Would living to 1000 be immoral?

[chain]

I seem to recall that very long lives were listed early in the bible. At that time it appeared to be God’s will. If this technology becomes available, and can be accepted while maintaining other moral issues (such as continued openness to life), imho it should not be a problem.

That said, I do see the load carry capacity of the Earth as an issue. Some other technological changes (such as terraforming other planets or utilizing the vastness of the seas) for it to be possible.

 

[Tsuwano]

I am not a theologian, but it has long been my understanding of what is “natural” for any being is to tend toward its ultimate end or purpose. For humans, that is ultimate union with God, not taking on the attributes and purposes of other creatures.

Whether extended life spans for humans is "natural"or “unnatural” is therefore determined by whether it brings humans more effectively to their ultimate goal, not whether the lives of other creatures (or cave men for that matter) are, or are not, extended.

But I still have to wonder whether the physical clock we all inherit applies to us in other ways as well.

I tend to agree with what you’ve written above, but I’m intrigued by your last comment about whether the physical clock we inherit applies in other ways. What do you mean? Is it possible for you to expand your thought a bit?

 

[GodLovesTheSpek]

The realization of the physical clock would be learn lessons. I think we would not take that physical clock for granted – nor use it as a means unto itself – that is using it to extend life in some way to try to “cheat” death. Deceived into playing God? Denying God or His power over us? Only He knows how much time is allotted. This should be a lesson to learn quickly about our physical clock, I would think. Given that we are not to unduly attach ourselves to things of this earth, I believe earthly life would be one of those things.

The Earth is not Heaven. It is part of God’s mercy that we all eventually die.

Knowing this we should form our lives and live them as close to His as quick as possible.

This could be the last post I ever write.

 

[celticsfan1983]

I would think that we are able to visit a doctor to treat sickness (and prolong our lives), so why would this technology be any different?

Living to 150 would be awfully lonely though. Pretty much all of your family, your wife, your children and friends would long be dead by then.

 

[johngh]

Whether living to 1000 is immoral or not, I do not know. I do know that it will have profound negative consequences on humanity though. But despite what some scientists say, I still think the technology for living that long is at least 75-100 years away. I think there are other technological issues, most notable artificial intelligence, that are a much bigger issue right now.

 

[notrust]

i want choice bottom line i choose to fight for god not man. your plans are yours and morally if you fear the future the powers that be should not deprive mankind at least unless it will be a problem in their lives im not helping people know so people 100 years from know are happy while im eating ants. yes ive pondered this recently.

the biggest down fall of any mind controled cult including the illuminati are robots in our future so i baught 4 christmas singing and dancing toys. sounds to easy to be true but very soon the illuminati will never exist because of robots.

 

[chaz0426]

I seem to recall that very long lives were listed early in the bible. At that time it appeared to be God’s will. If this technology becomes available, and can be accepted while maintaining other moral issues (such as continued openness to life), imho it should not be a problem.

That said, I do see the load carry capacity of the Earth as an issue. Some other technological changes (such as terraforming other planets or utilizing the vastness of the seas) for it to be possible.

I was going to add that if we ever develop the ability to extend our lives then the probability to terraform if not already colonized mars and beyond by that time is also pretty high. We have already identified several habitable planets outside of our solar system. The technology involved in getting there is the biggest hurdle. I’d like to think that we’d address the issue of limited resources and limited space before extended lifespan. Otherwise it would become more of a problem than a luxury.

To add to that, I do personally desire to live long hopefully to 100 if health permits and health care technology by that time is at least somewhat better than now considering we made major leaps in health care from just 75 years ago (1930’s). However I don’t think I would want to live beyond the turn of this century because I will probably just be ready to move on and hope to be with God. Plus all the methods of extending life may be tiresome on the body. Even then I couldn’t imagine living more than 200 years or wanting to. Even the best pleasures of this world would get bland, old and boring.

On the issue of morality. I think it’s within moral grounds since the issue of preventing life or degrading it in anyway isn’t seen at least from my perspective. It’s quite the contrary. The question is, why would one want to live that long and what would he/she do?

Being a scientist at heart, my only desire to live long would to see how much the world changes and how far we go hopefully for the better. It would also be neat if Jesus came back too!

One of my biggest fears which is growing bigger as I get older is this world turning more and more into a Godless world. I’m seeing more and more of it everyday and it makes my heart sick let alone depressing. Atheism seems to be growing exponentially replacing Agnosticism. I have more respect for Agnostics as I once considered myself one as a teenager despite being born Catholic. If this world becomes that way I think I’d rather die sooner rather than later.

 

[celticsfan1983]

I seem to recall that very long lives were listed early in the bible. At that time it appeared to be God’s will. If this technology becomes available, and can be accepted while maintaining other moral issues (such as continued openness to life), imho it should not be a problem.

Keep in mind that those ages could be for family dynasties, instead of individual persons.