LDS and Catholic view of Heaven

[Truth_Faith13]

The LDS view of Heaven has been discussed a lot in another thread regarding LDS Marriage. In this thread, it was mentioned that Catholic’s believe that there is ONE heaven (I knew this) in the presence of ALL members of the trinity (I knew this) but that each person has a different experience and therefore a different reward (I didn’t know this!)

I didn’t want to get the other thread off topic and so decided to start a different topic specifically talking about Heaven, what Heaven consists of etc. I would like to compare and contrast LDS and Catholic and so have posted here in “non catholic religions”

My question I suppose rests on the actual difference between the two faiths since it would seem both have a different “reward” system and so may not be as different as I first thought. Does the CC have any official teaching on this? How, if there is one heaven, with all members of the trinity and most souls have passed through purgatory to be sanctified (or purified?) are there different rewards?

I understand the LDS have a view of three degrees of glory, the highest of which has its own levels. Are these degrees of glory in physically different places? or is the experience of the person different?

How does a Catholic and an LDS view 1 Corinthians 15 Not all flesh is the same: People have one kind of flesh, animals have another, birds another and fish another. 40There are also heavenly bodies and there are earthly bodies; but the splendor of the heavenly bodies is one kind, and the splendor of the earthly bodies is another. 41The sun has one kind of splendor, the moon another and the stars another; and star differs from star in splendor.

 

[jane_doe]

I understand the LDS have a view of three degrees of glory, the highest of which has its own levels. Are these degrees of glory in physically different places? or is the experience of the person different?

This is unknown. Traditionally people think of it as different addresses and different experiences, but there are some (including myself) who see it more as just different experiences and not necessarily addresses.

How does a Catholic and an LDS view 1 Corinthians 15 Not all flesh is the same: People have one kind of flesh, animals have another, birds another and fish another. 40There are also heavenly bodies and there are earthly bodies; but the splendor of the heavenly bodies is one kind, and the splendor of the earthly bodies is another. 41The sun has one kind of splendor, the moon another and the stars another; and star differs from star in splendor.

LDS view: this verse applies both literally to the physical resurrected body and to the more metaphysical body that is the entire self.

 

[Horton]

The LDS view of Heaven has been discussed a lot in another thread regarding LDS Marriage. In this thread, it was mentioned that Catholic’s believe that there is ONE heaven (I knew this) in the presence of ALL members of the trinity (I knew this) but that each person has a different experience and therefore a different reward (I didn’t know this!)

I didn’t want to get the other thread off topic and so decided to start a different topic specifically talking about Heaven, what Heaven consists of etc. I would like to compare and contrast LDS and Catholic and so have posted here in “non catholic religions”

My question I suppose rests on the actual difference between the two faiths since it would seem both have a different “reward” system and so may not be as different as I first thought. Does the CC have any official teaching on this? How, if there is one heaven, with all members of the trinity and most souls have passed through purgatory to be sanctified (or purified?) are there different rewards?

I understand the LDS have a view of three degrees of glory, the highest of which has its own levels. Are these degrees of glory in physically different places? or is the experience of the person different?

How does a Catholic and an LDS view 1 Corinthians 15 Not all flesh is the same: People have one kind of flesh, animals have another, birds another and fish another. 40There are also heavenly bodies and there are earthly bodies; but the splendor of the heavenly bodies is one kind, and the splendor of the earthly bodies is another. 41The sun has one kind of splendor, the moon another and the stars another; and star differs from star in splendor.

This is the CCC from the Vatican website.
vatican.va/archive/ccc_css/archive/catechism/p123a12.htm

These are the notes from 1 Corinthians 15. As you can see contrary to LDS belief St. Paul is talking about the resurrection of earthly bodies and questions the Christians of Corinth may have.

[15:35–58] Paul imagines two objections that the Corinthians could raise: one concerning the manner of the resurrection (how?), the other pertaining to the qualities of the risen body (what kind?). These questions probably lie behind their denial of the resurrection (1Cor 15:12), and seem to reflect the presumption that no kind of body other than the one we now possess would be possible. Paul deals with these objections in inverse order, in 1Cor 15:36–49 and 1Cor 15:50–58. His argument is fundamentally theological and its appeal is to the understanding.

[15:35–49] Paul approaches the question of the nature of the risen body (what kind of body?) by means of two analogies: the seed (1Cor 15:36–44) and the first man, Adam (1Cor 15:45–49).

[15:39–41] The expression “its own body” (1*Cor 15:38) leads to a development on the marvelous diversity evident in bodily life.

[15:42–44] The principles of qualitative difference before and after death (1Cor 15:36–38) and of diversity on different levels of creation (1Cor 15:39–41) are now applied to the human body. Before: a body animated by a lower, natural life-principle (psychē) and endowed with the properties of natural existence (corruptibility, lack of glory, weakness). After: a body animated by a higher life-principle (pneuma; cf. 1Cor 15:45) and endowed with other qualities (incorruptibility, glory, power, spirituality), which are properties of God himself.

 

[gazelam]

Here is the Encyclopedia of Mormonism entry of Heaven: eom.byu.edu/index.php/Heaven

Here is the Encyclopedia of Mormonism entry on Degrees of Glory (which some non-LDS CAFers are referring to as “layers”): eom.byu.edu/index.php/Degrees_of_Glory

I hope this helps…

 

[twf]

I’m not aware of any Catholic doctrine that requires Catholics to believe that heaven is a single physical place. In fact, after the Lord returns, and the consummation of all things, Scripture and Tradition speak of a “new heaven” AND a “new earth”. The Syriac tradition in particular speaks of the deification of the entire cosmos…the final consummation of the Incarnation (the mystical union of God and creation through man). I personally believe that heaven ultimately will consist of the billions and billions of galaxies and planets out there all made new by Christ. Of course the saints will always be in the presence of the Trinity…God is not limited to a particular place.

 

[IgnatianPhilo]

What disturbs me about the LDS Idea of heaven or life in their version of the resurrection is that ultimate joy and fulfilment is not dependant on God alone but one an individual’s relationship to their spouse/spouses and the Children from those spouses. In order to achieve the highest state of being, ultimate fulfilment, God alone is not enough, one needs another human being and God is shown in some sense to be a deficient provider within Mormonism.

Mormonism also seems to be challenged in experiencing God. Consider that God (the father) doesn’t pervade all creation, rather another entity (his holy Spirit) does. Since Heavenly Father in Mormonism is limited in his Flesh and bone body to a specific space within the material universe it seems that it will be very unlikely that the Mormon will get to spend a great deal of time with their Heavenly Father in person. The Mormon’s attention will likewise be divided from Heavenly Father to their spouse and the spiritual children and world they will govern as a result.

If any LDS feels they can address these concerns, I would i like to hear what they have to say.

 

[zaffiroborant]

I’m not aware of any Catholic doctrine that requires Catholics to believe that heaven is a single physical place. In fact, after the Lord returns, and the consummation of all things, Scripture and Tradition speak of a “new heaven” AND a “new earth”. The Syriac tradition in particular speaks of the deification of the entire cosmos…the final consummation of the Incarnation (the mystical union of God and creation through man). I personally believe that heaven ultimately will consist of the billions and billions of galaxies and planets out there all made new by Christ. Of course the saints will always be in the presence of the Trinity…God is not limited to a particular place.

There’s a difference between heaven consisting of many different places and heaven being segregated.

 

[twf]

What disturbs me about the LDS Idea of heaven or life in their version of the resurrection is that ultimate joy and fulfilment is not dependant on God alone but one an individual’s relationship to their spouse/spouses and the Children from those spouses. In order to achieve the highest state of being, ultimate fulfilment, God alone is not enough, one needs another human being and God is shown in some sense to be a deficient provider within Mormonism.

Mormonism also seems to be challenged in experiencing God. Consider that God (the father) doesn’t pervade all creation, rather another entity (his holy Spirit) does. Since Heavenly Father in Mormonism is limited in his Flesh and bone body to a specific space within the material universe it seems that it will be very unlikely that the Mormon will get to spend a great deal of time with their Heavenly Father in person. The Mormon’s attention will likewise be divided from Heavenly Father to their spouse and the spiritual children and world they will govern as a result.

If any LDS feels they can address these concerns, I would i like to hear what they have to say.

In Mormonism, God and man are the same “species”. God has an eternal family and a glorified physical body. Humans on earth will someday have an eternal family and glorified physical bodies. The infinite divide between God and deified man that exists in a Catholic / Orthodox understanding of theosis isn’t there. The theology is fundamentally different.

 

[twf]

There’s a difference between heaven consisting of many different places and heaven being segregated.

True. Though there are definitely different degrees of glory / reward in the orthodox Christian tradition. That is clearly Scriptural. Though this side of heaven we can’t begin to comprehend what that really means. Our Lady, of course, is at the pinnacle of the “hierarchy” of degrees of glory.

 

[gazelam]

What disturbs me about the LDS Idea of heaven or life in their version of the resurrection is that ultimate joy and fulfilment is not dependant on God alone but one an individual’s relationship to their spouse/spouses and the Children from those spouses. In order to achieve the highest state of being, ultimate fulfilment, God alone is not enough, one needs another human being and God is shown in some sense to be a deficient provider within Mormonism.

Mormonism also seems to be challenged in experiencing God. Consider that God (the father) doesn’t pervade all creation, rather another entity (his holy Spirit) does. Since Heavenly Father in Mormonism is limited in his Flesh and bone body to a specific space within the material universe it seems that it will be very unlikely that the Mormon will get to spend a great deal of time with their Heavenly Father in person. The Mormon’s attention will likewise be divided from Heavenly Father to their spouse and the spiritual children and world they will govern as a result.

If any LDS feels they can address these concerns, I would i like to hear what they have to say.

My thoughts are that our human mind has an extremely limited understanding of the heavenly realm and speculation can only take us so far.

Isaiah 55:8, 9 For my thoughts are not your thoughts, nor are your ways my ways, For as the heavens are higher than the earth, so are my ways higher than your ways, my thoughts higher than your thoughts.

1 Corinthians 2:9 But as it is written: What eye has not seen, and ear has not heard, and what has not entered the human heart, what God has prepared for those who love him.

 

[IgnatianPhilo]

My thoughts are that our human mind has an extremely limited understanding of the heavenly realm and speculation can only take us so far.

Isaiah 55:8, 9 For my thoughts are not your thoughts, nor are your ways my ways, For as the heavens are higher than the earth, so are my ways higher than your ways, my thoughts higher than your thoughts.

1 Corinthians 2:9 But as it is written: What eye has not seen, and ear has not heard, and what has not entered the human heart, what God has prepared for those who love him.

If we assume a Mormon outlook in which transcendence doesn’t really exist it doesn’t seem that hard to comprehend. We simply become more powerful than we are already and my criticisms of the LDS vision of the afterlife ought to be addressed without appealing to “God’s ways are more mysterious and wonderful than we know.” That statement is true as far as the “how” it will be accomplished. But the “why” is left wide open and full of holes. Is heavenly Father a creature beyond his body? Does his soul pervade all existence? If it does why does he need a holy Spirit? Given spatial limitation you will likely not be able to spend a great deal of time with Heavenly Father bodily since he has not only millions of other Mormons to care for but the souls of everyone else to care for. These are harsh but fair criticisms which follow from LDS doctrine. In the end the God of Joseph Smith is shown to be severely deficient when compared to the classical idea of God who is utterly transcendent.

 

[jane_doe]

If we assume a Mormon outlook in which transcendence doesn’t really exist it doesn’t seem that hard to comprehend

Do you think you really understand the LDS view of the afterlife? Or that you would like to understand it?

. We simply become more powerful than we are already

Incorrect.

But the “why” is left wide open and full of holes.

The why is perfectly clear: love.

Do you disagree with my main premise that God alone is not sufficient for ultimate fulfilment within Mormonism?

No. Your premise is foreign to LDS theology.

 

[IgnatianPhilo]

Do you think you really understand the LDS view of the afterlife? Or that you would like to understand it?

Incorrect.

The why is perfectly clear: love.

No. Your premise is foreign to LDS theology.

Jane It is up to you to present a counter argument rather than just denying what I am saying. To be transcendent is to be beyond the universe and time. It is to be the highest form existence which escapes categorisation. The only real transcendent beings in Mormonism seem to be eternal intelligence’s existing in a realm which Mormons can say nothing about, they can’t even define the intelligence’s we once were. Your God on the other hand is defined and limited. He is literally a man of flesh and bone, he cannot he create without his spiritual wife/wives, he is dependant on his Holy Spirit and he is limited in his influence to his own planet/universe and cannot influence anything beyond that (like his heavenly Father’s world. I see no reason for why we cannot label him just a super human entity.

If I am incorrect that we simply become more powerful than we already are you have to demonstrate that rather than saying I am simply incorrect. It seems within Mormonism the transformation from mortal to divine includes gaining several powers and or abilities. The ability to manipulate matter to form planets/universes, the ability through ones spouse/spouses to have spiritual children numbering in the billions if not trillions, the ability to influence one’s creation and perhaps some other powers that we see God perform in the bible and Mormon resources.

I am glad you agree with me that the God of Mormonism is not sufficient for human fulfilment. You are dependant on your spouse it seems to inherit eternal life which I think is problematic as I pointed out in the other thread concerning LDS marriage.

 

[jane_doe]

To be transcendent is to be beyond the universe and time. It is to be the highest form existence which escapes categorisation.

I’m going to stop you right here: you are applying Catholic theology to a non-Catholic faith. This is fundamentally flawed from the start and destined to be non-productive. LDS don’t use the word “transcendent”, so in order to understand LDS faith you’ll have to break it down into different words.

Your God on the other hand is defined and limited.

Incorrect. God is infinite.

He is literally a man of flesh and bone,

A body does not limit the Son, nor the Father.

he is dependant on his Holy Spirit .

??? This makes no sense.

he is limited in his influence to his own planet/universe and cannot influence anything beyond that (like his heavenly Father’s world.

This is speculation.

I see no reason for why we cannot label him just a super human entity.

You read the Bible-- would you describe God as “just a super human entity”??? Neither would I.

If I am incorrect that we simply become more powerful than we already are you have to demonstrate that rather than saying I am simply incorrect. It seems within Mormonism the transformation from mortal to divine includes gaining several powers and or abilities. The ability to manipulate matter to form planets/universes, the ability through ones spouse/spouses to have spiritual children numbering in the billions if not trillions, the ability to influence one’s creation and perhaps some other powers that we see God perform in the bible and Mormon resources.

You are preoccupied with “more powerful”. Any power is besides the point. We are sinful, hateful, small minded individuals. God is infinite perfect and loving. There’s a huge difference.

I am glad you agree with me that the God of Mormonism is not sufficient for human fulfilment.

I do NOT agree with you. I do NOT agree with your severely flawed understanding of my faith.

You are dependant on your spouse it seems to inherit eternal life which I think is problematic as I pointed out in the other thread concerning LDS marriage.

I have already repeatedly correct you on this matter. No, LDS not believe a person’s eternal life is dependent on any earthly person, including a spouse.

 

[Stephen168]

I’m going to stop you right here: you are applying Catholic theology to a non-Catholic faith. This is fundamentally flawed from the start and destined to be non-productive. LDS don’t use the word “transcendent”, so in order to understand LDS faith you’ll have to break it down into different words.

The word is an idea that can be applied to anything. The idea applies to the Christian understanding of God, and does not apply in the Mormon understanding of God. It does not apply to Mormonism for all the reasons given by IgnatianPhilo.

 

[IgnatianPhilo]

I’m going to stop you right here: you are applying Catholic theology to a non-Catholic faith. This is fundamentally flawed from the start and destined to be non-productive. LDS don’t use the word “transcendent”, so in order to understand LDS faith you’ll have to break it down into different words.

I’m applying a term which has a meaning beyond “Catholic” theology and is widely accepted of being applied to divinity since the time of the ancient Greeks. Now I originally said that in the Mormon view transcendence doesn’t exist. I speculate perhaps it can be applied to intelligence which are more mysterious and unknowable than Heavenly Father of whom Mormons have a wealth of information and knowledge of, what he looks like and what he is actually composed of ( a male body of flesh and bone ). Since this is a thread comparing the concepts of Heaven in LDS and Catholic view (which is generally in accord with my Orthodox view) we can rightly compare the two. In one view God is everywhere, not limited by physical space like he is in the LDS view. He is thus able to be intimately present within the believer given his omnipresence, a doctrine the Mormon must deny since the Mormon God is not omnipresent, only his holy Spirit is.

Incorrect. God is infinite.

Infinite how? Your God has a body of flesh and bone, he quite possibly exists on another planet in the universe. He is by definition limited and subscribed to his body. Is he infinitely powerful? Well no, since he has no power over his own heavenly Father he is therefore limited by the eternal chain of gods before him. Can he create ex nihilo from himself? No he requires a spouse(s) and he requires pre-existent matter to rearrange. Was your God not once like we were, a mortal man? I suppose one could say he has always existed in Mormonism, which is a moot point since we have all always existed.

A body does not limit the Son, nor the Father.

Yes a body does limit one to that existence. That is the Father and the Son are no more than their physical bodies/souls. There are interesting questions we could ask. Does God’s physical biology affect how he governs the universe? Is Heavenly Father’s body size limited? Certainty he is limited spatially in that he cannot be in two places at once. While he might have less limitations than we do he does have limitations.

??? This makes no sense.

So Heavenly Father does not require the Holy Spirit? He is not dependent on the Spirit to aid him? If he can do all the things the Spirit does why does he use a secondary entity instead of taking care of things himself?

This is speculation.

Speculation which makes sense given Mormon beliefs about their own afterlife. Will you be able to interfere with Heavenly Father and the plans for his world once you die? If not then it follows that he cannot do the same to his Heavenly Father as your spiritual children cannot do to you. You might deny the idea that Heavenly Father has his own Heavenly Father in which case you contradict what Joseph Smith, God’s chosen Prophet taught about this subject.

You read the Bible-- would you describe God as “just a super human entity”??? Neither would I.

No I wouldn’t describe the God of the bible like that. I would describe the God Mormons read into the bible like that however.

You are preoccupied with “more powerful”. Any power is besides the point. We are sinful, hateful, small minded individuals. God is infinite perfect and loving. There’s a huge difference.

Again in what sense is God perfect or infinite? A clear case can be made for the limitations of your Heavenly Father. Also Heavenly Father was perhaps just as Hateful, sinful and small minded as any of us are today within Mormon theology. (Controversial I know but It stands to reason from Mormon theology that the possibility heavenly Father was once a sinner is a possibility).

I do NOT agree with you. I do NOT agree with your severely flawed understanding of my faith.

I asked: Do you disagree with my main premise that God alone is not sufficient for ultimate fulfilment within Mormonism?

You said: No. Your premise is foreign to LDS theology.

In saying “No” I thought you were answering my question that you didn’t disagree with my main premise. But since you do we can ask the question which I brought up in the other thread but no Mormon touched. There are three types of existences after the resurrection for Mormons, the highest existence is reserved for faithful Mormons whom are married. Doctrines and covenants makes this clear.

lds.org/scriptures/dc-testament/dc/131.1-4?lang=eng#0

Allowing for the possibility that marriage can occur before the resurrection and for those who had no chance of marriage in life it still means that ultimate celestial glory is dependent on finding a spouse either in this life or the next. God alone is not suffcient since he cannot fulfil the need of being a spouse to all his followers. You might not like the conclusion and dismiss it but it does follow from Mormon beliefs.

I have already repeatedly correct you on this matter. No, LDS not believe a person’s eternal life is dependent on any earthly person, including a spouse.

Doctrines and covenants disagrees with you. See previous link.

 

[jane_doe]

I’m applying a term which has a meaning beyond “Catholic” theology and is widely accepted of being applied to divinity since the time of the ancient Greeks. Now I originally said that in the Mormon view transcendence doesn’t exist. I speculate perhaps it can be applied to intelligence which are more mysterious and unknowable than Heavenly Father of whom Mormons have a wealth of information and knowledge of, what he looks like and what he is actually composed of ( a male body of flesh and bone ). Since this is a thread comparing the concepts of Heaven in LDS and Catholic view (which is generally in accord with my Orthodox view) we can rightly compare the two. In one view God is everywhere, not limited by physical space like he is in the LDS view. He is thus able to be intimately present within the believer given his omnipresence, a doctrine the Mormon must deny since the Mormon God is not omnipresent, only his holy Spirit is.

Infinite how? Your God has a body of flesh and bone, he quite possibly exists on another planet in the universe. He is by definition limited and subscribed to his body. Is he infinitely powerful? Well no, since he has no power over his own heavenly Father he is therefore limited by the eternal chain of gods before him. Can he create ex nihilo from himself? No he requires a spouse(s) and he requires pre-existent matter to rearrange. Was your God not once like we were, a mortal man? I suppose one could say he has always existed in Mormonism, which is a moot point since we have all always existed.

Yes a body does limit one to that existence. That is the Father and the Son are no more than their physical bodies/souls. There are interesting questions we could ask. Does God’s physical biology affect how he governs the universe? Is Heavenly Father’s body size limited? Certainty he is limited spatially in that he cannot be in two places at once. While he might have less limitations than we do he does have limitations.

So Heavenly Father does not require the Holy Spirit? He is not dependent on the Spirit to aid him? If he can do all the things the Spirit does why does he use a secondary entity instead of taking care of things himself?

Speculation which makes sense given Mormon beliefs about their own afterlife. Will you be able to interfere with Heavenly Father and the plans for his world once you die? If not then it follows that he cannot do the same to his Heavenly Father as your spiritual children cannot do to you. You might deny the idea that Heavenly Father has his own Heavenly Father in which case you contradict what Joseph Smith, God’s chosen Prophet taught about this subject.

No I wouldn’t describe the God of the bible like that. I would describe the God Mormons read into the bible like that however.

Again in what sense is God perfect or infinite? A clear case can be made for the limitations of your Heavenly Father. Also Heavenly Father was perhaps just as Hateful, sinful and small minded as any of us are today within Mormon theology. (Controversial I know but It stands to reason from Mormon theology that the possibility heavenly Father was once a sinner is a possibility).

I asked: Do you disagree with my main premise that God alone is not sufficient for ultimate fulfilment within Mormonism?

You said: No. Your premise is foreign to LDS theology.

In saying “No” I thought you were answering my question that you didn’t disagree with my main premise. But since you do we can ask the question which I brought up in the other thread but no Mormon touched. There are three types of existences after the resurrection for Mormons, the highest existence is reserved for faithful Mormons whom are married. Doctrines and covenants makes this clear.

lds.org/scriptures/dc-testament/dc/131.1-4?lang=eng#0

Allowing for the possibility that marriage can occur before the resurrection and for those who had no chance of marriage in life it still means that ultimate celestial glory is dependent on finding a spouse either in this life or the next. God alone is not suffcient since he cannot fulfil the need of being a spouse to all his followers. You might not like the conclusion and dismiss it but it does follow from Mormon beliefs.

Doctrines and covenants disagrees with you. See previous link.

Before I spend all my time replying to this, I have a question for you: IgnatianPhilo are you interest in getting your facts straight and actually learning what LDS believe?

 

[Stephen168]

Before I spend all my time replying to this, I have a question for you: IgnatianPhilo are you interest in getting your facts straight and actually learning what LDS believe?

It is clear that you cannot prove anything IgnatianPhilo said was incorrect; either by fact or reason.

 

[Horton]

Before I spend all my time replying to this, I have a question for you: IgnatianPhilo are you interest in getting your facts straight and actually learning what LDS believe?

It sounds as though IgnationPhilo is quite knowledgeable regarding the LDS faith. You’ve said many times you are here for dialogue and discussion about the Catholic faith and comparing & contrasting them with other religions. He is doing just that. Given he has stated his as Greek Orthodox (I believe) it is clear he want’s to be proselytized.

This poster took quite a bit of time to respond to you so it would only be appropriate to either counter his argument respectfully or respectfully bow out of the conversation. Your response, though common, just tells many posters on CAF you are either unwilling or unable to respond.

 

[gazelam]

If we assume a Mormon outlook in which transcendence doesn’t really exist it doesn’t seem that hard to comprehend. We simply become more powerful than we are already and my criticisms of the LDS vision of the afterlife ought to be addressed without appealing to “God’s ways are more mysterious and wonderful than we know.” That statement is true as far as the “how” it will be accomplished. But the “why” is left wide open and full of holes. Is heavenly Father a creature beyond his body? Does his soul pervade all existence? If it does why does he need a holy Spirit? Given spatial limitation you will likely not be able to spend a great deal of time with Heavenly Father bodily since he has not only millions of other Mormons to care for but the souls of everyone else to care for. These are harsh but fair criticisms which follow from LDS doctrine. In the end the God of Joseph Smith is shown to be severely deficient when compared to the classical idea of God who is utterly transcendent.

I appreciate that you want to ascribe to God the maximum amount of interaction with all of the departed faithful. However, isn’t the God of orthodox Christianity so transcendent, that He is literally immaterial? I can be harsh, too! IMHO an immaterial being is a non-existent being. I’m not sure how an immaterial/nothing being is going to make anyone’s afterlife a joyous place. I’ll leave you a quote from Joseph Smith: “Could you gaze into heaven five minutes, you would know more than you would by reading all that ever was written on the subject.” Take care.