Non-sexual reproduction? Incidentally I read about this concept this summer. The book claimed to be a summary of the secret society(occult) version of world history. It sure was strange reading and I never expected to see ideas from there restated here.

You could note that "greatly multiply sorrow" indicates relationship. You will not know that sorrow has increased unless you know what it was before. To realise that a change has occurred you must be familiar with the starting position.

You point out that no conception was recorded before the fall of man. Well, its not exactly an exhaustive text we are looking at. For all that we know by reading it, this could have been the same evening when they where created in the morning.

If we will no longer be humans in the resurrection, may Calvin be right about absolute predestination, that God decides what the redeemed thinks and wills.

What about couples taken to Heaven and to the New Earth - will they remain married or will they be considered unmarried? If they remain married will they cease having children? If they are considered unmarried will they stop having romantic affections for one another? If so, why?

"Men and women can reach God's ideal for them if they will take Christ as their helper. What human wisdom cannot do, His grace will accomplish for those who give themselves to Him in loving trust. His providences can unite hearts in bonds that are of heavenly origin. Love will not be a mere exchange of soft and flattering words. The loom of heaven weaves with warp and woof finer, yet more firm, that can be woven by the looms of earth. The result is not a tissue fabric, but a texture that will bear wear and test and trial. Heart will be bound to heart in the golden bonds of a love that is enduring. {LYL 16.3}

Jesus said we will be like the angels, and we definitely aren't like the angels now. Therefore, we will be somewhat different from what we are now.
Since God doesn't decide what an angel thinks and wills, why would He do so for us in the afterlife?

Pursuing this further, if someone becomes a widow(er) more than once and marries again, will that person have several espouses in heaven? (By the way, this was what the sadducees were asking Jesus. What was His answer?) And if someone's spouse doesn't go to heaven? Will some be single there while others will have several spouses?

Vaster,

First of all, we are told we will be like the angels, right? Do they not have wings? Furthermore, other portions of inspiration give us little details of this as well.

"They that wait upon the Lord shall renew their strength; they shall mount up with wings as eagles" (Isaiah 40:31).

"For, behold, the day cometh, that shall burn as an oven; and all the proud, yea, and all that do wickedly, shall be stubble: and the day that cometh shall burn them up, saith the Lord of hosts, that it shall leave them neither root nor branch. But unto you that fear my name shall the Sun of righteousness arise with healing in his wings; and ye shall go forth, and grow up as calves of the stall" (Malachi 4:1, 2).





Indeed, the "wings" concept comes from more than mere imagination here...although I grant that my imagination has sometimes looked forward to the day when I can fly--and we are also told Heaven will be more than we can imagine.

Blessings,

Green Cochoa.

Context please, what was the situation and what was the topic? Whom did Jesus say this to and what important qualifier is given in the text when this group is presented? And how does the short speech end?

The context is,

"For in the resurrection they neither marry nor are given in marriage, but are as the angels of God in Heaven."

???

Is there any other way to interpret these plain words?

Let me begin by quoting the full relevant passage before moving on.

Matthew writes: 23That same day the Sadducees, who say there is no resurrection, came to him with a question. 24"Teacher," they said, "Moses told us that if a man dies without having children, his brother must marry the widow and have children for him. 25Now there were seven brothers among us. The first one married and died, and since he had no children, he left his wife to his brother. 26The same thing happened to the second and third brother, right on down to the seventh. 27Finally, the woman died. 28Now then, at the resurrection, whose wife will she be of the seven, since all of them were married to her?"

29Jesus replied, "You are in error because you do not know the Scriptures or the power of God. 30At the resurrection people will neither marry nor be given in marriage; they will be like the angels in heaven. 31But about the resurrection of the dead—have you not read what God said to you, 32'I am the God of Abraham, the God of Isaac, and the God of Jacob'[a]? He is not the God of the dead but of the living."

33When the crowds heard this, they were astonished at his teaching.

I boldened the parts which I referred to in my reply to Rosangela. Now, what was Jesus answer to the inquiry of the Sadducees? He pointed out that their error was double. They did not know the scriptures nor the power of God. Therefore knowledge of the scriptures together with knowing God clearly would have preempted their question. Then follows the sentence we are discussing here. Jesus said: At the resurrection people will neither marry nor be given in marriage; they will be like the angels in heaven. In what respect do Jesus say that people will be like angels? Is there any warrant for extrapolating this to other aspects of anglehood? And how does this relate to Jesus first sentence in His answer, where He points out that the whole question is ill founded?There is nothing suggesting that this would refer to any time in an unknown future from its context. Rather it looks like a promise that anyone who is faint and weary can claim for today. This and the fact that a couple of verses previously compares the inhabitants of earth to grasshoppers suggest we can safely catalog these "wings as eagles" under poetic language. Here is another example where taking the message without placing overdue emphasis on the exact images used to give it seems the best path. For surely people are not wood with roots and branches and nor do we grow up to become calves in the stall. Drawing a correct distinction between narrative and poetic text is a virtue. Lastly, we have the third and fourth sentence in this short speech. And my claim here is that it is highly inconsistent to claim narrative speech for the first two and figurative speech for the last two when the main thing that differs them is that we want to believe the first is factual and that we want even more to believe that the second is not. I am of course speaking of these: 31But about the resurrection of the dead—have you not read what God said to you, 32'I am the God of Abraham, the God of Isaac, and the God of Jacob'[a]? He is not the God of the dead but of the living." God is the God of Abraham and God is not the God of the dead but the God of the living, thus the only logical conclusion that can be deduced is that Abraham is not dead but living. But no orthodox Adventist would venture there, not least because doing so would make him or her orthodox adventist no more.

Thomas, Jesus was referring to the future results of the resurrection, not that it was already a reality in the cases of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob. Jesus referred to death as sleep. In this sense, they are not dead.