank God every day that not everyone is a highfalutin’ overthinker such as I! Sooner or later someone has to get to the actual living, and when I see it, it inspires me a great deal. To read your reply and catch a little glimpse of your heart is a great gift, and I’m grateful you shared. Shallow? Never.
Comment by nightfly — January 14, 2010 @ 7:50 pm
Thanks for ruining one of my favorite songs for me, Lisa, you slattern.
Comment by sarahk — January 14, 2010 @ 10:11 pm
Will I have a smoking hot bod in heaven?
Since I’ve not experienced love on earth, I would like to know it in heaven. If I can have both sex and love in heaven, then … well good. Gives me something to look forward to.
Comment by Cara Ellison — January 14, 2010 @ 10:51 pm
I REALLY want to join the sexy band. Let’s start one at the SYC.
NF — Heaven won’t be heaven to me if I can’t sit on some cloud and snicker inappropriately with you.
Cara — To the best of my knowledge, you have a smokin’ hot bod now. I see no reason for God to change it.
Comment by tracey — January 14, 2010 @ 11:08 pm
Thanks baba. I like the fact that you make the point that Jesus is physically Jesus after the death. Body intact.
I think I have something indirectly to say about this on my blog.
Comment by Cara Ellison — January 14, 2010 @ 11:39 pm
Okay, I’ll go with flattered…honestly, I wasn’t offended. *sniff* Really…no, really. Not offended. Not me, not in the least. *sob, sob* I’m fine. Just fine. Really, FINE (slattern).
Comment by ann — January 15, 2010 @ 10:09 pm
Okay. Now I KNOW we’re okay, Ann. You called me a slattern.
Hahahahahaha. Good.
Comment by tracey — January 16, 2010 @ 3:02 pm
Oh good. I didn’t want my slattern friends at odds. It gave me chest pains.
Comment by sarahk — January 16, 2010 @ 10:22 pm
Hm-m-m. Couple of notions wiggling around in my head.
Physical body. . .OK, cool, I can relate to that. Implies a physical environment. . .will there be bugs? I REALLY hate mosquitoes and flies–maybe we can dispense with them? though the bats might miss them, and I like bats. . .oh well, it’ll work out somehow. It’d be nice to be able to fly myself, though. And as an old-timey science fiction fan–I want to be able to visit other planets/stars/galaxies. Will/can heaven have different laws governing its physical universe, so I can do both of those tings? Maybe that’ll be part of the “glorification”.
Also, forever is a LO-O-O-O-O-O-O-NG time, as my mother used to say, and presumably an infinite God has infinity to play around in. Looking around here on earth–it sure looks like God really likes variety and diversity. And then there’s that scripture about “my Father’s mansion has many rooms” (I didn’t look it up, so that’s a paraphrase.) So what I bet is, we’ll all get a heaven that somehow best suits us–and it won’t necessarily stay the same for all eternity. And we can visit each other’s and then go home and feel smug about how much better our own is
. And we’ll all know the other person is doing that, but it’ll be OK because we’ll love each other anyway.
Comment by Addofio — January 24, 2010 @ 8:32 am
A-a-r-gh! “Those things” (or maybe “doze tings” would be OK, it would at least look to be on purpose), not “those tings”.
I hope part of my glorification is that my fingers will be able to spell better.
Comment by Addofio — January 24, 2010 @ 8:36 am
Tracey, in case you or anyone else is still reading, I’ve made a similar positive case that male-female relationships similar to marital bonds can continue between the redeemed into the next life. This may then also imply a romantic, physical or even sexual aspect in such a relationship. This detailed positive case (incorporating exegesis, theology and philosophy) is made on my website (click on my name) – you’re most welcome to visit.
Comment by Rez — June 7, 2010 @ 4:10 pm