Four Kinds of Forgiveness

@sonship said
So you rephrase your question to not carry with it an incorrect innuendo.

What is the purpose of torturing people for their lack of belief after they die if what they found to be non-credible threats had not succeeded in turning them into believers?

Was the threat supposed to coerce people into becoming believers while they were alive?

If it didn't work, and they died as non-believers, what would be the purpose of carrying out the threat if the people still alive do not know?

@sonship said
@Ghost-of-a-Duke

As I go I may have some questions.

. It simply means that we leave one life and go into another; it is all for the sole purpose of soul development and spiritual growth. The soul may take the form of human, animal, or plant depending on the moral quality of the previous life's actions.

Does this mean that the moral quality of a clum ...[text shortened]... animals leading a morally right life such that they graduated upon dying to a higher form - human ?

To be honest sonship if your first instinct is to show belittlement and derision to the beliefs held by other faiths we're not going to get very far. (Do you not think I could easily do this with Christianity with your man in a whale and talking donkey? )

Firstly we need to establish that you understand (as an atheist) that I don't believe in reincarnation any more than I believe in the resurrection of Jesus. The information that I'm happy to share with you relates to what Hindus, Jainists etc themselves believe.

In answer to your first question (and I hope they improve) I don't suspect that any believer in reincarnation holds the view that a lump of grass has a karma that will affect the quality of their next life (although may hold the view that being a lump of grass in this life is a punishment/result of bad behaviour in a previous incarnation). It may also be the case that to achieve a perfect spiritual state and awareness that being such things as a lump of grass or a bug in one incarnation is on some level beneficial.

@sonship said
@Ghost-of-a-Duke

I may have some questions as I digest this.

[quote] The Bhagavad Gita states: “Never was there a time when I did not exist, nor you, nor all these kings; nor in the future shall any of us cease to be. As the embodied soul continuously passes, in this body, from childhood to youth to old age, the soul similarly passes into another body at death. [/quote ...[text shortened]... form of life then ? I mean for this soul of mine always was in the reincarnation loop from eternity?

No. As already referenced:

'According to the Hindu sage Adi Shankaracharya, the world-as we ordinarily understand it-is like a dream: Fleeting and illusory.'

@sonship said
@Ghost-of-a-Duke

To be trapped in samsara (the cycle of birth and death) is a result of ignorance of the true nature of our existence. It is ignorance (avidya) of one's true self that leads to ego-consciousness, grounding one in desire and a perpetual chain of reincarnation.

Is the desire to be untrapped self defeating because you still desire something ...[text shortened]... from the cyclic trap would seem to be to forget about being freed - thus forgetting about Hinduism.

Sorry, but your reasoning makes no sense at all here.

@sonship said
@Ghost-of-a-Duke

Every action has a reaction and the force determines one's next incarnation.

Even the action of weed or ant that preceded your arrival as a human this cycle?

[quote]
One is reborn through desire: A person desires to be born because he or she wants to enjoy a body, which can never bring deep, lasting happiness or peace (ānanda). [/ ...[text shortened]... ce along radical lines seeking to penetrate deeper into the mysteries of the world's evident misery.

Sorry sonship but your fixation on the karma of animals and rocks is hampering your ability to ask sensible questions.

Perhaps this will help:

'Most Hindus believe the 'atman' lives many lives on Earth, some of these (usually the earlier lives) in the form of animals. This belief is known as reincarnation. Because of this, many Hindus view all life as having equal status and deserving of respect. Hindu scriptures explain the idea of karma. If people are violent or unkind, their actions will return to them in the future, this is called karmic debt.

Some Hindus believe that if they keep on repeating their mistakes or bad deeds, their atman may be reborn in an animal form, so that the atman 'works off' some karmic debt and eventually 'earns' another chance to act responsibly in a human body.'

https://www.bbc.com/bitesize/guides/z3ygjxs/revision/5

@Ghost-of-a-Duke

To be honest sonship if your first instinct is to show belittlement and derision to the beliefs held by other faiths we're not going to get very far.

If you make a false accusation we will not get too far either.

I asked a legitimate question. And it was not belittling. It had sudden polemic impact, irony.

(Do you not think I could easily do this with Christianity with your man in a whale and talking donkey? )

And based upon the way you asked about these incidents, I would consider them legitimate questions. I do not count the mere asking as belittlement.

However, if I sounded to you like I was belittling someone, I am sorry you felt that way. Maybe it could have been asked with more care.

But "Who did Cain marry?" and "How did Jonah live in a whale?" and other standard questions I get. I do not consider all the askers as belittling.

We're not going to argue about this too long I hope.

Firstly we need to establish that you understand (as an atheist) that I don't believe in reincarnation any more than I believe in the resurrection of Jesus.

Okay.

But you pose questions for both.
Or I would think that you would.

So what have I done that you wouldn't have done?

The information that I'm happy to share with you relates to what Hindus, Jainists etc themselves believe.

You assumed, it seems, that I knew nothing about Reincarnation. Thanks. But I knew something of it. And I still have those basic questions.

In answer to your first question (and I hope they improve) I don't suspect that any believer in reincarnation holds the view that a lump of grass has a karma that will affect the quality of their next life (although may hold the view that being a lump of grass in this life is a punishment/result of bad behaviour in a previous incarnation).

I think Hinduism teaches that ALL LIFE is sacred.

My question would be then - "What is different about mankind that the concern for good karma STARTS with HUMAN LIFE?"

If the yearning for freedom from the cycle of re-birth starts at the level of HUMAN, then there MUST be something about HUMAN which set them apart from all OTHER living beings which are also sacred.

What IS that? That is what I would respectfully ask.

The Bible says we are connected to all other living things yet are unique in that we are made in the image of God Genesis 1:26,27). The mystery is addressed. Man is among the other lives but is unique. Man is made in the image of God (whatever that entails).

If there is an equivalent like answer in Hinduism and if you know it, tell me about it.

It may also be the case that to achieve a perfect spiritual state and awareness that being such things as a lump of grass or a bug in one incarnation is on some level beneficial.

I didn't quite understand this sentence too well. As far as I can see the ONLY beings which care about "a perfect spiritual state" are human beings, according to what I have seen so far.

The desire for "a perfect spiritual state" and indeed "ANY spiritual state" seems to commence when the life or soul has reached the level of HUMAN.

You seemed to find my asking about OTHER lives "lower" then human (ie, grass or insect or Ox) to be frivolous, even maliciously derisive.

I'm sorry if you picked up that tone. However, millions of levels of life are below HUMAN. And yet concern for karma, release, deliverance from desiring ego SEEMS to start at the highest level of biological life on the planet - Human men and women.

The Bible has an answer for why Human beings stand out from among all OTHER lives. What in Hinduism explains that uniqueness?

And if there is no explaining of it, then I again would ask about the spiritual yearnings of a weed, mouse, ox, whale, monkey, insect or amoeba.

@Ghost-of-a-Duke

Now I see this post.

Sorry sonship but your fixation on the karma of animals and rocks is hampering your ability to ask sensible questions.

Don't be too sorry. I can always ask someone else these legitimate questions.

Perhaps this will help:

'Most Hindus believe the 'atman' lives many lives on Earth, some of these (usually the earlier lives) in the form of animals. This belief is known as reincarnation. Because of this, many Hindus view all life as having equal status and deserving of respect.

This I knew. All lives are sacred to Hinduism.

Hindu scriptures explain the idea of karma. If people are violent or unkind, their actions will return to them in the future, this is called karmic debt.

And "unkind" was mandated by WHO ?

What is the moral standard that can measure "kind" in comparison to "unkind" ?

The lion that eats an antelope does not consider it "unkind" I am pretty sure.

The carnivorous pitcher plant that drowns an insect and absorbs its body for nutrients, I am pretty sure, has no conscience problems with being "unkind" to the insect.

Can you see that nature testifies that human beings are one of a kind on the planet. Nothing is quite like a human being.

Now whales and chimps are very smart. Do you think THEY have a concern for karma or something LIKE "payback" for moral actions?

Some Hindus believe that if they keep on repeating their mistakes or bad deeds, their atman may be reborn in an animal form, so that the atman 'works off' some karmic debt and eventually 'earns' another chance to act responsibly in a human body.'

Too WHOM is the "debt" due ?
What in the universe of Hinduism decides "The debt which you owed is now paid off. You are free from it."

That moral decision is located WHERE ?

@sonship

The Atman is an individualized (nominal) fragment of consciousness. It exists in Brahman. Brahman, through Maya, the illusory power, has created the Universe and every sentient being. This is the same as saying that the Universe is created in the Mind of God, the Supreme Being when the Supreme Being (Brahman) consciously uphold the ideas/ information that brings creation into being,

All created forms have consciousness owing to the Supreme Being consciously upholding them in The Mind. However, only sentient being have an Atman, an individualized consciousness as well as the consciousness of the created forms, in which they manifest.

In the created form, within the created world, the Atman erroneously identifies with the activities in The Mind (ideas) and any consequent bodily reactivity, which may arise, thus arises the personal self or jiva.

The personal self becomes the active agent, whose actions may give rise to consequences, which are in a sense “written or recorded” in The Mind, Also the personal self will have desires. These also become conditions in The Mind, which give affect future conditions.

When the body, the vessel through which the Atman or conscious being has physical experiences, is damaged or ceases to function and dies, the Atman leaves the body. However, it is tied to conditions set up in The Mind, including the identification as the jiva. These conditions cause it to reincarnate again and again.


(Kyrani Eade).

@FMF

What is the purpose of torturing people for their lack of belief after they die if what they found to be non-credible threats had not succeeded in turning them into believers?

Your questions as asked still to me contain a malicious and slanderous innuendo.

But I'll reason it out innuendo that God is a bully and all (not agreeing of course)

Take this statement:

For the wrath of God is revealed from heaven upon all ungodliness and unrighteousness of men who hold down the truth in unrighteousness. (Rom. 1:18)

1.) [i] You responds - " I don't believe in God, or God's anger, the unrighteousness of men, or the ungodliness of men, or holding down the truth about it. I am unpersuaded. Such information has not changed ANYTHNG about my thinking, living, concern, what so ever.

Therefore what is the purpose of this information?

2.) The purpose has not changed just because it had not effect on you.

Still -

" For the wrath of God is revealed from heaven upon all ungodliness and unrighteousness of men who hold down the truth in unrighteousness. " (Rom. 1:18)

Why would your ignoring the information in incredulity cause the warning to change in purpose/

And since you are not the ONLY one in the universe as a recipient of the information, why would its purpose be abandoned just because you among many others give no heed to it?

You may argue "What is the purpose of further speaking this to me when nothing about it has had an effect on me because it is unbelievable?"

This is akin to saying that because a sign says "Speed Limit 50 or else a Fine" and you ignore it, why should the sign be thought to have no purpose for anyone else?

Do you think the sign is only there for you?

The same is true of the message of God's love in Christ.

"In this is love, not that we loved God but that He loved us and sent His Son a propitiation concerning our sins." (1 John 4:10)

1.) [i] You responds - " I don't believe in God, or God's love for us, God's Son, God sending His Son, sending His Son as a propitiation, or any need for such propitiation. I am unpersuaded. Such information has not changed ANYTHNG about my thinking, living, concern, whatsoever.

Therefore what is the purpose of this information?

2.) The purpose has not changed just because it had not effect on you.

Still -

"In this is love, not that we loved God but that He loved us and sent His Son a propitiation concerning our sins." (1 John 4:10)

Why should there be an adjustment of the purpose of the information simply because it has no effect on you?

What selfishness decides that the information has no purpose because it is useless to you ? You are not the center of the universe such that no purpose for you has to mean no purpose to anyone else.

In fact of NO ONE heeds the information still its purpose to inform has not changed.

Was the threat supposed to coerce people into becoming believers while they were alive?

I gave a example of a message of God's anger and a message of God's love.

The messages having NO EFFECT on you, of either His wrath or His love, does not make either the messages, or His wrath, or His love become of no further purpose.

You are FREE for them to have no meaning to you.
And others are FREE to allow them or one or the other of them, to have meaning to them.

But you may say - "But I heard it. I don't want to hear it again because it had no meaning the first time. Every subsequent time it STILL has no meaning."

I would say if baseball annoys you then don't hang around Yankee Stadium.

Near there you are likely to hear about baseball. A Spirituality Forum open to the public is likely a place where you may here once or more than once something like Romans 1:18 or First John 4:10.

@sonship said
@FMF

What is the purpose of torturing people for their lack of belief after they die if what they found to be non-credible threats had not succeeded in turning them into believers?

Your questions as asked still to me contain a malicious and slanderous innuendo.

No, they don't.

@sonship said
But I'll reason it out innuendo that God is a bully and all (not agreeing of course)

Take this statement:

For the wrath of God is revealed from heaven upon all ungodliness and unrighteousness of men who hold down the truth in unrighteousness. (Rom. 1:18)

1.) [i] You responds - " I don't believe in God, or God's anger, the unrighteousnes ...[text shortened]... ere you may here once or more than once something like Romans 1:18 or First John 4:10.

Would it be "eternal justice" if you were punished-by-perpetual-torture after your death ~ by the Islamic version of the Abrahamic God ~ for not being a Muslim?

@sonship said
What selfishness decides that the information has no purpose because it is useless to you ? You are not the center of the universe such that no purpose for you has to mean no purpose to anyone else.

But aren't you placing the torturer god ideology - that you just so happen to personally believe in - at the centre of the universe, and then making assertions about its purpose that are incoherent and therefore useless to the very people you are personally trying to browbeat and scare with it? All without one jot of evidence to back up the claims you make based on your own superstitions and your own personal preference with regard to religion/scripture? And you accuse ME of "selfishness"? It's like intellectual self-parody on your part, sonship.

@sonship said
Why should there be an adjustment of the purpose of the information simply because it has no effect on you?

If all the fearmongering and threats and attempts at psychological coercion made by Christians don't work ~ for lack of corroborating evidence to back their claims ~ and non-believers go to their graves as non-believers, what would be the purpose [ideologically and morally speaking] of a creator being carrying out the threat to torture them if the people still alive [living non-believers] do not know?

@FMF

Would it be "eternal justice" if you were punished-by-perpetual-torture after your death ~ by the Islamic version of the Abrahamic God ~ for not being a Muslim?

You come to a parking lot. There is a sign which says "In this spot it is reserved for Handicapped people. Parking here will result in a fine of $300.00."

You decide the sign has no meaning for you and you don't even believe it. So you park there and get a ticket on your windshield for a $300.00 fine.

Some neighborhood punks noticed that they could imitate the procedure. They make a sign that says "Don't park near our favorite bar or you'll get a ticket for $300.00."

The imitation may be problematic to parkers. And it may have to be straightened out in court that one sign is legitimate and the other an imitation, fraud, and illegitimate.

The second sign mischievously erected as an imitation of the first doesn't render the first one invalid and meaningless.

Nor can guilt by association accuse the first sign of illegal mischievousness because the second imitation sign was.

The civil laws of human society are not perfect. Mistakes can be made. And there are some criminals who are in jail undergoing justice and other people wrongly jailed.

Taking those who are legitimately in jail there may be two types:

1.) There are those who realize that justice is taking place for what they have done.

2.) Others who don't believe that justice is being done because they are under penalty.

They don't jail only the ones who understand that justice will cause them to suffer the penalty. Those who don't agree suffer as well.

That is in man's imperfect system.
God justice cannot make a mistake. Hoping in an incompetence of God I think is a vain hope.

Lacking belief in Christ and God is just a matter of - "Time will tell."