Philosophy Now Forum

below

attofishpi wrote:
So my understanding (via a sage) that one is reincarnated to re-live upon Earth as wo\man in an appropriate family judged according to how one has lived ones former life is more weird and convoluted than one being judged and living forever in some paradise or burning in hell? How so?

Since neither has any basis in observable fact, it doesn't matter whether you believe in reincarnation or heaven or ghosts. Just saying I've never seen reincarnation presented as Christian dogma. They tend to be all about personal accountability and obedience to rules.
What is "the beast"?

Skip wrote:

attofishpi wrote:
So my understanding (via a sage) that one is reincarnated to re-live upon Earth as wo\man in an appropriate family judged according to how one has lived ones former life is more weird and convoluted than one being judged and living forever in some paradise or burning in hell? How so?

Since neither has any basis in observable fact, it doesn't matter whether you believe in reincarnation or heaven or ghosts. Just saying I've never seen reincarnation presented as Christian dogma. They tend to be all about personal accountability and obedience to rules.

Where am i discounting personal accountability and obedience to rules?

Again, why are my statements the weirdest and most convoluted interpretation of Christian afterlife theology you have ever read?

Skip wrote:What is "the beast"?

Usually a four legged hoofed animal that is rather tasty when cooked and eaten.

That's not "the beast"; that's a beast. A beast appears nowhere in Christian doctrine as an alternative habitat for a human soul (Jesus sent the demons into the pigs, but they asked him to). "The beast" in Christian mythology usually refers to the devil, Lucifer, the Antichrist. The God adapted to Christianity hasn't shown himself interested in the long-term perfectibility of souls, so much as expiation of sin, atonement and sacrifice.

Skip wrote:That's not "the beast"; that's a beast. A beast appears nowhere in Christian doctrine as an alternative habitat for a human soul (Jesus sent the demons into the pigs, but they asked him to). "The beast" in Christian mythology usually refers to the devil, Lucifer, the Antichrist. The God adapted to Christianity hasn't shown himself interested in the long-term perfectibility of souls, so much as expiation of sin, atonement and sacrifice.

It doesn't take a great leap in interpretation to consider that those that treat w\man less than w\man become 'the' beast in other words a beast.
For what other reason do you consider "the beast" would be used to refer to devil\antichrist?

attofishpi wrote: It doesn't take a great leap in interpretation to consider that those that treat w\man less than w\man become 'the' beast in other words a beast.
For what other reason do you consider "the beast" would be used to refer to devil\antichrist?

I don't know the reason for the leaping, but you're welcome to keep doing it with no more hindrance from me.

Immanuel Can was the reason I started this thread because of his constant threat of God judging atheists. I am sure he has read the questions in the OP. It says a lot that he hasn't turned up to explain how his God is going to circumvent the loopholes I have pointed out. I have a few more ready in case he does gather the courage to turn up.

sthitapragya wrote:Immanuel Can was the reason I started this thread because of his constant threat of God judging atheists. I am sure he has read the questions in the OP. It says a lot that he hasn't turned up to explain how his God is going to circumvent the loopholes I have pointed out. I have a few more ready in case he does gather the courage to turn up.

It's when he doesn't answer that you know he's acknowledged loss. I would take his continued engagement as an insult if I were you.

vegetariantaxidermy wrote:

sthitapragya wrote:Immanuel Can was the reason I started this thread because of his constant threat of God judging atheists. I am sure he has read the questions in the OP. It says a lot that he hasn't turned up to explain how his God is going to circumvent the loopholes I have pointed out. I have a few more ready in case he does gather the courage to turn up.

It's when he doesn't answer that you know he's acknowledged loss. I would take his continued engagement as an insult if I were you.

Never thought of it that way. I believe you are right.