Existential Questions

Don: It is a primary focus of all the great religions to answer three existential questions: Where do I come from? Why am I here? And: Where will I go after death? They are in essence questions of creation, revelation, and salvation.

Most religions teach that the afterlife is a reward—or a punishment—for the life lived here on Earth. Whether it is heaven, nirvana, Valhalla, or the fields of Aaru where the ancient Egyptians believed they went; Hell, Hades, the Jewish Sheol, the underworld, purgatory, or other place of punishment; or whether one is reincarnated or transmigrated to a place of transformation to the spirit world, to a place filled with virgins, or a place of transformation into something new through resurrection: All religions have them or something like them.

The question we are studying: “What must I do to inherit eternal life?” implies a belief that there is some sort of afterlife. The idea that our life here on Earth is all there is seems on the face of it to be an utter waste. Most of us want meaning not only in our life but also in our death.

And Jesus said to His disciples, “Truly I say to you, it is hard for a rich man to enter the kingdom of heaven. Again I say to you, it is easier for a camel to go through the eye of a needle, than for a rich man to enter the kingdom of God.” When the disciples heard this, they were very astonished and said, “Then who can be saved?” And looking at them Jesus said to them, “With people this is impossible, but with God all things are possible.”

Then Peter said to Him, “Behold, we have left everything and followed You; what then will there be for us?” And Jesus said to them, “Truly I say to you, that you who have followed Me, in the regeneration when the Son of Man will sit on His glorious throne, you also shall sit upon twelve thrones, judging the twelve tribes of Israel. And everyone who has left houses or brothers or sisters or father or mother or children or farms for My name’s sake, will receive many times as much, and will inherit eternal life. But many who are first will be last; and the last, first. (Matthew 19:23-30)

Note that Peter prefaced his question “What’s in it for us?” by declaring his qualifications: “We gave up everything to follow you.” Here’s what he meant:

Now as Jesus was walking by the Sea of Galilee, He saw two brothers, Simon who was called Peter, and Andrew his brother, casting a net into the sea; for they were fishermen. And He said to them, “Follow Me, and I will make you fishers of men.” Immediately they left their nets and followed Him. Going on from there He saw two other brothers, James the son of Zebedee, and John his brother, in the boat with Zebedee their father, mending their nets; and He called them. Immediately they left the boat and their father, and followed Him.  (Matthew 4:18-22)

It might be argued that leaving the life of a poor fisherman to follow Jesus was not such a great sacrifice—in contrast, for example, to the sacrifice demanded of the Rich Young Ruler. But Jesus insisted that putting God first was the quintessential requirement of salvation. But how does that actually work? Paul explained:

“And we preach to you the good news of the promise made to the fathers, that God has fulfilled this promise to our children in that He raised up Jesus, as it is also written in the second Psalm, ‘You are My Son; today I have begotten You.’ As for the fact that He raised Him up from the dead, no longer to return to decay, He has spoken in this way: ‘I will give you the holy and sure blessings of David.’ Therefore He also says in another Psalm, ‘You will not allow Your Holy One to undergo decay.’ For David, after he had served the purpose of God in his own generation, fell asleep, and was laid among his fathers and underwent decay; but He whom God raised [i.e., Jesus] did not undergo decay. Therefore let it be known to you, brethren, that through Him forgiveness of sins is proclaimed to you, and through Him everyone who believes is freed from all things, from which you could not be freed through the Law of Moses. Therefore take heed, so that the thing spoken of in the Prophets may not come upon you:

‘Behold, you scoffers, and marvel, and perish;
For I am accomplishing a work in your days,
A work which you will never believe, though someone should describe it to you.’”

As Paul and Barnabas were going out, the people kept begging that these things might be spoken to them the next Sabbath. Now when the meeting of the synagogue had broken up, many of the Jews and of the God-fearing proselytes followed Paul and Barnabas, who, speaking to them, were urging them to continue in the grace of God. (Acts 13:32-43)

As in the stories of the RYR and the Good Samaritan, Paul contrasted the keeping of the law of Moses with the gospel of grace. Mankind has a strong desire for and belief in protection by obeying the law. It was strong amongst Jews of the 1st century and is strong amongst many religious people today. Nearly all religious hold that the key to life after death is rooted in our behavior and morality during this life. It was hotly debated in the early Christian church, as illustrated by this discussion of circumcision:

Some men came down from Judea and began teaching the brethren, “Unless you are circumcised according to the custom of Moses, you cannot be saved.” And when Paul and Barnabas had great dissension and debate with them, the brethren determined that Paul and Barnabas and some others of them should go up to Jerusalem to the apostles and elders concerning this issue. Therefore, being sent on their way by the church, they were passing through both Phoenicia and Samaria, describing in detail the conversion of the Gentiles, and were bringing great joy to all the brethren. When they arrived at Jerusalem, they were received by the church and the apostles and the elders, and they reported all that God had done with them. But some of the sect of the Pharisees who had believed stood up, saying, “It is necessary to circumcise them and to direct them to observe the Law of Moses.”

The apostles and the elders came together to look into this matter. After there had been much debate, Peter stood up and said to them, “Brethren, you know that in the early days God made a choice among you, that by my mouth the Gentiles would hear the word of the gospel and believe. And God, who knows the heart, testified to them giving them the Holy Spirit, just as He also did to us; and He made no distinction between us and them, cleansing their hearts by faith. Now therefore why do you put God to the test by placing upon the neck of the disciples a yoke which neither our fathers nor we have been able to bear? But we believe that we are saved through the grace of the Lord Jesus, in the same way as they also are.”
All the people kept silent, and they were listening to Barnabas and Paul as they were relating what signs and wonders God had done through them among the Gentiles.

After they had stopped speaking, James answered, saying, “Brethren, listen to me. Simeon has related how God first concerned Himself about taking from among the Gentiles a people for His name. With this the words of the Prophets agree, just as it is written,

‘After these things I will return,
And I will rebuild the tabernacle of David which has fallen,
And I will rebuild its ruins,
 And I will restore it,
 So that the rest of mankind may seek the Lord,
 And all the Gentiles who are called by My name,’ 
Says the Lord, who makes these things known from long ago.

Therefore it is my judgment that we do not trouble those who are turning to God from among the Gentiles, but that we write to them that they abstain from things contaminated by idols and from fornication and from what is strangled and from blood. For Moses from ancient generations has in every city those who preach him, since he is read in the synagogues every Sabbath.”

Then it seemed good to the apostles and the elders, with the whole church, to choose men from among them to send to Antioch with Paul and Barnabas—Judas called Barsabbas, and Silas, leading men among the brethren, and they sent this letter by them,

“The apostles and the brethren who are elders, to the brethren in Antioch and Syria and Cilicia who are from the Gentiles, greetings.

“Since we have heard that some of our number to whom we gave no instruction have disturbed you with their words, unsettling your souls, it seemed good to us, having become of one mind, to select men to send to you with our beloved Barnabas and Paul, men who have risked their lives for the name of our Lord Jesus Christ. “Therefore we have sent Judas and Silas, who themselves will also report the same things by word of mouth. “For it seemed good to the Holy Spirit and to us to lay upon you no greater burden than these essentials: that you abstain from things sacrificed to idols and from blood and from things strangled and from fornication; if you keep yourselves free from such things, you will do well. Farewell.”

So when they were sent away, they went down to Antioch; and having gathered the congregation together, they delivered the letter. When they had read it, they rejoiced because of its encouragement. (Acts 15:1-31)

Rejoicing was no doubt the appropriate response! In those days, adult circumcision was conducted without anesthesia, with no antisepsis, and no understanding of anatomy. It was a perilous procedure and seems hardly likely to win converts. But the point is not the procedure: It is that one can no more please God by cutting off a foreskin than by trying to keep any other law. Circumcision was taken as evidence of being a law-abiding citizen. But Paul took issue with that:

But if you bear the name “Jew” and rely upon the Law and boast in God, and know His will and approve the things that are essential, being instructed out of the Law, and are confident that you yourself are a guide to the blind, a light to those who are in darkness, a corrector of the foolish, a teacher of the immature, having in the Law the embodiment of knowledge and of the truth, you, therefore, who teach another, do you not teach yourself? You who preach that one shall not steal, do you steal? You who say that one should not commit adultery, do you commit adultery? You who abhor idols, do you rob temples? You who boast in the Law, through your breaking the Law, do you dishonor God? For “the name of God is blasphemed among the Gentiles because of you,” just as it is written.

For indeed circumcision is of value if you practice the Law; but if you are a transgressor of the Law, your circumcision has become uncircumcision. So if the uncircumcised man keeps the requirements of the Law, will not his uncircumcision be regarded as circumcision? And he who is physically uncircumcised, if he keeps the Law, will he not judge you who though having the letter of the Law and circumcision are a transgressor of the Law? For he is not a Jew who is one outwardly, nor is circumcision that which is outward in the flesh. But he is a Jew who is one inwardly; and circumcision is that which is of the heart, by the Spirit, not by the letter; and his praise is not from men, but from God. (Romans 2:17-29)

So can we earn eternal life by abiding by the law, by placing ourselves rather than God at the center of religion? This was the fatal flaw not only in the RYR but even in Peter when he asked “What’s in it for me?” In those days, to be rich was viewed as to be in God’s favor and indicated righteousness, while to be poor was viewed as the result of God’s disfavor. This is why the disciples were so astonished that the RYR was not going to make it to heaven.

Does religion count towards earning eternal life? Does the law? If so, what do they offer? If not, how they detract from it? Is life after death linked at all to mortal life?

Ben: Why would one want eternal life? Do we even know what it is? Why does there have to be a connection between eternal life and the meaning (if any) of mortal life? As to the question of the role of religion: A philosopher has described religion as a boat that helps one get across a river; once one reaches the other side, the boat has no further use.

David: We only assume that everyone thinks that the three existential questions of origin, purpose, and afterlife (or creation, revelation, and salvation) are valid. I think many—perhaps most—most people do, but not by any means everybody. Many seem content enough to live only for today, with no expectation of an afterlife. Is their point of view invalid? Are they in spiritual danger by holding it? Or do they see something we don’t?

I think it is always worth challenging and testing basic assumptions.

Michael: Where would philosophy be without these existential questions? I think they are inevitable in thinking people.

Don: That these questions have been debated since the beginning of recorded history, and that all major religions address them in some way, suggests that indeed they are fundamental; though they may not be equally important or essential to everyone.

David: Most of Chinese philosophy and religion is focused on living life today. Yes, there is an afterlife, but it is populated by ancestors who apparently need the same things—a Mercedes, lots of money, and so on—that we do. (People burn cardboard models of Mercedes destined for their ancestor’s divine driveway.) But the main focus of Daoism and Confucianism is today, not tomorrow; about how to behave on this earth. They certainly accept the concept of eternity but do not attempt seriously to analyze it. We are talking about two billion people living today (never mind the billions more who have died holding the same beliefs)— no small number — who wax and have long waxed philosophic about the present life but do not seem nearly so consumed by the existential questions of creation and afterlife as those of us raised in a Western philosophic tradition.

Rimon: In these scriptural stories, the question was how to inherit eternal life. Someone has to die in order for us to inherit something. Is it the self?

Robin: Is giving up our selves… our selfishness… tantamount to giving up our will, our ego?

David: It is a truism but ultimately, in order to inherit an eternal life about which we know nothing we have to give up the mortal life that we know well. We have to die. The RYR was not willing to “die” figuratively by giving up his wealth, but in the end he had no choice: He had to give it up his wealth, along with his life, anyway. We all must. Since grace is a gift we get regardless, then all we have to do to inherit eternal life is to die.

Michael: Maybe we need to fine tune the concept of self. If it dies, it may not have to be a material loss. For example, the RYR had to give up his wealth for his self to die and inherit eternal life because he was rich, but this would not apply to someone who was poor. The self itself—the will, the sense of freedom and control—has to die in order to wake up in eternal life.

Ben: Zen Buddhists reach nirvana by being “in the moment”—by surrendering all desires. Scientifically, we began and will end as stardust. Are we not susceptible to be recast, reincarnated, in some totally new way?

Don: Are extreme sportswo/men who risk death driven by a need to relinquish the self?

Ben: The cave explorer, base jumper, and catastrophe fireman, and freediver featured in a documentary I am editing all use the same term when they are at the center or the core of their “element”. They find it ten kilometers below the earth’s surface, in 80 seconds of free-falling from a cliff top, in the blazing heart of a monster bushfire, and hundreds of feet under the ice of a frozen sea while holding a single breath for up to ten minutes. The term they use is: “Rebirth.” The freediver told me that when she reaches her center she no longer feels the need to breathe; she feels utterly calm and at one with the universe. Leaving that “center” is anticlimactic; however, the will to live usually overrides the inclination to stay at the center forever. And yet, for an instant, they all say they experience a kind of divinity, a relinquishment of self, and that time changes in some way for each of them. Seconds of free fall feels like eternity, while two weeks deep underground passes like the blink of an eye.

Michael: “Rebirth” is a fundamental Christian requirement.

David: Jesus also said that the kingdom of heaven—eternal life—is here and now, which is apparently the divinity the extreme sportswo/men discover. When they reach their “center” ought they to resist the will to live? Should they instead remain forever in that eternal divine moment, dying a mortal death but experiencing a spiritual rebirth? Or is that momentary association at the center itself sufficient for spiritual rebirth, not requiring mortal sacrifice?

Ben: It gives meaning to their lives. To the extent religion gives meaning and helps in a symbolic rebirth, perhaps it has value.

Don: Is there a measurable causal relationship between the present life and the afterlife? Does Jesus support or oppose the idea of a measurable relationship?

Robin: To be an heir, one needs a relative or other benefactor. There has to be a relationship, if not through birth then through appointment. It is not a relationship of our choice. But as happened in the Garden, it is a relationship that can be severed. Jesus restored that severed relationship by sacrificing himself so that he could appoint us as his heirs and we could inherit his legacy of eternal life.

Rimon: Jesus showed us that we can do nothing on our own to inherit eternal life. He had to die for us.

Michael: There is definitely a relationship, a connection, between the question of the meaning of this life and the inheritance of the next.

Robin: We are heirs of the legacy of Jesus.

David: It seems to me the legacy is one of spiritual life—a legacy that will persist even if we succeed in wiping ourselves off the face of the earth. The spirit cannot die.

Don: Next week we will study the parable of the laborers in the vineyard (in Matthew 20), who all got the same pay no matter how many hours they worked, to see if it can shed any light on the topic under discussion.

* * *