rebirth?

 today i read two ideas that are worth elaboration

in gita, the hindu song of god chapter 2,12  [mahabharata book 6 section 26]  is an idea " 

aham sanskrit for i, never never existed translated "never was a time when i was not existing"

that idea is not-not exist meaning exist in past. perhaps he is saying this claiming to be god? in the past i always existed in the mouth of krishna claiming to be god? but we continue the same for humans mortals, kings and arjuna meaning even mortals that have a body that was born only the body had a beginning and a time when the body did not exist but the "driver" of the body  always existed even a mortal never was a time of never existing meaning always.

not oly a god has no beginning but the living part of mortals always existed in the past before the body was built and born. that is a fascinating idea to contarst to western thinking. we wanna how stuff started... but it did not start.  we contrast something that starts, i see a table that a mortal built. there WAS a time when the table did not exist as a table before the parts were attached and assembed. the western bible says the world had a "beginning" in the first word that mean that like the table there WAS a time when the world did not exist. the judeo-christian claims the same for humans, god "made the human" on he sixth day  by combining physical with a breath f life together the start of the human and before that there was a time when like the table no human existed.

the difference is stark that ju-c has a start and a time when humans did not exist but hindu claims each king always existed in past.

even if we stretch the bible that the breath of life was adam... entering the ody it is god's breath not the spirit driver of any human but blown from god so the same as adamas son both body and spirit driver did not exist yet neither did adam spirit driver exist until gods breath became the life driving adams body until heis death.

we ths have two possibilities in the past: hindu claims each person in the past always exxisted before entering the body but the ju-c bible said that adam's spirit driver did not exist separately from god nor other humans. there are tw directions to stretch the text: both false kuz krishna lists arjuna and the kings existed in past differs from bible that god was the same source for each spirit driver of mortal body.

did seth son of adam have a soul? god did not blow a soul into him. the bible lacks any explanation of adams sons and dauters.

once the breath of life enterd adam he  could cause the next life but who is driving the sons mortal body?? not the breath of god.

we can only imagine that at some point perhaps when the baby starts breathing after birth the soul enters... that would match the rabbis permitting abortion, but i have doubt is adams son and other human mortals  same as this hindu idea or not? either way adam differs. 

krishnas idea is more tempting not that there was a "start" to human life, and certainly not from "dirt of the land" as the schools teach... they urgently teach to young kids  before they can doubt that "that sounds sillier than fairies."

the seond idea is about the goal. fter taking hindus side for above topic i analyse the flaw in the hindu side for the second topic.

in the same sectiion krishna said the goal is o be "free" liberated from the material because each person is "second born" not immortal.  when they die three things can happen. they can go tp another body same as changing clothing as krishna said n this section or they can go to suffering described in book 18 and menyioned by krishna in this dialog if arjuna not fight he will go to suffering and arjuna feared the hell if he caused the adies,  unable to find a man marrying men from other castes... and he and the lades have hell not reborn in other body but suffering. or the plenty and joy as described in book 18 given if a warrior doeshis duty to fight.

2,15 said the goal is "liberation" which can be accheived by seprating from joy and pain. then they willnot be slaves to the body to bbe "second born" in a body.

the efforts of hindu is to stop being reborn in a second body. as defined in good dictionaries and encyclopedias. all of the efforts of the hindu and behavior and meditation is for that goal.

in contrast christians teach that the god taut in bibole that a person "lives once", so there is  NO NEED for  PREVENTING preventing the rebirth in another  body after god revealed that this event will not occur so all the efforts of hinduism and rules are not needed to prevent it. same as telling my son "use your hand to stop my hand moving toward your shoulder" and do not start moving my hand... he cannnot PREVENT me touching his shoulder when that event will not happen as i choose not to move toward his shoulder similarly if we know a person will not be second born kuz god said so in the bible then that goal of "preventing" another birth in another body is already accomplished becuse it will not happen. hence we see that the christian faith fulfills the main goal of hinduism and removes any necesity to do the religious burdens of hindu caste or other ceremonies to prevent the rebirth for example arjuna the warrior fihghting for his mission.

stil the first idea of existence in  hindu is better adding the idea not in bad bible for the son of adam  always existed meaning no starting point for the spirit driver. while the second idea of hindu would noy occur and no effort to prevent it.

so indted of moving to another body either same as he pained others he will suffer pain or the same as he helped others he will be helped as a spirit alone with no body. who will judge that? the god who told us we live once will judge but wait god also sent krishna to say you change body same as changing clothes?

if god existed then certainly he would teach who to follow? one message is not from god.

 the silence when two messages both claikm to be from god and no GUIDANCE is acting as if god does not exist... this suggests that no god exists and both of these messages are not from god kuz no source. in the absence of a god nobody to judge that the inflicter of pain deserves pain... a world like that sucks but is the logical conclusion...

unless you accept that god sent me to tell you that genesis is not from nor is the story true about  humans  from his breath nor from dirt of the land nor can we trust any detail in book genesis.

and the idea of changing body is also false and will not happen. none of the three religons have accurate religious texts.

if you accet that then you can ask me what is the goal instead?

if you accept god made the efforts to send me to warn you the texts of these religions have false contents then instead accept that your spirit always existed before you born and when your body dies you will not move to a second body and we know this kuz god saw the different teachings and sent me to guide you that both were inaccurate. if god did not send me to guide then that is itself acting like he does not exist and without a judge neither hell nor rebirth... to avoid.