You’re right. The outcome of purgatory is heaven (“heaven” as conceptualized by Christianity). The outcome of reincarnation (according to many Hindus and Buddhists) is heaven (“heaven” as conceptualized by Hindus and Buddhists).
Some might want to come back in order to fulfill a vow made to God.
I agree with the first, I didn’t consider hell a viable option, actually. I think your second reason would cover the Dalai Lama and Elijah/John the Baptist. Or some of the Saints considered “suffering souls” who seemed called to that life and purpose from childhood.
Yes, the official teaching is no pre-existence, but there are hints here and there that that is not the whole, and fully final, story.
Hence, “some parts” of conservative Protestantism. They have some of the original beliefs, but have, as you said, deviated from the Faith.
That cannot happen because the “person” is the body; or rather, body is an inseparable aspect of the person. Change the body and erase the memories, the result is a new person.
I think what I was wouldn’t be erased and the male me wouldn’t start as some sort of blank slate. And I don’t agree that my strengths and weaknesses come from my body, unless you mean purely physical ones.
Yes, they do. The thought processes that come naturally to your mind, as well that those that don’t, originate in the head you were issued at birth. So do your temperament, personality, and mental and emotional quirks that make you “you”.
You will, of course, receive a spiritual body (pneumatikon soma) for Heavenly life. That does not in any case correspond to what the East means by reincarnation.
What the East means by reincarnation, depends upon which Eastern tradition you have in mind. And even within one Eastern tradition, reincarnation can involve all sorts of bodies, including “normal” physical bodies, “immortal” physical bodies, subtle bodies, and causal bodies. Among these bodies, the “immortal” physical body would more closely correspond to Paul’s pneumatikon soma.
That depends upon the reincarnational/rebirth theology. Some say that the soul was Created by the Creator; others that there is no discernable beginning to the soul. And there are also differences regarding the ultimate destination of the soul, whether the soul becomes “one” with the Ultimate Reality, whether the soul maintains its individuality while in communion with the Divine, or whether the soul is never able to transcend samsara at all.
Again, reincarnation/rebirth does not deny heaven and hell. Both Hindus and Buddhists believe in heavens and hells, that is, realms of the spiritual worlds that are either very pleasant or very unpleasant. Some of these hells, in fact, are – for all intents and purposes – “eternal” in the sense that those who are in those hells cannot “get out” without assistance from other, compassionate beings who enter into hell for the purpose of saving those in hell. Many Hindus believe in eternal heaven, in which case the heaven is not simply a “pleasant” place to be, but is actually where God’s Presence can be most fully enjoyed.
To think in terms of “until you get it right” is to trivialize reincarnation/rebirth’s purpose of leading the person into communion with Divinity, which is a graceful process, not a mechanical process. According to many Hindus, communion with divinity, with God, with the One Divine Person, is realized only by the grace of God, not by any mere human effort of "getting it right’.
How can anyone be guilty of any crime or sin, if what they are is a pure result of their physical body?
This is a great post. It so easily can be rewritten as a post on Christian theology. Could you come back long enough to leave some links to sources you like?And with that, I shall withdraw from this thread.
Pneumatikon soma as variously described, would seem to be the “immortal physical body” with some aspects of “subtle body” added. It is a physical body; but has power over it’s substance that our familiar human, psychikon soma, does not.
Because the body has sufficient bra(name removed by moderator)ower to energize a mind that is expected to command it.
Your thoughts originate in your head, because there are no thoughts if the head stops working, due to anesthesia, coma, a chokehold, etc.
So, as is obvious from this post, there are many, many versions of reincarnation, some of which approach the Catholic Truths more than others. The Catholic view of life and the soul is that it begins at conception and is eternal from that point forward. Humans are corporal creatures, the perfect blending of body and soul. That’s why the Creed says we believe in the resurrection of the body, because for a human to be human, he must have both body and soul. Angels, on the other hand are purely spiritual, having no bodies.I’ll just make a few observations, without intending to get into a long debate.
Forgive the trivialization. So how does a Hindu get grace? How does simply being reborn into another body do it. And why is that more graceful than the first life? A catholic gets sufficient grace to be saved by requesting it in the sacrament of baptism and then grace is strengthened by recieving Jesus in the eucharist. Grace is freely given by God to those who request it. You fall rom grace through sin. You can reenter the state of grace through the sacrament of reconciliation. You see the patern. Grace is bestowed on those that requested it sacamentally with a contrite heart. If yo die in the state of grace, you will go to heaven. Purgatory frees a person who dies in the state of grace from the tendency to sin prior to heaven,because there can be no sin in heaven.
Agreed that many people misunderstand their own faith traditions. Love is indeed a universal Truth. Catholics believe that in times of trouble, God raises up great saints to teach this: Men like St. Francis of Assissi and women like St. Therese of Lisieux. He also does great miracles through the lowly, like St. Bernadette at Lourdes, The three children visionaries at Fatima and St Juan Diego at Guatalupe. With God, there is no lacking in new, holy souls to do his work.
Why, after unloading all that, are you withdrawing from this thread? If you believe all of what you said below, shouldn’t you stick around and defend and elaborate on it for the edification of others?And with that, I shall withdraw from this thread.
Julia,
You don’t know that, you can’t even define what “the moment of conception” is. The Church, not knowing exactly when or how God attaches (for want of a better word) the soul to the body, defaults to conception, that is: this is what we presume because in this matter the most conservative stance is necessary. Bodies stay in caskets or urns while their previous occupants go to Heaven or Purgatory. That is, we exist without them.
Thanks. (I’ll put links scattered here and there.) It’s interesting to note that the only conciliar condemnation of the soul’s pre-existence (and, thus, reincarnation/rebirth), is in the context of Origen’s *apokatastasis *(the so-called “monstrous restoration”), the idea that since we all come from God (our souls existed with God before being born in physical bodies), we will all definitively and without question return to God. Thus, one could argue that the primary reason pre-existence (and by implication reincarnatin/rebirth) was rejected by the Church, was because it was too closely associated with an idea that did not encourage real moral and ethical discipline and devotion: if we’re all headed back to God, why be good or do good? It’s conceivable that if pre-existence and reincarnation/rebirth were not easily misinterpreted as justifying a lax spiritual life, then the condemnation would not have occurred. But what’s done is done.