Chapter 4.Analysis of Paradise Concepts
- Andrew Mytaf
- Feb 8
- 18 min read
Updated: Mar 19
Our ambitious task here is to identify, or perhaps even craft, the ideal concept of paradise. This isn’t mere speculation; we draw upon dozens of surveys, studies, and analyses, examining what truly makes people happy. Research and social surveys repeatedly point to certain recurring elements—interpersonal relationships, health, job satisfaction, and general well-being—as key contributors to happiness. Happiness, however, is not a straightforward formula; it’s a complex blend of positive emotions and life satisfaction, a nuanced state that defies simple definitions.
The Three Elements of Happiness
At the foundation of happiness lies the most fundamental and, admittedly, the most obvious condition: the absence of suffering. This includes a state of health, well-being, and a degree of self-contentment. In short, without freedom from pain and misery, happiness remains a distant prospect. Yet, while essential, these basic conditions rarely lead to a life brimming with fulfilment on their own.
Next comes the realm of relationships—a central pillar of happiness. Relationships, as it turns out, aren’t just a pleasant addition to life; they’re often the driving force behind our search for life’s essentials. Remarkably, even when primary needs like health or comfort are only partially met, meaningful relationships can provide a deep sense of purpose and joy. From cradle to grave, we are fundamentally social beings, constantly seeking connection, communication, and a sense of belonging through friendships, love, and mutual care. Relationships weave a complex web of meaning around us, grounding us in ways that provide both resilience and a profound sense of purpose.
But beyond this lies a further, often overlooked, layer of happiness: the pursuit of novelty. This encompasses the thrill of new experiences, the acquisition of knowledge, and the expansion of one’s understanding of the world. Novelty feeds a continual sense of progress and self-improvement, enriching not only the individual but also the relationships around them. Personal growth injects fresh dynamics into our interactions, often sparking renewed interest in one another. Many find that the excitement of learning, the joy of fresh experiences, and the steady sense of growth contribute significantly to life’s satisfaction and meaning.
These three pillars of happiness—freedom from suffering, meaningful relationships, and the pursuit of continual exploration—find strong reflections in various psychological frameworks. Take Maslow’s hierarchy of needs: although his famous pyramid divides human needs into segments, it also addresses these fundamental layers. Maslow’s concept of self-actualisation, which embraces aesthetic appreciation, intellectual fulfilment, and personal growth, aligns closely with the idea of novelty as essential for well-being.
Similarly, positive psychology identifies five key elements of well-being: positive emotions (linked to freedom from suffering), engagement, relationships (reflecting our need for connection), meaning, and accomplishment (mirroring the drive for growth and comprehension). Though these models offer varied perspectives, they ultimately distil into three primary dimensions of well-being.
Psychologically, happiness thus appears as a multi-layered state extending beyond mere pleasure or affection. It’s a condition where individuals continuously grow, seek meaning, and realise their fullest potential. When contemplating an ideal paradise, it’s clear that all three elements—freedom from suffering, meaningful relationships, and boundless exploration—must coexist. Some may see the third element as optional, but it undeniably deepens life’s richness. This perspective implies that the ultimate paradise wouldn’t be a static bliss but rather a dynamic process of continuous growth and self-realisation. Thus, paradise becomes not a destination but a journey, resonating deeply with our innate desire for progress and connection.
To craft such a concept of paradise, it’s only fair to begin by examining those that already exist. Here, we might uncover some surprisingly logical frameworks—or, at the very least, a few starting points for improvement.
Pagan Primary Sources
The notion of paradise, in its many forms, has been with us since the dawn of recorded history, emerging through mythologies that often reflect the particular character of each culture. Over time, these ideas developed into polytheistic and monotheistic religions, shaping more elaborate visions of paradise. Ancient pagan visions of paradise, however, often seem a far cry from modern ideals—perhaps even violating some basic Geneva Convention standards. In these paradises, gods are often embroiled in conflict, and the afterlife can require the souls of the deceased to engage in cosmic battles. In the few depictions where the dead find respite from earthly struggles, true freedom from suffering and death is rare, to say the least. Ancient paradises often included the deaths of animals, as feasting and hunting were considered part of the joy of the afterlife. And the treatment of women in these depictions… well, let’s say they’re not given much consideration beyond serving as part of the “heavenly” decor.
Take the Viking Valhalla, for instance. Every morning, the Einherjar—Valhalla’s warriors—rise and arm themselves, ready to charge into the day’s battles. They fight fiercely, killing and wounding each other, only to be resurrected and healed. After hours spent on the battlefield, they gather in the grand hall for a feast, dining on Sæhrímnir, the eternally regenerating boar that is sacrificed daily, only to be reborn in time for the next meal. Mead flows abundantly from Heidrun, the goat nourished by the leaves of Yggdrasil, the World Tree. The warriors are served by Valkyries, the legendary maidens of Norse mythology. The grand hall glows with the eerie light reflected from countless swords, casting shimmering patterns over this perpetual cycle of combat and celebration.
On the surface, this setup might appear almost logical—until one pauses to ask, what exactly are those swords reflecting? While this vision may indeed embody paradise for some, to modern sensibilities, it edges closer to a peculiar kind of ‘hell’—especially for poor Sæhrímnir, trapped in an endless cycle of reincarnation. Perhaps this snapshot of ancient tribal bliss offers us a valuable contrast, helping us reflect on just how much our concept of paradise has evolved.
Paradise in Major Religions
Ancient myths, glorious as they might be, often appear outdated, having failed to transcend the primal instincts that defined their times. As humanity advanced intellectually and economically, these mythic visions largely faded in relevance. However, the same cannot be said for the more enduring religious models of Islam, Christianity, and Indo-Buddhism. These traditions developed complex and nuanced concepts of paradise, reflecting their evolution alongside human understanding. Judaism, however, stands apart in this regard. The Torah and Jewish teachings are remarkably sparse in their descriptions of paradise. Instead of intricate imagery, they offer a simple promise that might be summarised as: “You’ll get everything you need… and maybe a little extra.” Or, more plainly, “Everyone will be satisfied—trust me.” It is a humble reassurance, light on flourish but rich in pragmatic charm.
Unlike Judaism’s minimalism, Islam provides vivid and detailed descriptions of paradise. The Qur’an and Sunnah describe paradise as a multi-tiered realm, with each level offering increasing degrees of bliss. For the righteous, paradise is a place of ultimate peace and luxury, where food, drink, coolness, rest, and elegant garments are freely bestowed alongside the company of eternally youthful companions—heavenly maidens as well as their earthly spouses. Rivers of water, milk, honey, and heavenly wine flow abundantly, with the reservoir of Kawthar, reserved for the Prophet Muhammad, standing out as a focal point where all the rivers of paradise converge.
These detailed depictions, however, have occasionally puzzled Islamic theologians. Some have debated whether these descriptions should be interpreted symbolically, suggesting that the emphasis might lie on intellectual and spiritual pleasures rather than physical ones. Sufism, the mystical branch of Islam, views these images as veils concealing the eternal beauty of the divine. According to Sufi thought, paradise is not about the external rewards of palaces or houris. As Hafez Shirazi (1326–1390) proclaimed: “Their goal is not paradise… not palaces or heavenly houris. Their dream is to behold the Almighty.” For Sufis, true bliss is found in dissolving the self into the vision of God’s primordial light, where bodily resurrection becomes secondary to spiritual awakening in this life.
In much the same way, the descriptions of paradise in Indo-Buddhist traditions also underwent transformations, including peculiar instances where women were denied entry into eternal bliss. This was later addressed through the notion that women could be transformed into men in paradise. Moreover, based on several unflattering statements attributed to Siddhartha Gautama, it appears he harboured significant issues with women. The interpretation of nirvana also underwent an expected transformation. In most reincarnation-based teachings, it is no longer regarded as a specific place of bliss (what is currently seen as the last world before nirvana, where good souls revel). Instead, nirvana is now understood not as any particular place or state but as the comprehension of some unconditional truth and the cessation of all manifestations of anything—residing there alongside enlightened beings such as Buddha, Krishna, and others.
The Bible, which laid the foundation for Christianity, offers a distinctive approach to the description of paradise. Interestingly, it does not provide a detailed depiction of paradise itself. Instead, paradise is briefly referenced in two key characteristics:
1. A harmonious relationship between all animals, marked by the absence of predation, death, and suffering (Isaiah 11:6).
2. The promise that human imagination cannot fully conceive of what awaits there (1 Corinthians 2:9).
However, the Bible provides an elaborate description of a transitional space referred to as New Jerusalem. This is portrayed as a place between the current earthly reality and the new universe, and its depiction evokes imagery reminiscent of a hyperbolised version of the intergalactic complex Avalon from Passengers (2016), infused with the serene ambience of Santorini and the radiant splendour of the Emerald City. Described as a city descending from God, New Jerusalem features enormous walls, twelve giant gates, a river of life flowing from the foot of the throne, and healing plants along its banks, intended to aid humanity in a thousand-year transitional period before the creation of a new heaven and earth. Near the throne lies a vast crystal floor. The city incorporates precious stones that captivate with their hues, offering a visual splendour symbolising beauty and divine perfection in ways understandable to human imagination.
In this city, the Glory of God serves as its illumination, overshadowing—or even replacing—natural luminaries. This imagery points to a time when, as some interpreters suggest, God will draw the material universe into non-existence, followed by its re-creation under entirely new cosmic principles.
Christian theology also emphasises an internal aspect of paradise, much like Sufi thought, with verses such as “The Kingdom of God is within you” (Luke 17:21). Here, paradise originates as a transformation within the believer, with spiritual peace radiating outward to others.
While Islamic and reincarnation-based religious traditions share themes in their concepts of paradise, each envisions ultimate bliss in distinct ways. For Islam, the pinnacle of paradise is the beatific vision of Allah. In Indo-Buddhist traditions, it is a final, serene presence within nirvana’s perfection. Christianity, however, presents paradise as a dynamic, never-ending process of understanding, where happiness stems from an eternal journey towards infinite knowledge and fresh experiences contained within an unobservable God.
Furthermore, biblical texts describing paradise remain notably abstract, a fact reflected in Christianity’s unparalleled diversity of interpretations and its record-breaking number of denominations. This abstraction may, paradoxically, highlight the richness of the text as fertile ground for exploration.
The Optimal Combination
In our arsenal, we have everything that research, surveys, and observations have revealed about what makes a person happy: “He will wipe every tear from their eyes. There will be no more death or mourning or crying or pain, for the old order of things has passed away” (Revelation 21:4 NIV). In this context, “wipe every tear from their eyes” can be interpreted not as erasing memory (which would risk substituting personality or even eliminating the original self) but as transforming suffering through contrast, allowing awareness of the best possible outcomes. It acknowledges the torment of those with opposing mentalities who cannot align with the paradise offered but respects their choices and rights as tributes to their individuality.
Of course, one might consider the possibility of creating analogues of those who chose to disappear, lacking unnecessary information. Yet such entities, stripped of original memory and identity, cannot compare to a person who has travelled the path of rethinking their values, well-being, and orientation—preserving all personal information while understanding their choices and their reasons.
At the second step of happiness, we find not only the “communion of saints in love” as a foundation of eternity but also gender equality: “…there is neither male nor female; for you are all one in Christ Jesus” (Galatians 3:28 NKJV).
Naturally, the third step towards perfect happiness lies in God’s self-description in the Bible as “revealing himself in images”:
“For since the creation of the world His invisible attributes are clearly seen, being understood by the things that are made…” (Romans 1:20 NKJV).
“I will open My mouth in parables; I will utter things kept secret from the foundation of the world” (Matthew 13:35 NKJV).
“May be able to comprehend with all the saints what is the width and length and depth and height—to know the love of Christ which passes knowledge” (Ephesians 3:18–19 NKJV).
These passages suggest that paradise will not consist of eternal contemplation of divine radiance, which, if it exists, might take the form of a material communication hologram—suited to human tendencies to perceive personalities as spatially localised. Most importantly, infinite information can only be revealed infinitely through the perception of spatial and physical images. For the sceptic, this perhaps is the most compelling aspect of paradise: the ability to comprehend reality through an endless process of discovery in infinite forms.
Worship of God
All of the above sounds good to the sceptical ear and solves the main problem—the loss of interest in life as a self-exhausting process. But what about the constant references to worshipping God? Isn’t this evidence of God’s mania? For why else would a perfect Absolute (having no need for anything) require worship, sometimes sounding like a condition for being with Him? Knowing and exploring something against the background of a feeling of aversion to such a personality will simply lose all meaning if there is even time for it due to continuous (eternal) praise and worship!
However, the Bible does not describe worship as an endless contemplation of God with synchronous swaying from side to side. The Bible speaks of an inner state of delight—not from literal contemplation of God (for it is impossible to see infinite immaterial information)—but from knowing Him through what He will reproduce in tangible images comprehensible to us. These images will allow us to interact with Him and understand His wisdom, love, and care. In fact, the original, undistorted material patterns are expressions of His thoughts.
Of course, the Bible also mentions a schedule for forums and times for general meetings to share experiences and feelings resulting from personal comprehension of God through observable facets of reality. Certainly, this does not mean that God will not speak to us verbally. It will cost Him nothing to localise Himself simultaneously to individuals or groups of people distant from each other and, over a cup of tea, assess how well we have assimilated a new portion of figurative information and whether we are able to convey it in words.
The emotions a person experiences through this process can be described as a state of worship—an admiration and desire for life in all its facets. In the current reality of God’s non-intervention, however, this often seems like nothing more than a temporary state, vulnerable to destruction by entropy. Perhaps God’s insistence on focusing on Him and cultivating admiration stems from the idea that this reality reflects not so much His direct thoughts but rather our own. Our destructive thoughts and actions, both toward one another and toward external reality, establish the conditions necessary for the emergence of entropic patterns in nature, shaping a world that mirrors our inner turmoil. Thus, God’s emphasis on Himself as the source of undistorted Life acts as a remedy, countering these distortions and reminding us that when a person ceases to admire Life, they risk losing the desire to live altogether.
It is noteworthy that admiration is an indicator of mental health. Of course, the expression of emotions may differ in people with varying mental states (these differences can also be individual), but it has been observed that the capacity for empathy, upon which admiration depends, is significantly lower in many mental deviations. For example, in some forms of psychopathy, where the condition results in a complete lack of empathy, the individual either becomes narrowly fixated on a specific area of admiration (which often leads to perversions) or cannot admire anyone at all, as they consider themselves the measure of all things. For such a person, everyone else is reduced to objects, tools, or threats. The more a person is concentrated on themselves, the less healthy they are.
Apparently, God also takes into account that the absence of admiration or its misdirection can lead to the destruction of personality, gradually narrowing one’s perception of reality until it would shrink into non-existence.
Radicality of Ancient Texts
Why, then, does the Bible contain harsh and crude formulations that appear to contradict the character of God, leading to confusion about His nature? On the one hand, He shows extreme self-denial and gives everything He can for the sake of humanity, yet then appears to demand admiration in a way that seems excessive, as if it were the ultimate goal of salvation.
Perhaps the answer lies in God’s consideration of all levels of perception across different epochs. Naturally, a compromise was made to accommodate the most primitive stages of understanding, where simplicity and directness in presenting information were prioritised over complexity to achieve the desired outcome. Much like with children, where commands often take precedence over explanations, the categorical nature of instructions ensures their well-being, even if they cannot yet grasp the reasoning behind them.
Thus, the New Testament authors referred to the Old Testament as a “schoolmaster” (Gal. 3:24 KJV), using images, terms, and visual practices tailored to the cognitive level of ancient audiences:
“…But solid food belongs to those who are of full age, that is, those who by reason of use have their senses exercised to discern both good and evil.” (Heb. 5:12-14 NKJV).
Similarly, the prophet Daniel foresaw a time when knowledge would increase, stating:
“But you, Daniel, shut up the words, and seal the book until the time of the end; many shall run to and fro, and knowledge shall increase.” (Dan. 12:4 NKJV).
This suggests that the initial information began as a set of minimal commands rich with meaning, unfolding over time as new knowledge emerged. These insights complemented the foundational truths, forming a logical continuum that expanded with human understanding, consistently addressing the growing imbalance between competing concepts of reality—such as the laws of Life and their alternatives.
Certainly, this depends on the presence of individuals capable of decoding these meanings—logical “receivers” who align the information with its intended purpose (in earlier stages, this role might have been fulfilled by prophets). Without such figures, the information ceases to evolve and loses relevance, possibly because sufficient prior insights exist or because no one else will ever accept it.
This dynamic does not imply that those whose personal realities conflict with God’s objective reality are unfit for life under the future laws of Life. Rather, it highlights an increased risk that such individuals will reject these laws, firmly believing that their perspective is the only reasonable and satisfactory one. This condition is powerfully illustrated in F. Dostoevsky’s “The Grand Inquisitor”, where the religious leadership asks the returned Christ not to interfere, as His corrections might undermine their authority and dismantle the reality they so painstakingly created. Ultimately, they expunged God from their harmonious world, as they were unable to overcome their entrenched sense of self-righteousness. Those who, by God’s providence, cannot overcome this inner sense of being right will be “spared” from suffering (of course, as we have mentioned, their self-awareness could be replaced with a duplicate, but these would no longer be the same individuals who were removed).
If you rolled your eyes, thinking, ‘Well, you can twist any absurdity into a noble and logical model,’ let me assure you, that is not the case. To achieve such coherence, at the very least, you need:
1. A reference to attributes inherent in the idea itself that correlate with the text, such as: ‘God is perfect,’ ‘needs nothing,’ and ‘desires maximum happiness for people.”
2. An indication in the text that the information was presented in a primitive form requiring analysis—evident in the progressive revelation of these meanings through prophets.
3. Logical compatibility between the original expression and its semantic conclusion, avoiding contradictions. For example, “God requires worship” evolves into “God does not need worship”, or “Worship is a form of admiration” transitions to “Worship becomes rejection only when distorted by misunderstanding.”
4. Correspondence to the broader context, where the explanation integrates harmoniously with other principles without discarding them.
For instance, this concept aligns with Proverbs: ‘Whoever rejects the ways of reason will dwell in the assembly of the dead.’ At the same time, another passage cautions: ‘Do not rely on your own understanding.’ In context, the former asserts that reason is a tool for knowing God, while the latter reminds us that human reasoning cannot confine God, as His nature surpasses comprehension even across eternity.
In short, achieving an ideal model of God through logical reasoning fulfils the minimum task. However, the inability to fully explain this model using known phenomena, processes, or principles does not confine God; it merely highlights the limitations of our own understanding. For instance, if we cannot observe abstract information as an autonomous phenomenon, we might prematurely declare it “impossible.” But if God is localised in space, while boundlessness and omnipresence are attributes of consciousness, then the localised aspect cannot be considered perfection—it becomes a fragment, or rudiment, of perfect consciousness.
If localisation is derived from consciousness, it functions as a tool for God’s purposes, not a limitation. Suggesting otherwise would be akin to tethering a cow to a stake and calling it free—no matter how ‘holy’ you declare the stake or the cow. Creation itself is localised not because God requires it but to preserve its distinction from Him and prevent it from merging into His boundless nature as a single unified being.
Through our understanding, we recognise perfection’s possibility, even if we cannot explain it within our limited framework. Reason cannot claim to grasp everything comprehensible to God.
The ‘pareidolia effect’ does not apply here, as the interpretation relies on specific parameters. For example, presenting two smeared spots as Van Gogh’s water-blurred self-portrait, measuring 30x40 cm, is deceptive if the blot doesn’t match the specified dimensions. In this context, you are not simply projecting what you wish to see; instead, you are seeking a correspondence between the observed data and the defined parameters. Similarly, if one were to replace the concept of God with that of a leprechaun, the attributes associated with the leprechaun would merely adopt those already defined for God, resulting in nothing more than a rebranded version of the same unchanged phenomenon.
However, consistency between text and conclusion does not guarantee truth, just as empirical data is not all reality. If all this reasoning is merely wishful thinking, I would still reject any other eternity. Red-hot sandals boiling my brain might sound unpleasant, but at least my thoughts would remain active—unlike the mental stagnation of some paradises. Or perhaps I’d find myself endlessly reborn as worm castings, which some sceptics might say is a more fitting reflection of my musings.
Biblical Examples of Worship
The biblical portrayal of worship goes beyond mere temple rituals, encompassing various expressions of agreement, joy, gratitude, delight, and exultation—essentially, a spectrum of positive emotions. However, the Bible also presents several atypical uses of the term “worship,” which extend its meaning beyond simple admiration.
For instance, during the exodus of the Jews from Egypt, God instructs Moses to tell Pharaoh: “Let my people go, so they may worship me” (Ex. 9:1 NIV). This statement is not an attempt to mislead; both Moses and Pharaoh understood from these sentences that “worship” in this context meant a permanent departure from Egypt. It signified a new way of life founded on new principles—essentially, a shift in focus from the secondary to the primary. Worship here begins when individuals perceive God’s presence in physical reality and learn to discern what stems from human autonomy versus what reflects God’s original design. If reality is a cross-reflection of God’s will and human will—sustained by God’s love and tolerance of human shortcomings—then worship becomes a way to align oneself with the original reality, cultivating a desire for true Life, which is God Himself.
Another unconventional example of worship appears in Genesis 22:5 (NKJV), when Abraham, preparing to sacrifice his son, says: “Stay here with the donkey; the lad and I will go yonder and worship, and we will come back to you.” In this case, worship can be understood as identification with God—an attempt to comprehend His thoughts and emotions in the context of sacrifices that, by necessity, involve compromises resulting in pain and anguish.
This idea aligns with John 4:23 (KJV): “But the hour cometh, and now is, when the true worshippers shall worship the Father in spirit and in truth: for the Father seeketh such to worship him.” Here, “spirit” refers to consciousness, while “truth” signifies absolute objectivity. Worship, therefore, involves seeking to understand God by identifying with His thoughts and feelings. It becomes a complex intellectual and emotional process of aligning oneself not only with God but also with His representations in others (people) and in physical reality itself.
Conclusion:
1. Alignment with Biblical and Humanist Ideals
The proposed concept of paradise aligns closely with both the biblical definition and many points outlined in secular humanist manifestos advocating universal good for humanity. However, it diverges on one crucial aspect:
Example from “The Humanist Manifesto III”:
“Humanists believe in a society that ensures equal rights and opportunities for all its citizens, respecting individual autonomy and dignity. This includes freedom of expression and choice and providing all the necessary conditions for personal growth and development according to one’s own lifestyle and beliefs.”
In practice, such ideals could lead either to societal division or complete chaos, potentially culminating in societal collapse. To avoid this, certain groups—defined by their beliefs and perceptions of reality—would inevitably have to be suppressed or excluded. This suppression could affect any group, regardless of its size, depending on who wields the power to decide.
The divergence here does not stem from a lack of tolerance. After all, the patience God demonstrates toward the ideological diversity of our reality is the ultimate example of tolerance, one that surpasses any human conception of it. Instead, the discrepancy lies in the principle of equal rights and influence for all ideologies—granting each worldview proportional and enduring authority within society as though all were equally valid. Such an approach elevates every ideology, regardless of its consequences, into a position of normative influence, creating unavoidable conflicts.
Furthermore, it would be impossible to determine whether such measures truly align with an objective definition of good. Interpretations of reality and facts would inevitably depend on the worldview promoted by those in positions of influence. Ultimately, this would create a paradise for one worldview, while others would feel like outcasts, silenced and excluded.
Much like God in our proposed concept, humanity does not believe in the widespread, voluntary transformation of ideas about norms, justice, love, and other values deemed “good.” Instead, efforts to achieve such a paradise are often placed on the next generation, which would still encounter the constraints of reality, logic, and intuitive morality. This creates a cycle where the pursuit of paradise transforms into a kind of eternal purgatory.
By contrast, God limits this pluralistic approach to objectivity to a finite period—for both individuals and humanity as a whole—until every wavering soul resolves its position between the objective reality and its entropic alternative.
2. Faith as Internal Agreement
True enjoyment of paradise is possible only through complete internal agreement—a state originally encapsulated by the meaning of the word faith.
3. Three Key Components of Paradise
Paradise must incorporate the following essential elements of happiness:
• Absence of suffering
• Harmonious interpersonal interaction
• Infinite novelty, or inexhaustible depth of information, presented through comprehensible and meaningful images accessible to all levels of human consciousness.
4. Worship as a Natural State
In the context of paradise, worship should not be perceived as a duty or obligation but as a natural and continuous state of happiness. It becomes an integral part of perceiving and experiencing eternal good.
Comments